Center for Strategic Assessment and forecasts

Autonomous non-profit organization

Home / Defence and security / The tragedy of Yugoslavia: Lessons and Conclusions / Articles
Dr. Srdjan Perisic: "Who controls the Balkans?"
Material posted: Publication date: 25-10-2017
Dr. Srdjan Perisic — representative of a new generation of Serbian policymakers who seek to strengthen in the Serbian scientific thought specific geopolitical way of thinking. Perišić received a master's degree and then doctorate at the faculty of political Sciences and completed his education at the Military Academy. This kind of impact on his worldview, especially if we remember that Dugin argues: the military peculiar to a special type of "spatial thinking". That is, they are to a greater extent than all other categories of the population, look at the world as space. Perisic associate Professor specializing in international relations, geopolitics and foreign policy. Especially interested in geopolitics and Russian Eurasianism. His research on this topic, Perisic summarized in the book "the New geopolitics of Russia".

— Print: In the introduction to "the New geopolitics of Russia" says the world in recent years is not based on those foundations that existed after the collapse of the USSR. What are these basics? Today we live in a much-desired multipolar or is it a relative of a unipolar world?

— Srdjan Perisic: We are witnessing the emergence of a multipolar device. On the one hand, globalization is unable to complete the unification of humanity according to the standard Western ideology of liberalism. People resist the fact that a person has become a individual who lives only by instincts, freed from values and identity. On the other hand, is a struggle — both on a theoretical and on a practical level — between realists and globalists.

Realists assert the primacy of national sovereignty in international relations. For them there is nothing but national sovereignty, no transnational organizations. The globalists and liberals reject national sovereignty, considering it an outdated principle of regulation of international relations. That is, they simply advocated the formation of a transnational global government. To them by the state unnecessary, and they need to relax. Globalization and American military superiority is the main methodology used to achieve this goal. That is, the struggle between the globalists, who favour a unipolar device, and realists who support a multipolar, gives us the ability to choose a polycentric, non-existent after the collapse of the Soviet Union.

— Many had hoped that Donald trump would bring to American foreign policy of isolationism share, thereby refreshing it and overthrow the globalist elite from the throne. Now, after constant threats from the mouth of trump to launch a military intervention in various parts of the world, all these hopes seem unfounded. Can the USA do in peaceful isolation after 1989?

— Trump is fighting against the globalists. He is also a realist. He is the enemy of globalization and sees it as harmful to American citizens. However, in this fight, trump defeated. He can't implement his election promises and remove from key people. To stay on as President, he, unfortunately, adopts the policy of the globalists. It is clear from the threats against North Korea, Iran, Syria. During this time did not stop American support of "al-Qaeda" (banned in Russia — approx. ed.).

However, whether trump can bounce back from these defeats, not so important. The fact that the election of a President has awakened a part of American society that opposes globalization. And this is important in itself. So far, this was impossible. American society is divided and is on the verge of collision. Some believe that is not far off civil war. The appearance of trump shows clearly that the US and the West are in crisis. The strength of their power is weakening. And Serb political elites must finally understand.

Speaking about the redistribution of world power, I want to pay special attention to the fact that Germany seeks to come to terms with Russia. Is there a possibility that Germany, and with it the entire EU, will gradually be freed from the status of an American satellite and will be relatively independent pole of the world order? What will this mean for Serbia?

— The German public believes that sanctions against Russia should be removed, and that Ukraine is in the Russian sphere of influence. That is also the opinion of the German business elite. The new German government will go the way of warming relations with Moscow. Recently Berlin's position on the issue of North Korea and Iran moving closer to Moscow and away from Washington. But there is an aggravating circumstance: in Germany is still placed American armed forces. This is a very heavy burden that prevents Germany to make independent decisions in its foreign policy. That is, the warming of relations with Moscow will depend, including, from relations with Washington.

On the other hand, the EU is going through various crises, is in a state of half-life, and he had no strength to make a decisive step away from geopolitics in the spirit of Atlanticism. Besides the European Union, which is a product of globalism and Atlanticism, still sees NATO as a guarantor of its existence. While the European elites will not reconsider its position, the EU will not become a separate geopolitical pole. Unfortunately, a large part of the Serbian elite does not understand.

— Then what will happen to Ukraine? Does the rejection of military solutions and territorial expansion of Russia, that Russia gave up or still talking about a strategy which will give long term results?

— The US turned Ukraine into a trap for Russia. The West hoped that Russia will begin military intervention. If she did, then it is against the whole world. Probably even China would oppose Russia. Vladimir Putin understood this and did not allow to realize such a scenario. Of course, this does not mean that Russia has refused to return to Ukraine under the Russian geopolitics. Moscow is clear that without Ukraine, Russia cannot strengthen its position in the world. In this regard, the Kremlin has decided on a long-term strategy. To this decision his bowed and the situation in Ukraine itself. In the case of Ukrainization of Russian ethnicity. The Western identity of Ukraine imposed throughout Ukraine. Special activity this shows the Ukrainian elite. It has the national fascist part, the most numerous in the West, and liberal Western part of the Kiev and Central regions of the country. In a liberal part includes supporters of the EU, and to Russia they are treated as a foreign country.

The ideology that impose Ukrainization, is the warranty Pro-Western orientation of the country. In fact, Pro-Western elite is the most dangerous, more dangerous Ukrainian nationalist fascism as such, and together it forms the ideological Foundation of modern Ukrainian Russophobia. In this regard, long-term strategy of Russia is helping Donbass, the restoration of Russian identity and in its economic recovery. All this should point the rest of Ukraine, i.e. Ukrainian Russian which now are very poor, the way in which Ukraine needs to go.

— What role in the formation of a multipolar world to play China? In one early work, Dugin notes of caution in this country and described it as the "France of the East", referring to its same capacity and tellurocracy and Thalassocracy. However, it seems that today the axis Moscow-Beijing is more stable than ever before.

20 years ago there was a question about where is the directional vector of the Chinese geopolitical expansion to the South, southwest or North. One felt that this vector will be directed North to the Siberian resources. But Beijing correctly predicted that Russia is recovering and doesn't want any conflict with China. Instead, Russia wants to cooperate in the fight against terrorism and separatism in Central Asia. To decide on expansion into Siberia would have meant for China a suicide. Beijing would be left without gas, oil and energy, and the US in this situation wouldn't have helped. China continues to remain constrained by their seas. But through them, due to the stable Russian oil and gas supplies, China can realize its geopolitical expansion, establishing economic ties with the rest of the world. Why China is promoting its geopolitical project "One belt and one road", as the New silk road. This project is working with Russian geopolitics.

On the other hand, the New silk road will strengthen the model development, which was dominated by the state. Most major infrastructure projects managed by the state. In addition, most loans guaranteed by the government. New silk road — a fine example of realism in international relations. Within such a concept of communication between States take precedence over the relationships between corporations and civil society actors.

— China has recently adopted a new military doctrine, according to which the focus will be on the development of naval forces to facilitate the projection of Chinese power. This heralds a new intervention or, conversely, will curb American interventionism due to the buildup Marines?

— To successfully implement the New silk road project, China needs to have a developed Navy. However, China's military development is not focused on intervention, as in the case of the United States. China is implementing its geopolitical ambitions, which in terms of values and in terms of relations to other States and societies differ from Western American. American globalization involves the imposition of liberal values and norms which the West's ultimatum requires the other countries. The Chinese do not impose to the world their values and ideas. And this is a significant difference, which is reflected in the difference in the use of military force. The armed forces of China and Russia, are not for aggressive expansion, and to curb it.

— Since the arrival of Donald trump in the White house has become considerable acceleration of regional integration to NATO, which is created by an unpleasant sensation, as if Serbia is surrounded by this Alliance. What are the geopolitical perspectives of Serbia in such circumstances?

— Taking Montenegro and planning to take Macedonia, NATO wants to intimidate Serbia and to put before a fait accompli. The goal is that the Serbian public, 80% of which opposed the NATO membership, changed my mind. If we start from the definition of politics as the ability to distinguish friend from foe, then the obvious conclusion is that NATO has shown itself to be against Serbia and Serbs, not as a friend. On the contrary, the Alliance participated in the dismemberment of the Serbian ethnic space. But if Serbia were clearly built geopolitics, and in its framework — clearly the chosen strategy of national security, foreign policy and so on, NATO has never been able to intimidate Serbia.

On the other hand, today's international order is not the same as it was 18 years ago when NATO, the US and the West in General were at the peak of its power. Now everything has changed. The power of the West weakens, economic, and military, and in the value relation, and force other players grows, forming a multipolar world. In such circumstances, the fact that a certain country is surrounded by NATO members, plays a decisive role. That is, the task of Serbia to form its geopolitics, in accordance with its geopolitical identity and in accordance with the fact that the world is becoming polycentric. Serbia needs to choose the line of his foreign policy on this basis.

— If we remember that Serbia got a new MiG, and Croatia offensive weapons, the US and Germany does not hide that the purpose of modernization of Croatian aviation is "to achieve a dominant position in the region", then what do we expect in the near future?

In international relations power is a category influencing policy. In this regard, in addition to the acquisition of weapons, you need to change and the organization of the army of Serbia. It does not meet modern trends. During the so-called reform of the army from 2001 to 2012 was abolished the majority of combat units. Everything was done to ensure that the army has lost the ability to defend Serbia, but has acquired a new function — to help the us armed forces in their interventions around the world, and to participate in military operations of the EU. That is the Serbian army in its present form prepared by the membership of Serbia in NATO. It is a fact. Today, the armed forces made up of just six teams that have symbolic military equipment. These teams consist of separate battalions. The army lost its combat component. And that's the problem. Also in the Western direction, from Subotica to Vranje, Serbia poorly protected. In addition, in Belgrade there is not one military unit, which potentially would have acted against the assault of the aggressor.

Given the growing tension in the international arena and the use of force, it is clear that the organization and the model of the Serbian army nor the number of troops or the nature of its units do not meet modern requirements. Speedy changes are needed. We also need to understand that Croatia will always push towards a possible conflict with Serbia and Republika Srpska. Supporters of Atlanticism in the Balkans will always be Croatia and Albania. The geopolitics of the West need to the Serbian ethnic space in the Balkans was not uniform and pliable for control. Croatia and Albania — means to achieve this goal. Who are the representatives of the Serbian elite does not see this, he is either naive or devious.

Was there in Serbia, in Your opinion, a shift to strengthening of geopolitical science, necessary for proper government decisions, or we remain obsessed with so-called "geopolitical schizophrenia"?

In Serbian geopolitical science, there are prominent figures. Unfortunately, their scientific knowledge is not in demand by political elites. And this is the main problem. Any specialist in geopolitics knows that this science provides the power of a shared understanding of what to consider when making crucial decisions. To manage, direct his government and the nation must, in accordance with geopolitics. There is no nation in Europe that has both geopolitical identities, that is, no nation, formed under the influence of two spaces of land and sea. Serbia wrongly portrayed as a country with two identities, which affects the West and East, sea and land. In this regard, is not backed by anything scientific conclusion that Serbia needs to focus equally on both the West and in Russia. As a form of collaboration, this orientation of the country is desirable, but in the sphere of geopolitics it is unattainable.

Science confirms that geopolitical poles exclude each other. That's why ignorance or misunderstanding of geopolitics leads to disaster for the state and the people. 20th century us is conclusively proved. Throughout the 20th century none of the Serbian elites, whose position is allowed to make decisions not acted in accordance with geopolitics. As a result, the Serbs are the only nation in Europe that lost all its state. Was not the Kingdom of Serbia, in the blood of the genocide of the Serbs drowned Kingdom of Yugoslavia, broke up socialist Yugoslavia, and Serbian ethnic space has been fragmented. Actually did not and the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia in 1999 and in 2006 was dissolved and the State Union of Serbia and Montenegro. They all collapsed because there was a clear Serbian geopolitics. And now there is the Republic of Serbia. But does she have clearly defined geopolitics?

Several times You mentioned "geopolitical identity" of Serbia. Can You explain what it really is?

Serbs, like other peoples in Serbia, its culture, traditions, area of residence relate to continental Europe. This space affects the NOMOS of the Earth. NOMOS is the elevation of the space that it inhabits one of the people in the "force field order". NOMOS is the phenomenon that generates social and political order. That is the very basis of political order is not the law, as erroneously trying to prove to some lawyers, and the space. Laws are part of order, which is formed by space. German lawyer Carl Schmitt opened the NOMOS in the 50-ies of the 20th century. He opened the inextricable link between space and state space and right. The influence of the sea on Serbia and Serbian territory slightly, so that the NOMOS of the sea we are never formed. Our space gave us the traditional and conservative impetus in social and cultural sphere and collective identity. In this space the Serbs began to form the Byzantine civilization. All the undeniable facts that you cannot refute. Any attempt to represent Serbia and the Serbs part of the Western civilization is wrong and harmful. That is, Serbia has certain continental mainland identity. This means that the Serbian geopolitical identity can be a basis for a state's geopolitical ambitions and practices, and hence different regulatory strategies of security, foreign policy, cultural and economic policy.

Vojislav Gavrilovic (Voislav Gavrilovi)

Source: http://inosmi.ru/politic/20171023/240594296.html

Tags: Balkans


RELATED MATERIALS: Defence and security