Are nations with less economic-military power more like the pivotal core muscles needed by those greater powers to be functional? Supposing this analogy holds, would it be better for the larger dynamic muscles with dictatorial control (Russia, China) to have a more democratic, confederate relationship with independent core muscles (Ukraine, Poland, Tibet)?
Consider what core muscles do: they stabilize the body against the force of larger dynamic muscles to keep balance and avoid falling during important operations. In this, a discus can be thrown further and more accurately without being drilled into the ground or tossed too high, both ill-uses of power.
Yet dynamic muscles do not control core muscles. Core muscles independently engage for stability, balance, and even stress relief, even when dynamic muscles are not being used, but forces are acting on the whole body. Riding a horse or staying on the back of a bumpy truck come to mind. When bad things happen in large geographic power-player’s homelands, countries nearby might lend willing sympathy, aid, and support if their peoples were treated as respected equals of scale over time.
There is much reporting on Russia, “the West,” Europe, and China, and what these power-players do in relation to one another. Yet contrary to PR, these are not the leaders of democracy in the world today. There is little or no principled, proportionate focus at the U.N. or in the media on the independent importance of less powerful nation states whose people live between greater power blocs, such as those of Ukraine and Poland.
Because of their locations, Ukraine and Poland are more accustomed than Russia to invasion and abuse. Both Ukraine and Poland were triple baptized in the fires of Fascism, Communism, and post-Cold War adjustment. These countries and their peoples deserve recognition and respect for making it through all that and striving to be democratic states guaranteeing freedom for their peoples.
Yet the Ukrainians and Poles are treated by the Great Powers as if they had no independent rights, and as if their lesser-might makes them lesser international citizens. That is a long-standing, wrong-headed approach to international leadership which has led to consistently inconsistent results for regional stability.
Some argue independence is might and resource based, that some nations will always be dependent on larger neighbors, and that merit is second to inheritance. However, do we say that a bantam-weight boxer has not won the bantam weight title because he has not beat the heavyweight champion of the world? And do we argue that five-hundred citizens who pay less tax are less valuable than five wealthy who pay the same as the five-hundred? No, for the five-hundred do jobs that five cannot or will not do, but will pay others to do, and pay them less than they probably should for the ardor of the work.
Also, the mere existence of more nation-states with independent democratic mooring means there are more freedom choices for culture groups who may suffer under another bloc. This sort of lateral federalism, whether formal or informal, works to give people places to go where they can feel at home, accepted, and be productive. This sort of lateral federalism helps organize groups to minimize ethnic tension, one of the principle concerns following the fall of the Berlin Wall last century. As we see now, with discussions of Ukrainians, Tatars, Chechens, and Russians, ethnicity, race, and cultural differences still impose some of the most negative and least productive political behavior on the world.
Democratic federalism organizes life so that ethnic difference can be a source of seasoning and variety in the regions of a continent that celebrates its variety and diversity rather than penalizing and fearing it. Ultimately, where true principle or true reliance on a divine source exists, political people need not dominate one another. By cooperating, whose faith is truest will either remain unknown by appearances but livable by daily functionality, or, it will become so evident that everyone will admit it. Either way, democracy accommodates the freedom that individuals and collections of cultural sameness need to grow and improve as people.
So why is it we are seeing the same old politics play out in the Ukraine?
Politically Well 