Longing For A Popular, Revolutionary Foreign Policy

THE UNITED STATES, just a few hours ago, accused the Soviet Union of aggression, in the Crimea, the Ukraine, and Syria. This accusation would seem, at first glance, to reside safely on the side of accuracy; however, The Democratic Republic of Russia, or whatever its called these days, wishes to inform the American representatives that the term "Soviet Union" no longer applies, that there is no Russian aggression occurring anywhere, and furthermore accuses the United States of trying to restart the Cold War. The Unites States could perhaps argue that if dropping bombs on and rolling tanks through the above named places is not "aggression", then we simply don't know what aggression is, and we think we do. Undoubtedly, the Russians think they are acting in "self defense", or something of that nature, not aggression. All this does not auger well for the success of peace talks concerning Syria, or for the ability of the United States and the former Soviet Union to negotiate anything. Russia insists that, in order for Syrian cease fire talks to commence, all hostilities must stop. In other words, in order for talks to begin for the purpose of creating a cease fire, there must be a cease fire. That would certainly make things easier. The United States might reply that if a cease fire is a pre-requirement to cease fire talks, there is no need for cease fire talks. Perhaps we begin to see the obvious folly of international relations conducted by elite rulers, who claim to be acting in the best interests of the people they claim to represent, but obviously do not. If only the people of the United Sates and the people of Russia could act on their own behalf, make foreign policy decisions themselves instead of turning over the process to an elite, inane few, the world would be a more sane, and less violent place. But that would require a revolution.