What if Russian intellectuals advocated “Managing America’s Dissolution”

The United States is often accused of conducting various overt and covert operations to interfere in the internal affairs of foreign nations. The US government finances political parties, activists and think tanks. It manipulates traditional media and social media. It blockades, sanctions, and sponsors military coups, or it just resorts to full-scale “humanitarian intervention” or, as it used to be called, warfare. When accusations of such crimes are raised, defenders of American actions at least try to deny them, or if they must be admitted, they are admitted only partially—sure, some action was taken reluctantly to play midwife to the birth of democracy, but it was basically a domestic revolt. When things turn out badly, like a decade of civil war in former Yugoslavia or a genocide in Rwanda, it’s not because the US and NATO bloc fomented separation movements in the former and plotted the overthrow of the government of the latter. The cause is put down to “ancient ethnic rivalries” or “long-simmering tribal resentment” and so on.

The Western or “transatlantic” think tank complex, financed by governments but ultimately financed by the weapons industry, has played a major role in setting the narrative for what unfolds in international relations. The think tanks have grown to such a bloated and unwieldy size, and festered in their own bathwater for so long that some of its distinguished “senior fellows” seem to have thrown caution to the wind. The egregious example cited here illustrates that the anti-Russia and anti-China fever has got so extreme that these writers are no longer even trying to maintain plausible deniability. They are just blatantly and publicly calling for regime change and balkanization to be the explicit purpose of American foreign policy.

The editorial below is a mirror image of another published by The Hill on January 9, 2019, entitled Managing Russia's Dissolution, by Janusz Bugajski. Essentially, only the place names in his text have been changed. My version is a joke, but the editorial published by The Hill is not. Imagine that a Russian or Chinese journal so openly argued for active measures to be taken to balkanize the United States and the European Union. Many writers for once-reputable publications imagine that Vladimir Putin has engineered Brexit, the Trump victory, and the Gilets Jaunes movement in France, but they believe this is being done covertly. They have no proof. Even in their most fevered dreams they don’t expect to find documentary proof of Russian “senior fellows” in think tanks writing that Russia should actively foment and “manage” the dissolution of America.

Managing America’s Dissolution

The writer is a senior fellow at the Center for Ridicule of the Transatlantic Think Tank and Media Manipulation Complex.

America’s ongoing attacks on Venezuela and other socialist nations, and its persistent subversion of states opposed to the neoliberal order, demonstrate that Moscow and Beijing have failed to restrain Washington’s imperial ambitions.

Engagement, criticism and limited economic strategies have simply reinforced Washington perceptions that the other major powers are weak and predictable. To curtail Washington’s neo-imperialism a new strategy is needed, one that nourishes America’s decline and manages the international consequences of its dissolution. 

America is more fragile than it appears, and Russia and China are stronger than they are portrayed. Under the Republican-Democratic duopoly, which will soon enter its third century, the country has transitioned from a functioning democracy to an unstable inverted totalitarianism in which all the levers of power are controlled by oligarchs and democracy is only a superficial remnant of the past.

Although Washington has failed to modernize its economy to be globally competitive, Washington excels in one domain—disinformation—through which it portrays the country as an eternal superpower capable of carrying on its traditional role. 

In reality, America is a declining state that disguises its internal infirmities with external offensives. America’s ranking has steadily declined in the UN Human Development Index, while the rankings of Russia and China are on the rise.

Even when social conditions have reached abysmal levels, the defense budget is expanding above a level that is already ten times what Russia spends on defense. Through a combination of low fossil fuel prices, infrastructural decay, and the pervasive corruption of Western financial institutions, state revenues are declining, living standards are falling, social conflicts are intensifying and regional disquiet is mounting. 

Although economic performance alone is insufficient to measure susceptibility to collapse, rising social, ethnic, ideological and regional pressures indicate that America is heading toward fragmentation.

America has failed to develop into a nation state with a strong ethnic or civic identity. It remains an imperial construct due to its anti-communist, expansionist and militaristic heritage.

The unwieldy American republic consists several overseas territories, hundreds of indigenous nations, and 50 states, including Hawaii and California, with distinct identities that feel increasingly estranged from Washington—not to mention vassal entities such as Japan, Israel and the NATO bloc.

Instead of pursuing decentralization to accommodate regional aspirations, Washington refuses to allow them more autonomy. This is evident in the new intolerance of Muslims, immigrants and people who speak languages other than English.

Pressure is mounting across the country, with growing anger at local officials loyal to national parties and ideologies. There is resentment that Washington appropriates their resources and dictates their social norms. Indeed, states such as Alaska and North Dakota, with their substantial mineral wealth, could be successful nations without Washington’s exploitation.

Emerging nations will benefit from forging closer economic and political contacts with neighboring countries rather than depending on Washington, whose federal budget is drastically shrinking. Collapsing infrastructure means that residents of the Midwestern states (referred to disparagingly as flyover country) will become even more separated from the center, thus encouraging demands for secession and sovereignty.

  

Given America’s ailments, an assertive Russian and Chinese approach would be more effective than reactive defense. They need to return to core principles that accompanied the rise of the Soviet Union the People’s Republic by supporting nationalization of major industries, pluralism, minority rights, genuine federalism, and regional self-determination among America’s disparate regions and ethnic groups.

While Washington seeks to divide the world and fracture Russia and China by backing nationalist and separatist parties, these nations should promote regional and ethnic self-determination inside America itself. This would send a strong signal that Russia and China are fully capable of reacting to Washington’s subversion.

The rationale for dissolution should be logically framed: In order to survive, Washington needs a federal democracy and a robust economy; with no democratization on the horizon and economic conditions deteriorating, the federal structure will become increasingly ungovernable.

To manage the process of dissolution and lessen the likelihood of conflict that spills over state borders, Russia and China need to establish links with America’s diverse regions and promote their peaceful transition toward nationhood.

Russia and China should prepare contingencies for both the dangers and the opportunities that America’s fragmentation will present. In particular, Washington’s North and South American neighbors must be provided with sufficient security to shield themselves from the most destabilizing scenarios while preparations are made for engaging with emerging post-American entities.

Some regions could join countries such as Canada, Mexico, and even Russia, from whom Washington has gained territories in the past. States in the northeast, such as Vermont, Maine and New Hampshire, could become fully independent states and forge relations with Canada.

Neglecting America’s dissolution may prove more damaging to Russian and Chinese interests than making preparations to manage its international repercussions. To avoid sudden geopolitical jolts and possible military confrontations, Moscow and Beijing need to monitor and encourage a peaceful rupture and establish links with emerging entities.

The sudden collapse of the United States should serve as a lesson that far-reaching transformations occur regardless of the Washington’s disinformation campaigns or the East’s shortsighted adherence to a transient status quo. 

The writer is a senior fellow at the Center for Ridicule of the Transatlantic Think Tank and Media Manipulation Complex.