Russia isn't waging an economic war against anyone. A dictator tried to invade his democratic neighbour, he failed, and now the other democraties are cutting him out of their club
See e.g., "How the West should respond to China’s search for foreign outposts" (https://www.economist.com/leaders/2022/05/07/how-the-west-sh...), which uses the phrase "America and its allies" three times.
The US, NATO, NORAD, ANZUS, SEATO, and specific alliances such as the US-Japan alliance, Mutual Defense Treaty between the United States and the Republic of Korea, and the like, would likely be included. In the context of Ukraine and this article, probably the Common Security and Defence Policy (CDSP) of the EU as well.
As a friend of mine told NPR: “It’s not that Tunisia’s democracy is threatened. Tunisia’s democracy has been shot in the head.”
> A better term would be liberal democracies
If you think "liberal democracies" still carries the same positive vibe across the world that it used to some years ago you are in for a big surprise.
> "both sides are the same" ring to it
They are definitely not the same, they have obviously different values. Again, Putin has said as much, he's the one fighting for a multi-polar world with multi-polar values, so to speak. I think the same holds for Xi, in China.
Agree, I would state it as "liberal" "democracies" - this is an opinion of course, but I think if one was to fairly but critically perform an in-depth evaluation, things are not as lovely as they are described to the masses.
That's the opposition to Russia? Hardly, Ukraine's neighbours are doing far more than anyone in London or Washington.
> They are definitely not the same, they have obviously different values
Yes one of them is democracy, the other is dictatorships. One is good, the other is bad. Refreshingly, some things in life are simple.
> he's the one fighting for a multi-polar world with multi-polar values
if he wanted a multi-polar world he'd have let ukraine be a pole. no, he wants a russian world, with himself at the top of it
Yes, they would want Ukraine under their sphere of influence, that one has been also made pretty clear by them ever since the USSR was broken up.
in a more generalized sense, russia actually doesn't care about any of the countries listed but itself, except insofar as it can convince those countries to support russia
the world is already multipolar, as was pointed out – look to the UN for an example of how multiple poles interact with each other in a civilized fashion – nearly 200 of them!
russia doesn't want this, all they want is domination, and the disintegration of the multipolar world that is civilized diplomacy which might unite and thus present a united front against russian domination and genocide
This isn’t what polarity refers to. The nations of the UN are not at all equal in terms of power and influence.
While no one would question that the United States, Russia, and China are the “poles” in this system, no one would regard any of the 190ish other nations which are far smaller and less powerful as poles.
At tha General Assembly all nations are equal. And after all of the abuses of veto powers discussions to eliminate the permanent Security Council positions are once again picking up steam.
I mean, I agree that it doesn't carry the same positive vibes that it used to, but it still carries much better vibes than "corrupt authoritarian semi-dictatorships".
To those who might try going "muh western propaganda" on this, save your time. I am speaking as someone who grew up in one of those "corrupt authoritarian semi-dictatorships" and eventually immigrated to a "liberal democracy".
As he noted, it doesn't merit three cheers. Two, though? Maybe two.
I now live in one of those “horrible” western democracies where I can tell the Prime Minister that he’s an idiot to his face and the worst that’ll happen is that he’ll laugh at me in a dismissive way.
But these countries are “all the same”, right? Right?
Great pole there! /s The West may have it's problems, but Putin is trying to resurrect the same pole that was led at one point or another by Hitler, Stalin, Mao. The world doesn't need that again.
Isn't it strange how Russian money kept trying to prevent it from becoming so and yet, it kept becoming one?
And the list goes on and on, although only one of the mentioned things would be enough to consider such a country as non-democratic at least.
I think corruption and a rule of oligarch is the least problem in a country like that.