Time is running out for smaller nations

 Borders between spheres

 

Our civilisation is presently in the end-phase of the period of Warring States, which always accompanies modernities of civilisations. Through confrontations, wars and imperialism the countries and superpowers of the world are heading for the final unification and subordination under one, two or three empires. This is our destiny. The path toward and the shaping of this imperial order are decided through conflicts, wars and suffering. But the harm must be kept at a minimum.

 

I have earlier argued that in order to preserve stability and peace in the world, there must be clear mutually agreed borders between the spheres of interest of the superpowers. There can be different borders depending on whether we talk about politics, economy, IT or military. Most conflicts arise because of disputes over such spheres. Thus as said, the limits of the spheres must be fixed and respected. Of course, a such agreed arrangement cannot be forever. Sometimes it will need to be adjusted and revised as the balance of strength changes. Such changes often result through confrontation, but the duration and stability of the peaceful periods should be maximized.

 

This is not an arbitrary claim. It is self-evident that suffering through conflicts and wars must be kept as low as possible. To ensure this it may be necessary to limit the independence of smaller countries, either 1) by being controlled by a big power or 2) by them uniting to a block and become a big power themselves. These are the only possibilities; it is the choice faced by all medium and small countries. In both cases, their independence will become reduced. If you because of outdated small-nation nationalism refuse uniting, you will be subjugated from abroad instead.

 

To uphold stable borders between the spheres of the dominating powers, smaller nations must be prevented from disruptingg the demarkation lines. This goes for any strategically important countries anywhere on Earth, but especially for countries near the geographical border between the spheres of the big.

 

If superpowers cannot agree on an exact border in a part of the world, a less stable, but acceptable solution is to allow buffer states between them, states which are semi-independent subsidiaries of the big. Officially, they may be neutral or allied to one of the superpowers, but with guaranties to the opposing power. The behavior of such border states is crucial for the stability of the relations between the big and these states must be carefully guided. Generalized, this applies to all smaller countries situated geographically or strategically between superpowers.  Based on present and past experience it is obvious that without agreed delimitations between spheres, intermediate and small countries can pose a major threat to peace in the world. Conflicts often arise from competition for control over them.

 

For the United States and China there are two major comfrontation lines, where clear borders between the spheres are needed.

1) the economic spheres in Latin America. Here conflicts over the influence in countries are likely to multiply. And as we see in the case of Venezuela such conflicts can escalate and become military.

 

2) Even more dangerous are the political and the military spheres in the vast ocean between the coasts of the powers. The island-countries Japan, Taiwan and the Philippines destabilize the relation between the two superpowers with irresponsible and provoking statements from populist politicians.

 

Situated between America and Russia, Europe contains countries from both the present global civilisation in the west and countries in the emerging East European Civilisation in the east. Ordinary political conflicts and the frictions between the two civilisations and the resulting political decisions determine our destiny.

 

Europe may be viewed and analyzed by seeing it as divided into four slices or zones from west to east. Slices with differences in politics, culture and civilisation:

 

1} West and South Europe.

2} Central and North Europe.

3} The western parts of East Europe.

4} Countries bordering on Russia.

 

Internal conditions in and the relations between the slices decide internal and external politics and the shape of present and future Europe.

 

The countries in West and South Europe are strongly affected by the global political decline with its polarization and populism.

The countries in Central and North Europe are the most mature parts of the continent.

The countries in the Western parts of East Europe are politically declined like those in the West and South. This is also the case for the countries bordering on Russia, but here an animosity toward Russia is logical. Like Russia, the two parts of East Europe belong to the East European Civilisation and share culture and internal political tendencies. This area is not a unitary cultural block. Its nations are in transition phase from being dominated from our civilisation to emancipating themselves and finding their own eastern identity.  Furthermore, as we move eastwards, this identity is stronger and stronger because the cultural influence from west is weaker. This culminates in Russia.

 

The sketched divisions of Europe from West to East add to the internal divisions, which rise everywhere, especially in the politically declined parts. Tackling the fragmentation and uniting the very disparate four zones is a challenging task. But a first step is to see not only the problem of populism in the countries, but especially to realize the differences along the west-east axis from the Atlantic coast to Ukraine. These differences are not trivial, but very deep.

 

If it succeeds, Europe may become a superpower of its own. Rest-Ukraine could be a buffer-state toward Russia. The UK and Canada could be buffer states toward America.

 

If it does not succeed, the whole of Europe will become a buffer-zone between America and Russia. Sliced up and ruled.