The Perfect Versus the Good

We live in a time of increased divisiveness.

The challenge for leaders is, of course, to identify which is the perfect goal that we can achieve, and which is the good one for which we must settle. 

Russian President Vladimir Putin continues his war against Ukraine, lying every day about the origins of the conflict and seemingly bent in obliterating Ukraine and its culture.  

Consequently, western leaders are increasingly supporting a total Ukrainian victory against Russia and the consolidation of Ukraine as a full member of the European Union and NATO. In response, Mr. Putin has responded by threatening nuclear war should Russia be thwarted in its own objectives. 

While a necessary part of a negotiation stance, rhetoric such as this can oftentimes be the enemy of good negotiations, forcing sides into corners that can be difficult to get out from.

Recently, US President Biden has often painted both Russia and China as implacable enemies which is perhaps true in view of their alleged digital interference in elections and territorial ambitions: Russian in Eastern Europe and China in Taiwan.

In this divisive environment, the forces of dialogue and consensus seem marginalized and do not appear to be winning the battle for the world’s hearts and minds.

As we see, the perfect – absolute victory in a zero-sum game – can be the enemy of the good – the search for compromise with no absolute victory or defeat. How do we choose? 

As far as Russia is concerned, Mr. Putin is motivated by his imperialistic goals and appears ready to do anything to win. By threatening the nuclear option, he makes the “perfect” impossible to achieve since he will not retreat from Ukrainian territory that Russia holds, nor will he settle for a Ukraine that joins the EU or NATO.  The perfect may be therapeutic to our perceptions of injustice, but those perceptions will do us little good if we all fall victim to a nuclear holocaust. 

With respect to China, the equation looks similar. 

As negative rhetoric ratchets up at all levels, language becomes the destructive weapon that can lead to violence. The hotter the rhetoric, the greater the danger.

China must be stopped from invading Taiwan. It must also cease interfering in elections in the democratic West. To achieve both requires statesmanship at the highest level. Increasing the heat of the rhetoric only forces the opponent into a corner. 

President Xi also appears ready to challenge U.S. power in the Middle East. 

Last week, China brokered a deal that seems to have put an end to Saudi Iranian rivalry, opening the door for greater Chinese influence in the region as well as a possible end to the cruel civil war in Yemen – a proxy war between Saudi Arabia and Iran that has killed hundreds of thousands and that has lasted for years.

There is no perfect solution to East-West rivalry, so the choice becomes searching for the good solution – but is there one?

The Chinese brokered deal between the Saudis and the Iranians, and its massive global economic clout underscores the fact that the West must accept the 21st century paradigm that we now live in a truly multipolar world – one in which absolutist perfect solutions or zero-sum games can no longer exist. 

Indeed, China controls a significant part of the transportation and manufacturing infrastructure of many countries through its Belt and Road initiative. China is the world’s second largest economy, has a large military, and an impressive industrial base. 

Some may say that strong US leadership under former President Reagan led to the collapse of the Soviet Union. But the Soviet Union was sinking fast due to its economic and financial incompetence, and the rot that had entered the system. 1980 was a far different world from 2023, and we must keep this in mind in any analysis of global geopolitics. 

With dictators in power in Russia and China, each with his own expansionist objectives, the West must understand that, in the eyes of the opponents, the West is also expansionist. In their view, the West seeks to contain or terminate authoritarian rule and their perceived need by all powers to have a sphere of influence that enhances their sense of security. 

The West is facing a well-entrenched dictatorship in China, and a perhaps more volatile one in Russia should the war with Ukraine prove a stalemate and threaten Putin’s position. But neither government is likely to stand down from its imperial ambitions.  

A good solution for the West starts with unity and leveraging pressure points that will cause Mr. Putin and Mr. Xi to think twice as to what really is in their best interests. This is best done through diplomacy and direct communication – something that is sorely lacking right now. 

In fact, for the US, a divide and conquer strategy against Russia and China reminiscent of former President Nixon’s strategy in the 1970’s could work once again and convince China that its economic interests would render both an invasion of Taiwan and a strong alliance with Russia counterproductive. 

Megaphone diplomacy may be therapeutic in the short term. But it reduces or eliminates the diplomatic space required to negotiate acceptable compromises.

It is time to talk.

[email protected]

Keep reading: A Decade of Pope Francis

Edición: Laura Espejo