The great French political writer, Alexis de Tocqueville, stated long ago that democracies were “decidedly inferior to other governments” in the conduct of foreign policy. Joseph Schumpeter noted, “An autocrat is … unhampered by all those considerations that distract the attention of a democratic leader.” Every despot is free to follow in the footsteps of Genghis Khan. In fact, totalitarian systems are founded on an assumed program of conquest. This is true whether the program is publicly acknowledged or not. The extension of empire is imbedded in the psychology of totalitarianism. In opposition to this, the democracies have always tended toward appeasement, accommodation and retreat. This was true at Munich in 1938, at Potsdam in 1945 and it is true whenever George W. Bush meets with Vladimir Putin today.
It is useful to recall what Stalin told his Yugoslavian comrades in 1945: “The war will be over soon,” he said. “We shall recover in fifteen or twenty years, and then we’ll have another go at it.” This is how the totalitarian mind works. Dictators often believe in a future world war. Castro, Chavez, the funny little hairdo in North Korea and the Chinese Communists all believe in a future destructive war. Western leaders do not share this belief. Their policies are based on the belief that world war can be averted.
In Robert Conquest’s “Reflections on a Ravaged Century,” he explained that the “basic problem” of Western governments dealing with Russian totalitarianism was “an often inadequate conception of the Soviet psychology.” What we lack, as Westerners, is imagination. Western leaders may be very intelligent, noted Conquest, but they are “unable to conceive of minds and men markedly different from themselves.” The appeasement strategies of the West are not evidence of “stupidity,” Conquest explained. They are evidence of the fact that men lack the scope needed to “envisage alien minds.”
It takes imagination to see into a dictator’s heart. Without judging Hitler or Stalin, you have to entertain the kind of brutal thoughts they entertained. You have to enter into the killer’s mind as you dismiss the objections of bourgeois morality. “One death is a tragedy,” Stalin once said, “but one million deaths is a statistic.” The totalitarian regime is a militarist autocracy, unconcerned with the rights of the individual, hostile to free market capitalism and determined to overthrow the United States as the world’s leading power. If four billion people have to die in this process, then four billion people will die. As alien as this way of thinking is to normal people, it is second nature to a man like Vladimir Putin. If China now trades peacefully with the United States, it is merely a necessary step in preparing for a future world war. If Russia now talks of cooperation with Europe and America, it is merely biding its time while gathering the technology and resources necessary to build a more effective military machine.
The struggle against totalitarianism did not end in 1991. But who will acknowledge this truth? On Jan. 15 the Wall Street Journal ran an article written by George Shultz, William Perry, Henry Kissinger and Sam Nunn. Illustrious names all, including two secretaries of state, one defense secretary and a senator. The article called for a “nuclear-free world.” They quoted former Soviet dictator Mikhail Gorbachev, who seconds their call for “urgent action.” According to these illustrious names, the world is at “a nuclear tipping point” because of the “very real possibility” that nuclear weapons will “fall into dangerous hands.”
Only men of limited imagination could put their names on such an article – illustrious as their names might be. Nuclear weapons have already fallen into dangerous hands. Stalin and Mao, the leading mass murderers of history, acquired nuclear weapons long ago. Their successors have been building nuclear weapons for decades. The idea is to one day use these weapons on the United States. Yet who sounds a note of alarm? It is easy to think only of bin Laden as the world’s nuclear threat. Does anyone seriously believe that bin Laden could acquire nuclear weapons without the connivance of Russia or China? As it happens, a large country like Iran cannot even acquire such weaponry without help from Moscow.
And yet, Shultz, Perry, Kissinger and Nunn are worried that nuclear weapons “could” fall into dangerous hands. Illustrious names, indeed, without memory and without imagination. They do not remember Stalin’s deeds, or take to heart the actions of Vladimir Putin. Russia is the West’s most dangerous enemy. Al Qaeda doesn’t even rate a distant third. How can elder statesman and veteran policy-makers ignore reality while embracing so much fantasy? Undoubtedly the Russian and Chinese Generals heartily approve the call for a nuclear-free world. After all, such a world signifies a shift in the nuclear balance in favor of the totalitarian powers; for as the democracies divest themselves of nuclear weapons, the totalitarian regimes will retain hidden stockpiles with which to force the West’s future surrender.
History teaches that totalitarian regimes cheat when it comes to arms control. They always have and they always will. Anyone who does not know this, politically speaking, is a child. A nuclear-free planet merely signifies a nuclear-free West. It is worth remembering, as well, that a nuclear-free world has long been a favored theme of “useful idiots” and “fellow travelers.” In the 1960s, Russian strategists actually informed their allies that a future push to eliminate nuclear weapons was planned. Of course, these same strategists spoke of hidden weapons and alternative WMDs with which to destroy the “naïve Americans.”
Today Russia and America have 95 percent of the world’s nuclear weapons. This tells us something about the changeless nature of the Great Game. The two leading powers that conquered Europe in 1945 still monopolize the world’s intercontinental firepower. The nuclear standoff that characterized the Cold War is still in effect. The overall strategic situation has not changed. America’s victory in the Cold War was a sham victory. Moscow is to be congratulated on a stunning achievement.
