Outdated Western mentality

If there has ever been a week that demonstrates how difficult the transition to a multi-polar world order can be, then this week was it. The G8 met as the G7 in the era of the G20. US President Barack Obama is barely willing to have an informal talk to Russian President Vladimir Putin. The US leader did not even seem willing to stand near his Russian counterpart. If China were in the G8, Obama wouldn't talk to Xi Jinping either - certainly not during the week that marks the 25th anniversary of the bloody oppression of the protest movement at the Gate of Heavenly Peace, or Tiananmen Square.

Instead, Obama's Asian travels omitted China, while bringing him to the European countries that border Russia to make promises of an increased US military presence. Chief Iron Fist? The G8 states leave Putin out in the cold (and then there were seven) and think that falling back into old structures can be called a modern policy. The spiteful G7 met in Brussels for two instead of the Russian city of Sochi. And they invited representatives of the EU to the table. By the end of the summit they issued a list of demands aimed at Russia. Does the G7 plus the EU equal NATO 2.0? A pious wish.

No China? No go.

But despite all assurances to the contrary, this group - however it is set up - is not united. No matter how it is composed, it is been unable to solve the Ukraine crisis. The point of no return was in September 2008 when the world enlarged from the G8 to the G20, thus including China.

If there cannot be a solution of the crisis without the involvement of the United States, then China's input is going to be absolutely necessary as well. Seeing as the Europeans have got stuck, China could even step in as a mediator. After all, the Chinese aren't exactly close friends with the Russians either. But in contrast to the United States, Beijing has not butt into the crisis. Without flexing their muscles like Obama has, they have already profited from the soap opera of US-European values to the tune of a $400 billion in a long-term gas agreement as well as a few other deals. That is likely to continue for as long as Obama refuses to stand next to Putin.

The West is harming its own interests with its parochialism while obstinately trying to hold together that which does not always fit. Changing global alliances increasingly appear to be the more pragmatic choice. The emerging and wide-ranging China is, however, more skilled in forming such alliances. Today's D-Day commemorations (06.06.2014) say everything about the West's narrow 20th century mentality.

The World War was a world war

This year marks the 70th anniversary of the landing of Britons and North Americans in Normandy. This year, of all countries, the honorary guest is Russia. But even this particular cast, consisting of four victorious powers and one loser, is far too incomplete to do justice to the commemoration of a world war that did indeed encompass the entire world. If Russia is invited to the D-Day ceremonies, then there is a case to be made for China to be invited as well. Russia, which had the greatest number of casualties in the World War Two, (27 million), turned out as the winner on the Eastern Front not least as a consequence of the US intervention in the West. Similarly, China, with the highest number of casualties (15 million), turned out as the winner in the Far East as a consequence of the US nuclear attack against Japan. So why not commemorate D-Day together and making use of the opportunity to hold backstage political talks?

Obviously, we in the West are not open enough for that - not even nearly 70 years after the end of the war. If we do not overcome this concept of Western superiority - if not arrogance - it will become increasingly difficult for us to solve international conflicts. It was not that long ago that the post-war era came to a close. And while the West is dreaming of NATO 2.0, China is making the deals.