The Chairman of the Commission Federation Council for Information Policy and Interaction with the Media Alexey Pushkov, who headed the State Duma Committee on International Affairs on the strategy of the new head of the American Agency in 2011-2016
- How do you assess her transition to the new job?
- Biden is recruiting personnel for the key positions from the Obama administration. If we talk about the foreign policy dimension, then this is actually the Obama 2.0 administration. We see all the same old faces that we know from the Obama presidency. So I'm not surprised that Biden is pulling up Samantha Power. Ideologically and politically, this is a very important area: it is the projection of American "soft power", American political influence and, by the way, subversive activity on other states.
Samantha Power is a well-known figure, she combines political aggressiveness with an almost dogmatic belief in the correctness of the so-called "new American values". In her person, we will not deal with a politician belonging to the school of political realism, which proceeds from the fact that it is necessary to take into account the interests of other states and correlate American politics with these interests. No. It will be the conductor of a policy of increasing American influence in spite of everything and against all odds.
Another question is to what extent she will be able to impose the American approaches, since these "new values" are facing resistance even in the countries allied with the United States. Let's say the same same-sex marriages, for which the current American administration and, of course, Samantha Power, ardently advocate, are introduced only in 14 countries of the European Union, and they are not allowed in 13 EU countries.
Strengthening American influence through financial injections into certain targeted programs, various kinds of grants, etc., further spreading aggressively liberal ideology and American approaches will be the main task of Samantha Power. From the point of view of a combination of her activity and the tasks facing her, she, apparently, seems to Biden the optimal candid
- Having been the US Permanent Representative to the UN for quite a long time, she is probably well familiar with the situation in different countries, where there is a weakness that can be hit. What countries do you think Samantha Power can turn her attention to when she takes this place? After all, USAID is currently operating in the Balkans and Eastern Europe, the organization is not officially represented in Western Europe.
- Eastern Europe remains the subject of the American political and ideological colonization for the simple reason that it is in Eastern Europe that traditional approaches are still preserved. If we look at the same European Union, we will see that the two countries of Eastern Europe, namely Poland and Hungary, are opposing the EU's attempts to impose strict Brussels criteria on them in a number of areas of public life, including with the aim of weakening traditional values in these countries. ... Conservative sentiments are strong in the Czech Republic, Slovakia and the Baltic states.
The task of Samantha Power will be the maximum subordination of these states to the American foreign policy line through the significant financial instruments and levers that will be at her disposal. The US has the ability to fund non-profit overseas organizations through the agency. I think the financial leverage will be maximally used to ensure that various countries align themselves with American leadership not only in the military-political sphere, but also in the ideological and value-based field.
I believe that the Americans have long nurtured the concept of creating a single global world and would like to see in it their closest allies who have not yet fully integrated into the American coordinate system, such as Poland or Hungary. I do not exclude that much attention will be paid to Turkey as well, since Erdogan causes concern among American liberal forces with his illiberal policy, as well as elements of independence in foreign policy.
- And the CIS?
- As for the states - republics of the former Soviet Union, here, I think, the task is still more limited. It consists in financing those programs and organizations that will work to separate these republics from Russia. The focus is not on values, not on revision of traditional approaches, not on encouraging these countries to abandon authoritarian manifestations. In the US view, these countries can be authoritarian and at the same time pleasing to America if they oppose Russia or curtail interaction with it.
There have already been signals from Washington from the people that Biden’s administration intends to transfer the rivalry with Russia to its borders - to the so-called near abroad - and begin a battle for states allied with us or those states that are historically close to us: Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, Armenia and even Belarus. The United States will maximally encourage any anti-Russian manifestations there, any pro-American tendencies.
According to Washington's definition, this is a kind of "gray zone" between the great powers, namely China, USA, Russia and the European Union. These intermediate states, which, as they believe in Washington, have not yet fully decided on their political orientation, will be one of the priorities for both the State Department and USAID, which is closely associated with it.
Interviewed by Oleg OSIPOV