Self-portrayals that are effective in the media and free of charge denigrate pragmatic politics.
Moral arrogance does not help people in dictatorships. Only pragmatic realpolitik can create the conditions for change. A mounted police officer patrols outside of Doha in Qatar.
No question: Qatar is a homophobic, misogynistic dictatorship that finances and spreads radical Islam throughout Europe with the “Muslim Brotherhood”. No question: there is corruption, racism, sexism among us. There are war-ready dictators and enemies of the West. There are environmental and climate problems. Energy crisis, economic crisis, migration crisis. But can these problems be solved or even adequately understood by a cheap excess of morality? Through rituals of outrage?
Ethical catalogs of demands and creeds are part of our everyday life, they not only shape politics, but also education and literature, Hollywood and parts of the corporate world. It is true that in polarized times it is important to stand up for the values of western civilization. Symbolic actions in a prominent place have their power. The conviction that the West offers better foundations for the well-being of people and their freedom should be represented and defended with self-confidence.
The problem begins where symbolic gestures are superimposed on politics, which inevitably operates in the field of tension between the most diverse interests. This work on reality in various areas, from economics to national security to geopolitics, cannot be replaced by moralism, including public demonization of governments that do not follow Western standards.
Daily backbreaking work
Mind you: It’s not about relativizing one’s own basic values, talking up dictatorships and warmongers just to be able to do business with them. It’s about the political wisdom that change can only be achieved on the basis of reality. It’s about the will to fight for compromises and solutions, even under difficult conditions. Backbreaking daily political work is required, which of course is rarely rewarded and even more rarely awarded in the limelight.
This sober understanding of politics includes the experience that rainbow colors on the armbands of soccer millionaires do not improve the situation of homosexuals and women in Islamic countries. It is also clear that Western-style ‹virtue signalling› does not convert such a government and that passionate invocation of the global community of values, gender-equitable and climate-neutral, does not produce them either. Just as little as world peace is donated by the heartfelt wish of newly crowned Oscar winners.
Switzerland could be a model for political realism. Due to its modest size alone, the country has to exercise prudence and sobriety in order to find an understanding with its neighbors and great powers alike. Of course, the zeitgeist does not stop at Switzerland either. For example, neutrality is being questioned today, with reference to a higher level of morality that stands above the constitution.
The principle of neutrality includes the Swiss tradition of peace service and non-interference in foreign conflicts. As a state doctrine, however, neutrality is not a morality but a strategy in the service of the country and its people. If Switzerland builds up relationships with economic cooperation and other forms of alliance that stand the test in the tug-of-war of the respective national interests and bring benefits, this also creates opportunities to bring about changes in other countries, even in totalitarian regions.
The State of Israel would be an example of realpolitik under extreme conditions. Threatened by terror, war and annihilation for decades, Israel has developed into one of the most innovative countries in the world, a global player in terms of technology. Now, on the high horse of morality, one could accuse Israel of doing business with rogue states, such as Azerbaijan, where Christians are being persecuted and killed.
No guarantee of success
One could also criticize Israel’s relationship with Russia. In the Syrian theater of war, Israel’s defense army is cooperating with Moscow when it comes to repelling Iranian militias who are looking for a final battle with the Jewish state. This is exactly what Israel is preventing with almost weekly airstrikes in consultation with Putin’s military. Israel does not want to endanger this cooperation and therefore refrains from supporting Ukraine own missile defense system to provide in the war against Russia. Security for one’s own state comes before the big moral pose.
Responsibility and painful compromises for the well-being of one’s own population instead of marketing one’s own virtue: that is a principle for every government that is more interested in the right result than in the right attitude. Even if this principle does not rule out a possible failure. A tragic example of this is Russia’s brutal war of aggression against Ukraine. This was preceded by decades of western realpolitik, attempts at economic networking and the harmonization of conflicting interests in order to minimize the potential for conflict.
Nevertheless, the war was not prevented. Pragmatism and prudence do not guarantee security against warlike dictators. Nevertheless, the advantages of realpolitik outweigh well-intentioned but utopian mind games. If governments and interest groups practice realistic politics, this can improve the lives of millions, while the moral cudgel serves more for their own profiling than for foreign policy effectiveness.
One should not let the public indignation about the “Dictator World Cup” in Qatar take away the joy of sport. It should have its place because it does good things for many. Pope Francis, a self-confessed football fan, said at the start of the World Cup: “I would like to send my greetings to the players, fans and spectators at the World Cup in Qatar. May this event be an opportunity to meet and promote fraternity and peace between peoples.”
Giuseppe Grace is a writer, publicist and communications consultant.