Аннотация: Historically short-term opportunities for small political actors. The note.
Historically short-term opportunities for small political actors. The note.
After Turkey actively connected to the events in Libya, a real risks arose for Mr. Haftar's structures. The foreign policy motors of one large state were set in motion.
The Berlin Conference on Libya was convened (January 2020). The conference formulated quite worthy conditions under which the forces of Mr. Haftar could (can) be integrated into European (pro-European) politics.
And what did we see after a while?
Mr. Haftar declared himself the sole leader of Libya. (As if forgetting the decisions of the Berlin Conference). ["On the 27th April 2020, Haftar made a televised address where he declared that the LNA would accept a popular mandate to govern Eastern Libya, making Haftar the de-facto leader. " Wikipedia]
For most major political players, this was an interesting event, which seemed showed a finish of some political period after the Berlin Conference.
What will happen next? In Europe, in the Western World, foreign policy structures, if necessary, demonstrate patience and reasonable humanity.
In any case, all subsequent actions will be undertaken adjusted for Mr. Haftar's ability to act in violation of international agreements ...
Mr. Haftar is as original a figure as the modern leader of the DPRK.
Of course, there are such factors as history, and as the geopolitical (geographical) position. These factors are in favor of maintaining the regime that now exists in the DPRK.
But there are factors of economic helplessness, general and technical backwardness, periodically occurring phenomena of mass hunger (which requires urgent humanitarian assistance from the outside).
Sometimes photos of North Korean ships appear on the Internet, of ships, which due to circumstances finding themselves in Japanese ports. These photos make a very, very strange impression - as if the ships arrived from some other planet. (The authenticity of the photographs, of course, is under reasonable doubt).
That is, other factors exist, no less powerful, which are acting in the direction of rapidly changing the regime in the DPRK.
Under these conditions - possibly for general humane reasons, due to the ability to see a long-term political perspective, given the ancient culture and ancient history of the Korean people - the modern leader of the DPRK was given the opportunity to integrate into the modern Western World.
Such integration is risky.
One of the important issues, for example, the elimination of certain types of weapons and equipment in the DPRK.
It's possible to move forward on the path of integration and cooperation, but without significant actual concessions from the DPRK (without the elimination of certain types of weapons) - based on the vague promises of the DPRK.
In this case, the risks will fall on the United States.
If the DPRK eliminates some types of weapons and equipment, then how will events develop after that? With this option, the risks fall on the DPRK.
And who will take the risks - the United States or the DPRK?
The US is unlikely to take risks. And if so, then the DPRK and its leadership should make a turn in politics and rely on guarantees, partly formal, partly expressed in the general (benevolent) attitude towards the DPRK by the United States.
The risks for the DPRK and for its leadership are, of course, enormous.
But, if you do not take risks, what are the prospects for the DPRK? ... The overall level of risk for this country will only increase over time and increase more and more ...
What options does the DPRK and its leadership have in this situation today?
1 variant. To expand cooperation with the USA (and South Korea), moving to the position of a loyal political partner.
2nd variant. To take a neutral position, hoping that the foreign policy situation will improve for (concerning) the North Korea in a "natural way".
3d variant. To go for an exacerbation. To make symbolic actions confirming the "independence" of the DPRK foreign policy. To demonstrate actions that remind some observers of aggressiveness.
The DPRK leadership chooses the third option. Threats sound. Some building explodes...
In some ways, all this resembles the behavior of Mr. Haftar to declare himself the sole leader of Libya after the Berlin Conference (January 2020).
It seems that both political actors can lose (or have lost) the unique historical opportunities that have opened up before them (for a short - on historical scales - time) due to the combination of certain political factors.
Maybe they are hoping for a coronavirus pandemic, for a short-term political circumstances?
Who can reliably know what they hope for ...
June 16, 2020 13:23
Translation from Russian into English: June 16, 2020 14:22.
Владимир Владимирович Залесский 'Исторически кратковременные возможности мелких политических акторов. Заметка'.