Kalistan

[Doc]

Amid International Spats, Kalistani FM calls for peace
"Kalistan is what Kalistan is," said FM Greene
Kaliburg, Grand Duchy of Ananto
September 5, 5682


Their Imperial Majesties' Foreign Minister, Mr. Henry Greene, at home in Kaliburg

"Well, as you can see here, I read quite a bit," said Their Imperial Majesties' Foreign Minister, Mr. Henry Greene, at his home in downtown Kaliburg. "I read a lot of workers history, about the early struggles of organized labor, the efforts of the Socialist Party of Kalistan, and the work this nation and the Socialist Party did to ensure that in all disputes between organized labor and management, the workers maintained the upper hand. It happened so often that it sort of became the default in Kalistan: the Socialist Party was in charge for the majority of 3000 years of Kalistan's history, often as the only Party.

"That leaves a legacy of hard leftism in our economy," he continued, "where even in a nation which outlaws other parties, worker unions remain completely independent of Government Control, and nearly always have a major role to play in Kalistan's economic policies, both at home and abroad. It is amazing what people will trade political liberty to protect: in Kalistan's working Class' case, they traded the right to form a political party to theoretically 'represent them' at the national level, but over which they had next to no actual power, for direct representation and the most important seat at every economic policy table in the Empire. It was a trade they were willing to make: a sham liberal representative façade for real political power, where the demands of workers are translated directly into national policy."

The Foreign Minister invited The Republic to speak with him on Kalistan's recent difficulties with nations around the world and their subsequent withdrawal from a more internationalist perspective.

"We expected the backlash, especially from more liberal democracies like Istalia," said the Foreign Minister. "I will reference the authors of the articles from Istalia. Members of my own government spoke their minds on the matter, which, if you think about it, is exactly the same thing that the authors of those articles in the Istalian press did. Lady Donahue expressed her opinion. And it was only when a Kalistani expresses her opinion does this get portrayed as something that is inappropriate. I don't need to remind anyone that the first shot in that, as Egelion correctly describes, 'petty' spat was lobbed by an Istalian, who described Kalistani policy as myopic, and by implication, immature when compared to the far more mature Istalia, a nation which has had multiple revolutions in the past century. And they doubled down in their more recent article on the very deep, and rather personal, criticism."

The Foreign Minister shrugged as he continues.

"Whether Kalistan is open to the world or not really makes no difference one way or another. Kalistan is, and always has been, obsessed with our own national interest--Kalistan is, what Kalistan is, and can be no different. To Kalistan, our national interest is far more important to us, than the whole rest of the world combined. This should not be a surprise to anyone. It has never been any other way. To the degree that a relationship serves this Empire, it is one this Empire will pursue. The Istalian author even lambasted their own government for not focusing on its own national interests. So Kalistan's Chancellor herself is 'myopic', as the Istalian author named as a person, for preferring Kalistan's national interests over all others-- unlike 'mature' nations like Egelion or Istalia--while Istalia is merely missing an opportunity for not looking to its own national interests, but otherwise, everything they are doing is fine. This is the accurate summary narrative of this supposedly independent journal. But I personally fail to see how its a bad thing for Kalistan to do something that the author then turns around and advocates from their own government. If this is scholarly analysis, it lacks what is known as internal coherence."

He then followed up with the comment,

"Kalistan is a Nationalist nation. Whether it engages with the world or not, this doesn't ever touch the long standing Kalistani policy position of nationalism. I think you could more correctly call Kalistan ultranationalist. I offer a long standing example: Kalistan would trade just about anything for concessions in Athosia. There is probably no cost too high for this monarchy in obtaining that coast. This is a nationalist aspiration which could possibly always remain just an aspiration, but it is one that remains the most important goal in what some would call a revanchist foreign policy establishment.

"Furthermore, Kalistan is not a liberal nation. We explicitly and completely reject liberalism as our guiding ideology. Whether that means economically, or politically, or socially. So it is incredibly inappropriate, and represents a major logical fallacy, to judge Kalistan for not acting like liberals, when we are not liberals. We maintain a strong commitment to social and civil liberties, because they are instrumental in maintaining social order within Kalistan. But we do not believe in what Istalia calls 'press freedom', just because its a principle. Kalistan wouldn't care if Istalia crushed its free press. We maintain a free press in Kalistan because people rebel if we crush it here. All that said: it is inappropriate for Kalistan to be judged by Istalia's liberal standards, and their doing so is the height of neoliberal dogmatic thinking. Because Istalian standards, or the standards of any liberal nation for that matter, are not universal standards. If we were to judge Istalia by our standards, the government of that nation would come out very unfavorably, and Istalia would complain about the effort from us."

The Foreign Minister explicitly critiqued liberal internationalism in light of Kalistan's return to an explicitly nationalist point of view.

"Liberals always paint the rejection of an 'everyone else first' foreign policy preferred by liberal internationalists as 'isolationism'--of course they would, because demanding that Kalistan put Istalian interests first in the name of some sort of sanctimonious commitment to internationalism, benefits Istalia. Its no surprise that the Istalian opinion piece followed suit. It's intellectually lazy to do so and first of all misses the nuances of a foreign policy that prioritizes national interests over sacrificing national interests so we can have friends and trade things with people. Istalia could just be angry that a nation they had taken for granted as being in their pocket is no longer reliably in their pocket. I don't know--If Kalistan somehow lost a reliable base that it had grown accustomed to exploiting freely in another part of the world, that would make us angry too. It's difficult to figure out, even for a foreign policy expert such as myself.

"But secondly, its not realistic to think a country will sacrifice its national interests for the sake of empty alliances. An alliance with Istalia doesn't serve Kalistan. It simply does not. We do not gain anything from associating with them, and certainly not anything that we cannot gain from a deeper and more meaningful relationship with our neighbors, Valruzia, Gaduridos, Lodamun, and Egelion included. The Istalians talk about concentrism: that in and of itself is just another restatement of Kalistani regionalism. If this is truly the policy of the Istalian government, as their opinion writers claim, the neoliberals in that magazine critique the Istalians for just that policy too, and yet somehow, Istalia is the mature one. But how is it different? Does Kalistan not worry about Ananto, then Kalistan, then the AE, then the Anantonese Basin, then Northern Seleya? How does this equate isolationism in Kalistan when it doesn't equate isolationism in Istalia? Unless its wrong to call it isolationism in Istalia AND Kalistan equally."

The Foreign Minister said that the Empire will not apologize for its foreign policy choices.

"Kalistan is criticized when it takes a forward leaning posture toward world affairs. We are criticized if we pull back from that forward leaning posture. At the end of the day, it really doesn't matter what Kalistan does. If other nations don't like it, they have one of two choices: they can find a way to live in a world with Kalistan, as it is, in it too, or they can choose to pretend that they live in a world without Kalistan in it. The second option is not difficult to do--Many nations do it currently, acting as if nothing they do can or should draw a response from Kalistan and then taking offense when it does.

"The first option is also surprisingly easy. Kalistan doesn't need respect or adulation. We insist on equality due to all sovereign nations, which we are due by virtue of our existence as a sovereign nation. Kalistan is not a colony. We are not something for any nation to get the benefit of, to get over on, or to take for granted. The only time our nation was ever approached for trade was when there was a distinct advantage that our participation would provide the sending nation. Otherwise, there is no interest in trade with Kalistan. Kalistan is approached when the goal is to increase market penetration in our region of the world. The assumption is that Kalistan is equally compensated by just getting the opportunity to 'trade' generically, because in liberal theory, trade is always just 'good.' But Kalistan wants something tangible from it equal to what other nations gain from the increase of their market penetration into our region. Or its not an equal deal. To a liberal, who is obsessed with normative foreign policy, and who think 'trade' and 'alliances' are good just because they are trade and alliances, without any consideration of the terms of that trade or that alliance, this demand for equality is what is anathema, as are all forms of interest-based foreign policy.

"When other nations treat Kalistan as an equal, exactly as they insist others treat them, they will find Kalistan far more amenable to their requests. If they continue to see the Anantonese Ocean as something for them to exploit, without putting something tangible back into it, Kalistan will oppose that. We don't require the 'respect' from some liberal state in southern Majatra. We don't require anything at all from Istalia. We can be perfectly happy with or without them in our backyard. So if their opinion writers feel the need to lecture Kalistan on respect, we ask them to save it--Sovereign nations do not need to 'earn' anything from another sovereign nation, an equal in all ways on the international scene, and to suggest otherwise betrays what at least the political writers in Istalia think of Kalistan. There's nothing we can, or will do about that. And we're not going to apologize for that."

The Foreign Minister also noted increased tensions with Valruzia, though he took a far more conciliatory tone here.

"Our Chancellor said what she said. It is legitimately how she feels about the ideology of Communism. The Emperor and Empress understand that the Valruzians are irritated by the criticism, and that Valruzia is growing tired of Kalistan's attempts to apologize. The Chancellor is the chief policy maker for Their Imperial Majesties, in her role as Head of Their Imperial Majesties' Government. I can't honestly be expected to throw my boss under the bus. I will say this though: Whatever Lady Donahue feels about communism, she has reliably maintained Their Imperial Majesties' attitude of comity toward Valruzia, and has done all they have required her to do with faith and fidelity. Her initial expression of irritation with communism itself came as a result of Valruzia's Legislator who expressed attitudes about Yeudis that they should all be expelled. These comments, I will add were roundly condemned by both many other nations in the world AND, by the way, by Valruzia's own legislature, who censured that legislator by kicking him completely out of the Legislature."

The Foreign Minister then went personal.

"I'm not sure if its well known, but I myself am of the Yeudi faith and my heritage is Yeudi-- Our Family is from Valruzian Yeudi stock: My great great grandfather and grandmother escaped the dictatorship and their name was Zielony. I personally found that Valruzian legislator's attitude not only repulsive, but also dangerous to Yeudis in Valruzia, a community I, and three million of my fellow Kalistanis, have a special connection to. I happen to be fortunate enough to live in a nation where I don't have to worry about my Government even hinting at a pogrom. And its because people like my boss, the Lady Chancellor of the Empire, are committed to using her position to go to bat for people like me. She is not a Yeudi. But I assure you, her initial statements were said out of frustration at finding out that one of our closest friends in Seleya had national legislators who felt comfortable enough to express that sort of sentiment in public.

"But," the Foreign Minister clarified, "Anti-yeudi statements were not the source of her anti-communism: She is a conservative and she is an uncompromising monarchist, she cannot be expected to enjoy having to embrace communists because communists are, as a core of their ideology, radical and anti-monarchists. There aren't any monarchist communists. For a very good reason. She's not going to like communists, even if she is faithfully carrying out Their Imperial Majesties' fiats in regard to our neighbors, and so, when she mentioned that I was to be the point person on Valruzia going forward, it was Their Imperial Majesties' attempt to ensure that someone who isn't hostile to a significant portion of their government is the one representing Kalistan to that said Government. It is regrettable that Valruzia took it as a slight, but I look forward to moving past that and working with whoever Valruzia puts in front of me to continue our relationship and to work constructively."

In closing, FM Greene's offered an olive branch to Valruzia:

"Kalistan's interest in Valruzia, and our desire to continue to work with them comes by virtue of our proximity and shared interests, in spite of our differences, which, I recall, have always been there. Kalistan genuinely wants to continue good relations with Valruzia, to cooperate on regional security and economics, to find a way to coordinate policies where appropriate and work together on things of mutual interest to both of our nations. Kalistanis, especially the conservative ones, like Lady Donahue, will disagree with communism where it exists, not because its Valruzian, but because its an ideology she happens to find repulsive. Her word, not mine.

"But as the Valruzians noted, Kalistan is not in control of Valruzia. The Chancellor's opinion being what it is, continued association with Valruzia will not be constructive if she is asked to work with Valruzia, and so they asked me, a socialist, who also still supports our Emperor and Empress explicitly, and who is a Yeudi, to make an effort to reconcile, leaving the Chancellor's antipathy and the Valruzian's support for communism, to the side, so that we can have constructive conversations of mutual interest. I welcome the opportunity to speak with my Valruzian counterpart. Its a start.

The interview, which centered on Istalia and Valruzia, was meant to provide Kalistan's final statements on the various disagreements that Kalistan finds itself in. But the FM was also interested in noting, if only in passing, that it continues to maintain a friendly and cooperative attitude toward its war partner Egelion, it continues to have a favorable view of Lodamun, and it is currently working to improve relations with the Yeudi diaspora across Terra. "And believe it or not, we also still maintain very close relations with Hutori, and hope to reestablish contact with southern Seleyan nations like Mordusia and Rildanor, now that their war is over. And we even look forward to talking once more to Kundrati of all places." He reiterated that if some Majatran political analyst wants to label Kalistan as an Isolationist nation, "... that word does not mean what they think it means."

@TheRepublic