The recent developments in Ukraine and Crimea have their own root causes. Whenever a determined people movement is displayed with an outpouring anger, there must have been some fundamental cause gone wrong. It was agreed by both sides; the orange movement and the Russian Federation that the level of corruption was cruel, given the worsening economic situation there. I am still having a challenging time understanding this kind of recklessness from the authorities who were "democratically" elected to serve their people not only for being unfair to their people but also in terms of lack of anticipating the outcome due to the already sensitive situation in the region after the wake of the cold war era. While the level of corruption is the main cause of the people's outburst, there could have been an alternative solution for what I regard a newly developing internal problem of Ukraine. It was best for all detractors to stay away from the conflict until things settle and the people sort out their future. As it looks, the geopolitical interest of the west and the east clashed again, interfering in the decision-making ability of the people of Ukraine to shape their future. What came about is the worsening of the east - west relation with the proclaimed 93% of Crimean's voting to secede from Ukraine. We are yet to see which way this goes.
We don't have to forget the current turmoil is happening next door to the 21st century Russia, Ukraine. The west never forgot its indulgence of eliminating communism to the last man, so it looks, however the former Soviet Union deflated to its present size. It is still a big territory and globally influential with a new drive to restore what was once known to be the Russian significance in the world politics. As one can witness, they have come a long way, but until lately they realized, when what they had been suspecting came to be heavily true; the west never slept. The west as Putin put it, know what they want and work for it persistently. It is against what most of the world population would choose - forget the cold war era and continue with the new world order of building a dynamic world community where the ideologies are never about being dominated by a single interest but rather a combination and most importantly of new but unifying world principle that doesn't necessarily reflect the emergence of a single victor. Can the west make the world a better place to live by dominating the new world order or by facilitating the diversity of the people and inventing a way to make it work for all? I think the final goal should be about establishing a unified but diverse world community rather than instigating a dominance, as the world is too big to look in a totalitarian sense. When one is equipped with these principles, one can always be prepared to lead the world with the ability and wisdom to adopt a sophisticated system where anything that is not a destabilizing factor, but a creative alternative is always a welcome gesture.
No comments:
Post a Comment