In every language and in all kinds of conversations where complex and intertwined problems are on the table begging to be resolved, a recurring theme is voiced by the participants.
The theme informs the participants that they can go to
the root causes underlying most of the problems, and solve them at that level,
which would be easier than to proceed in the conventional manner. In making
this suggestion, the attendees unwittingly describe a situation they have in
their minds’ eyes. It is a view of the problems being like a tree with few
roots, one trunk, and many branches that sprout abundant problems in the form
of hard to swallow bitter fruits.
However, this does not mean that every set of complex
problems —
pertaining to individuals or associated with institutions or even nations —
can be resolved in one fell swoop by going to the root causes, and working on
the problems at that level. It happens at times that devising a small solution
for every manifestation of the larger problem, is the best way to proceed. And
so, this approach must not be dismissed altogether.
In fact, this is how the problems of the Nuclear Age
during the decades of the 1970s and 1980s were resolved, an achievement that
kept the peace until today. You’ll find an excellent account of what went on
during those years, in an article that came under the title: “How to Make a
Deal With Putin,” and the subtitle: “Only a Comprehensive Pact Can Avoid War.”
It was written by Professor Michael McFaul, and published on February 11, 2022
in Foreign Affairs.
To give you a taste of how the article reads, the
following is a condensed version of how Michael McFaul has described what
happened during the two crucial decades:
“On the surface, the 1970s were not an
auspicious time for Soviet-US compromise. But in the middle of the decade,
Canadian, Soviet, US, and European diplomats discussed European security. After
several years of negotiations, they produced and signed the 1975 Helsinki
Final Act. In the first two decades after the accords were signed, Europe saw
an explosion of new security agreements and treaties. In 1987, Mikhail Gorbachev
joined US President Ronald Reagan to sign the Intermediate-Range Nuclear
Forces (INF) Treaty. In 1990, the Conventional Armed Forces in Europe (CFE)
Treaty came online. The 1990 Vienna Document, signed by Canada, the Soviet
Union, the United States, and most of Europe and Central Asia, expanded
transparency about weapons and military training exercises”.
The reason why McFaul brought out this history, is that
the world is going through a difficult period at this time. What happened is
that after the disintegration of the Soviet Union, more than the Eastern
European satellites pivoted toward the Capitalist West; so did some of the
Republics that were part of the old Soviet Union. A major Republic now aspiring
to join the Western military alliance of NATO is Ukraine. This is worrying
Russia’s President Putin so much that he mobilized more than a hundred thousand
troops, and sent them to the border with Ukraine, giving the impression that he
would invade the country unless he gets guarantees that Ukraine will never
become a member of NATO.
America and its Western allies flatly refused Putin’s
demand on the grounds that every sovereign nation has the right to associate
with whomever it wants to. This sounds like a problem with no obvious solution.
And so, it was left to historians such as Michael McFaul to come up with
something creative that will solve the underlying problem … which is Russia’s
fear of NATO circling it with military bases.
This being similar to the time when the two superpowers
faced each other but managed to keep the peace by negotiating several small
deals —
based mainly on the implementation of a program of transparency to alleviate
each source of worry raised by America and the Soviet Union — McFaul
has suggested a modern version of that approach to resolve the current
difficulties. The following is a very short version of what McFaul has said can
be done:
“A new grand bargain on European
security could commit all signatories to more frequent monitoring of troop
deployments, weapons deployments, and military exercises. It could allow
Russian inspectors to visit the sites of US missile defenses in Poland and
Romania, and NATO monitors could have similar access to Russia’s Iskander
missiles in Kaliningrad”.
Cognizant of the fact that to find a
solution for every manifestation of the larger problem, may turn out to be as
good a way to solve the current set of problems as it was in the past, there
remains the possibility that going to the root causes of the larger problem and
finding a one fell swoop solution there, could be an even better solution.
So, the questions to ask are these:
What are the root causes of the problem? And how to resolve them? The answer is
that the wrong mentality is at the root of all these problems. Changing that
mentality, will resolve the problems in one fell swoop. In fact, a strong
desire has been expressed by all the parties to do just that, as manifested in
the following passage:
“Moscow has argued that every state’s
security is connected to the security of others. The Istanbul and Astana OSCE
declarations proclaim that the security of each participating State is
inseparably linked to that of all others, and that each participating State has
an equal right to security. Putin has proposed that no signatory ‘strengthen
their security individually, within international organizations, military
alliances or coalitions at the expense of the security of other Parties.’ The
Kremlin is correct that every state has an equal right to security”.
Simply stated, this says that the change of mentality
required to solve the problems of the world in one fell swoop, resides in the
ability of the leaders in each country to think in terms, not only of “what is
safe for us,” but also in terms of “what is safe for the other side,” and act
accordingly.