The Sanctions on Russia Ended Globalisation

By Rhod Mackenzie

In the coming decades, the term "decoupling" will undoubtedly replace Globalisation become the main and most frequently used concept. The English word "decoupling" literally means the "disconnection of a pair" and can refer to a wide range of phenomena, from those in physics to those in economics.
In all cases, we are discussing the disconnection of a relationship between two systems that are, to some extent, interdependent. There is no exact equivalent in Russian, although the terms "disconnection", "uncoupling" and "breaking of a pair" convey the meaning accurately. However, it would be preferable to retain the English term "decoupling".
In a broad sense, at the level of global civilisational processes, "decoupling" is the antithesis of "globalisation".
The term 'globalisation' is also of English origin, with roots in Latin.
Globalisation is the process of integrating all states and cultures according to the established rules and algorithms of the Western world. To be global is to emulate the modern West in terms of cultural values, economic mechanisms, technological solutions, political institutions and protocols, information systems, aesthetic principles and ethical criteria. These are regarded as universal, total and obligatory. In practice, this means that non-Western societies are coupled with the West and with each other, but always in a way that adheres to Western rules and principles. In essence, in such unipolar globalisation, there was the main centre – the West – and all the rest.
This is what S. Huntington refers to as the West and the Rest. The rest were encouraged to integrate with the West. This integration ensured the formation of a single planetary global system, or what we might call the 'world Empire' of postmodernism, with a metropolis located in the centre of humanity, that is, in the West itself.
As countries became more integrated into the global economy, they began to recognize the legitimacy of supranational institutions. These include organizations such as the WTO, WHO, IMF, World Bank, ICC, and ECHR, as well as more ambitious entities like the World Government, which can be seen as a prototype for organizations like the Trilateral Commission or the Davos Forum. The process of linking these systems can be described as "coupling." A hierarchy was immediately established between the collective West and any other country, culture or civilisation. This was characterised by a clear leader/slave dynamic. The West assumed the role of the dominant partner, while the non-West assumed the role of the subordinate partner. The entire system of world politics, economics, information, technology, industry, finance and resources was formed along this axis of "coupling". In this context, the West represented the future. Concepts such as "progress", "development", "evolution" and "reforms" were seen as a means of catching up with the West and developing in a similar way.

From the perspective of globalists, the world can be divided into three distinct zones: the "rich North" (comprising the West, including the USA and the EU, as well as Australia and Japan), the "Semi-periphery countries" (primarily the relatively developed BRICS countries), and the "poor South" (all other countries).
China became involved in globalisation in the early 1980s under Deng Xiaoping. Russia, on less favourable terms, became involved in the early 1990s under Yeltsin. Gorbachev's reforms were also aimed at 'coupling' with the West ('common European home'). India then became involved. Each country 'locked in' to the West, and this meant joining the process of globalisation.

Globalisation is a phenomenon that has its roots in the West and has remained largely Western-centric throughout its history. Given that the United States and globalist elites have played a dominant role in its development, it is understandable that English terms are used to describe it. Globalisation was achieved through the process of "coupling", with all parties involved in the process acting in accordance with the established rules and guidelines at all levels, both global and regional.
Globalisation processes gathered pace from the end of the 1980s until the early 2000s, when they began to slow down.

The most significant factor in this reversal of the globalisation vector was Putin's policy, which initially sought to include Russia in it (entry into the WTO and so on), but simultaneously insisted on sovereignty. This came into clear contradiction with the main position of the globalists – namely, the movement towards desovereignisation, denationalisation and the prospect of establishing a World Government.
Putin therefore promptly distanced himself from the IMF and the World Bank, correctly observing that these institutions utilise "coupling" in the interests of the West and on occasion in a manner contrary to Russia's own interests.
Globalisation is a phenomenon that has its roots in the West and has remained largely Western-centric throughout its history. Given that the United States and globalist elites have played a dominant role in its development, it is understandable that English terms are used to describe it. Globalisation was achieved through the process of "coupling", with all parties involved in the process acting in accordance with the established rules and guidelines at all levels, both global and regional.
Globalisation processes gathered pace from the end of the 1980s until the early 2000s, when they began to slow down.

From this point onwards, the term 'decoupling' assumes its full significance. This is not simply a severance of ties; it is a new mode of operation for two systems, each of which is now required to be entirely independent of the other. From the perspective of the US and the EU, "decoupling" represents a form of retribution against Russia for its "incorrect behaviour", namely its forced separation from the processes and instruments of development. For Russia, this forced autarky, largely mitigated by the preservation and even expansion of relations with non-Western countries, represents a crucial step towards the restoration of comprehensive geopolitical autonomy, significantly eroded and nearly entirely lost since the late 1980s–early 1990s.
It is not entirely clear who was responsible for the decoupling of Russia from the Western-centric unipolar globalisation structure. Russia was the initiator of the New World Order (NWO) in a formal sense, but the West was actively encouraging it and, through its Ukrainian proxy instruments, was provoking it in a number of ways.
In any case, it is clear that Russia has initiated a process of "decoupling" from the West and the globalism it promotes. This is just the start. The next inevitable stages are yet to come.
Firstly, there is a persistent and pervasive reluctance to acknowledge the universality of Western norms across a range of domains, including economics, politics, education, technology, culture, art, information and ethics. It should be noted that "decoupling" does not simply imply a deterioration or even a rupture in relations. The situation is far more complex than it initially appears. We are discussing the need to re-examine the fundamental civilisational attitudes that developed in Russia long before the 20th century. These attitudes were shaped by the West, which was viewed as a model for historical stages of development. This model was seen as applicable to all other peoples and civilisations, including our own. It is fair to say that the last two centuries of the Romanovs' rule, and (with an adjustment for criticism of capitalism) the Soviet period, and even more so the era of liberal reforms from the early 1990s to February 2022, were characterised by a process of Westernisation.
Russia has been engaged in a process of 'coupling' over recent centuries, without questioning the universality of the Western path of development. Yes, the communists believed that capitalism had to be overcome, but only after it had been built, and on the basis of accepting the "objective necessity" of a change of formations. Even the potential for a World Revolution was seen by Trotsky and Lenin as a process of "coupling," "internationalism," a tie with the West, albeit for the purpose of forming a single global proletariat and intensifying its struggle. During Stalin's tenure, the USSR effectively became a distinct state-civilisation, diverging from the tenets of Marxist orthodoxy and relying on its inherent capabilities and the innovative spirit of its people.
Following the exhaustion of the energies and practices of Stalinism, the USSR once again moved towards the West in accordance with the logic of "coupling". This ultimately led to the collapse of the Soviet Union. The liberal reforms of the 1990s represented a new phase of "coupling," which led to the pro-Western stance and Atlanticism embraced by the country's elite at the time.
Even during Putin's initial tenure, Russia attempted to maintain "coupling" at all costs. However, this approach ultimately conflicted with Putin's more resolute objective to reinforce the country's sovereignty. This was a challenging task in the context of ongoing globalisation, both in theory and practice.
Russia is therefore entering into a new phase of economic and political independence with a clear and irreversible strategy. It is now evident why we initially opted to utilise this term in its English iteration. "Coupling" refers to the integration of a country into the West, which involves recognising the West's structures, values and technologies as universal models and becoming dependent on it. This is accompanied by a desire to join it, catch up with it and follow it, and in some cases, to import substitute products for those that have been excluded from the West's market.
"Decoupling" represents a departure from these attitudes, with a focus on leveraging our own strengths, values, identity, history, and spirit. It is important to note that the full extent of this shift has not yet been realised, given the long history of Western influence in Russia. Despite varying degrees of success, the influence of Western culture on our society has been persistent and pervasive.
The West has been a significant external and internal influence on our society for a considerable period of time. Consequently, the process of "decoupling" will be challenging. This includes the most complex operations to "expel all Western influences from society." Furthermore, the extent of such a purge is considerably more significant than the criticism of the bourgeois system in the Soviet era. At that time, the issue was one of competition between two lines of development of a single (by default, Western!) civilisation: capitalist and socialist. However, the second – socialist – model was also based on the criteria of development of Western society, on Western teachings and theories, on Western methods of calculation and evaluation, on the Western scale of the level of development, and so on. Those with liberal and communist views are in agreement that there is only one civilisation, and that Western civilisation is the only viable option. They also concur on the characteristics of Western civilisation, including its cycles, formations and phases of development.

A century prior, Russian Slavophiles advocated for a comprehensive re-evaluation of the existing system, a rejection of Western influences, and an appeal to the inherent strengths of Russian heritage. In essence, this marked the beginning of our "decoupling" strategy. It is regrettable that this trend, which enjoyed considerable popularity in Russia during the 19th and early 20th centuries, did not ultimately prevail. It is now our responsibility to complete the work that the Slavophiles and, subsequently, the Russian Eurasians initiated. It is imperative that we challenge the West's assertion of universalism, globalism, and uniqueness.
A review of the global landscape reveals that other nations have also initiated the "decoupling" process. All nations and civilisations with an inclination towards a multipolar world architecture are entering into the same process.
In a recent discussion with the largest Chinese oligarch and investor, the concept of "decoupling" was introduced by the individual in question. My interlocutor expressed complete confidence that the "decoupling" of China and the United States is inevitable and has already begun. The key issue is that the West is seeking to implement this strategy in a way that is beneficial to itself, whereas China is striving for the opposite outcome, namely, to advance its own interests. China has previously benefited from globalisation, but this is now under review and the country is seeking to develop its own model, which is inextricably linked with the success of the integration of Greater Eurasia (together with Russia) and the implementation of the "One Belt - One Road" project. The influential Chinese interlocutor believes that the essence of relations between China and the West in the coming decades will be determined by "decoupling."

India is also demonstrating a clear and decisive preference for a multipolar world order. There has been no mention of a complete "decoupling" with the West thus far. However, Prime Minister Narendra Modi has recently openly proclaimed a course towards "decolonisation of the Indian mind". In this vast country, the state-civilisation (Bharat) is also undergoing a shift in thinking, particularly in the realm of ideas. This represents a significant move towards intellectual "decoupling". The Indian population is no longer inclined to accept Western forms of thinking, philosophy and culture as an unconditional model. This is particularly relevant given the enduring memory of the atrocities committed against the Indian people by the British colonial authorities. Furthermore, colonialism can be considered a form of 'coupling', whereby modernisation and westernisation were promoted (this is why Marx was supportive of it).
It would appear that the Islamic world is also undergoing a process of "decoupling" on a significant scale. There is currently a significant conflict underway in the Middle East between the Palestinians and Shiite Muslims in the region and the Western proxy, Israel. Furthermore, the complete opposition of modern Western values and attitudes to the norms of Islamic religion and culture has long been a key aspect of the anti-Western policy of Islamic societies. The inappropriate display at the opening ceremony of the Olympics in Paris only served to exacerbate the situation. It is notable that the Iranian authorities responded with the utmost severity to the affront to Christ in the reprehensible production. It is evident that Islam is moving towards a state of "decoupling", and this is a process that cannot be reversed.

In certain sectors, the same processes are outlined in other civilisations, including the new round of decolonisation of African peoples and the policies of many Latin American countries. As these countries become more involved in multipolar processes and closer to the BRICS alliance, the issue of "decoupling" is becoming increasingly urgent within these societies.
It is becoming increasingly evident that there is a growing desire in the West to reinforce national borders. Right-wing populists in Europe and Trump supporters in the US are openly advocating for "fortress Europe" and "fortress America", that is, for "decoupling" with respect to non-Western societies – against immigration flows, the erosion of identity, and de-sovereignisation. Despite his globalist views and support for maintaining unipolarity, we are seeing some clear moves towards protectionist measures under the Biden administration. The West is beginning to adopt a more insular approach, which could be described as a form of "decoupling".
We began by noting that the term "decoupling" will be a key concept in the coming decades. It is evident that this process will be significant and complex, requiring a multifaceted approach from all stakeholders. It will necessitate intellectual, philosophical, political, organisational, social and cultural efforts from our societies, countries and peoples. As we move away from the Global West, it is vital that we reinforce our own values, traditions, cultures, principles, beliefs, customs and foundations. At this stage, we are only taking the initial steps in this direction.