Bargaining Chips

 

"The strong do what they can, and the weak suffer what they must."

-        Thucydides' History of the Peloponnesian War

 

I’d like to preface my reflection by saying that the one phrase that really stuck with me in this week’s soliloquy is: “the states that have freedom will act as they will. And the less powerful are the ones who are subject to what the powerful dictate.”

 

I have often thought about countries such as Georgia and Ukraine in this context. I have often asked the question, as the post-Soviet countries try to carve their way out of the rubble from the collapse of the doomed union, can they ever truly achieve their independence? How do they perceive independence – what does it mean to them? As Georgia has been paving its path to joining NATO, and has been aspiring to become an EU member, it has consistently failed to achieve either. It’s been documented that some member countries, Germany and France in particular, have denied Georgia gaining membership with the sole purpose not to antagonize Russia.     

    

Going back to Dr. Jackson, he explains there exists a formal anarchy between states, but while they’re actually legally constituted as being relatively similar actors, there are differences of capacity between states. Therefore, countries like Georgia and Ukraine that no longer wish to be associated with Russia, have turned into bargaining chips for the power players of the international realm. Given that there’s always been a hierarchy in practice, even if states such as former Soviet countries that became legally autonomous from one another make their own decisions, it is certainly obvious that some states simply have more power or capacity than others. I would argue that as Dr. Jackson divides states in the international system up into three categories (great powers, middle powers, and peripheral states), I would add a category for “bargaining chip countries”. As powerful states fight proxy wars (in possible peripheral states), and try to gain control over smaller states by either political influence, and divide up the world in parts they have most control in, they use some countries as bargaining chips, to negotiate with more powerful states.

 

Looking more closely at the relationship between Germany and Russia, it has been an interesting one. Both state leaders have been in power for far too long, and Germany’s dependence on Russia’s fuel supply has been constant. This trading partnership has created an odd couple that begs questions on Germany’s loyalty, values, and place in alliances, in light of Russia’s behavior toward the West, particularly in recent years.  

“Bargaining chip countries” make even more sense with respect the game the hegemonic institutions set up and participate in: this is a global order created by the dominant, not purely coercive, but rather, it comes with benefits provided to those who participate.