Big Nations, Little Nations… and Crimea
Crimea has certainly energized the commentariat and stirred the imagination of the more eschatalogically inclined in the academic community This is perhaps not surprising, given the multitude of symbols and portents written in the stars. There are so many significant anniversaries that we are spoiled for choice in which best suits this epic drama: the shots fired in Sarajevo a century ago, or 35 years since the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, or – and this is really quite striking – 160 years since the Anglo-French siege of Sebastopol during the Crimean War, or 75 years from Hitler’s Anschluss with Austria and takeover of Czechoslovakia… And it was only a few months ago that we marked the 45th anniversary of the crushing of the Prague Spring. There are more besides.
Amongst all the predictions, prognoses and commentaries, there is really only one big question. Will the crisis in the Crimea be the spark to ignite the Big One, start the escalator up to the Apocalypse? Neither Lavrov, nor Kerry, nor Ashton, nor even Ahmet Davutoglu can answer that one, because none of them has control over a situation that can slip out of their grasp at any moment.
Forgive me for the comparison, but big nations are a bit like locusts: when their number reaches a critical mass, the instinct to devour everything in their path overwhelms all others. Big nations believe that they are destined to decide the fate of the world. Maybe a swarm of locusts experiences something similar. Recall how they appear as a scourge from God in both the Old (Exodus) and the New (Book of Revelation) Testaments. That is how big nations seem to small ones, and even the not-so-small, forever dividing and devouring their territories, population and resources. Big nations are a constant source of instability and war, because stability is what the weak of this world, focused on their own survival, need most, while the strong thrive on rape and slaughter. It was the big nations that unleashed two world wars and may be on the verge of starting another. Because the laws of nature decree that the more an organism consumes, the more it must consume to satisfy its appetite. In this context, it’s worth recalling Napoleon’s aphorism about the nature of empires, that in the end they all die from indigestion (something which applied to his own).
Big nations are so wrapped up in their own conceit that they forget that in this theater of ours, besides the stage on which they strut, there is also an auditorium, for the benefit of which the play is, in fact, performed, with the whole world as its audience. Absorbed by their own drama, they forget that theater is mere play-acting, and they must submit to the logic of the action which develops by its own laws.
For example, not so very long ago, a certain big nation began, with real enthusiasm, ecstasy even, demolishing the political heritage, which only a short time before they had worshiped as the holy of holies and imposed on their vassals and clients. This process was observed not only by the nation’s neighbors, but also by its own family (as they liked to say) of nationalities. Some of them looked on with astonishment, others with contempt… It was this, rather than crude nationalism, that was the cause of the nearly instantaneous collapse of the system. After all, it was plain to see that no good would come of standing by such a mediocre ally and patron. Much later, when the elite found this behavior embarrassing, dozens of excellent reasons for the collapse of the USSR were discovered, with the main blame put on separatism. Of course, problems with the national republics on the periphery played a part, to say nothing of the fact that very existence of the periphery in itself creates a serious problem. However, not many now like to remember that in academic circles and the political elite, as well as the population at large, the idea of throwing overboard the ballast of the national republics became the basic ideology of the time. Yeltsinism was a means for the Russian political class to hold onto power and strengthen its position. The doctrine of Russia’s “special path” without the now tiresome “little brothers” came in very handy.
We are now living in a different age. It is a time for throwing stones, or as Russia’s Federation Council might put it, a gathering of the lands. Unfortunately one is impossible without the other, since nobody, not even Yatsenyuk, can be persuaded to give up land without being showered with stones.
But there is something else, too. While a good time was being had by all demolishing the Soviet Union, a lot of people were aware that after a period of time, there would be nostalgia for what had been lost and a desire to restore the past. That some little man with big ambitions would pop up and want to recreate everything just as it was. And these people worked day and night over the past twenty five years to build a security system with precisely that eventuality in mind. It seems that a little “man of the year”, blinded by euphoria with recent political victories and sporting triumphs, has fallen right into the trap laid just for him..
