Introduction to "Middle East: Two Approaches to Conflict Resolution"
Translating a Soviet Georgian book dissecting USSR vs. US strategies in the Middle East—chapter by chapter.
Dear Readers,
As promised, I’ll be translating a short but incisive book on the Middle East by a Soviet Georgian political scientist, which examines two contrasting approaches to conflict resolution in the region. What compelled me to share this work is its sharp critique of U.S. imperialism and Israel—an analysis I believe is still deeply relevant today.
I’ll be posting each chapter as I complete the translation on my Substack. If you’d like to support this effort, consider becoming a paid subscriber! Your backing helps me dedicate more time to bringing overlooked but vital perspectives to light.
This is the first installment!
(Near) Middle East: Two Approaches to Conflict Resolution
Author: Abon Tsistiashvili
Edited by S. Tsintsadze
Published by “Ganatleba”
Tbilisi, 1986
Introduction
The XXVII Congress of the CPSU confirmed the great international authority of the Leninist Party. The political report of the CPSU Central Committee to the Congress, delivered by the General Secretary of the CPSU Central Committee M. S. Gorbachev left a deep mark on the attitudes of international society. The ideas and decisions of the Forum of Soviet Communists mark important milestones in the modern turning point of international development. They determine the content of world politics at the end of the current century and the beginning of the next.
The Congress once again demonstrated the inseparability of socialism and peace, peace and reconstruction. The main goal of the Soviet Union's policy is to establish security and justice for the peoples of this world.
The main goals and directions of the foreign policy strategy of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union are substantiated in the political report of the Central Committee of the CPSU to the Congress. The spirit of realism and innovation runs like a red line in the first and fourth chapters, a responsible approach to the problems of war and peace, and the search for qualitatively new solutions.
The documents of the Congress set out a specific program of work for the preservation and establishment of peace. It is based on a complex analysis of all factors of modern world development.
The CPSU political report devoted space to the problem of eliminating hotbeds of dangers of war. "We are in favor of activating a collective search to find ways to defuse conflict situations in the Near and Middle East, ... in all the turbulent points of the planet. This is urgently required by the interests of universal security!"1
They say time is a healer and it heals everything. But it has so far proven powerless over the Middle East. It is a constant, if you will, chronic, hotbed of danger of armed conflict.
Vasily Polenov, a prominent Russian artist who visited the Middle East at the end of the last century, was delighted with what he saw, calling it “a charming, sunny, intoxicating world.” Today, these words sound like a long-forgotten fairy tale.
Currently, the picture and impressions, unfortunately, are completely different. Here is what we read, in particular, in the preface to the book “The Middle East: The Hundred Years’ War” published in Paris in 1985 — “The events taking place here, as always, are on the front pages of the newspapers. Clashes in Lebanon, the colonization of the West Bank of the Jordan River and the Gaza Strip, the routine expulsion of Palestinians, the crisis in Israel. Every day there are battles, bombings, attacks, provocations, repressions. This is a barrel full of gunpowder, which is constantly threatening to explode.” Indeed, over the past four decades, Israel's five wars against Arab countries, the continued interference of the United States and its NATO allies in the internal affairs of Arab countries, the protracted Iran-Iraq war, the aggravation of relations between individual Arab countries, civil wars and bloody civil strife in some Arab countries, the killing of peaceful residents and destruction of material assets - all make this region one of the hottest spots on our planet.
"Israel will never return to the 1967 borders. Israel will never agree to the creation of a Palestinian state. Israel will never agree to the division of Jerusalem" — this is how the Israeli leadership summarizes the position, which completely excludes a just and comprehensive settlement in the Middle East.
Who is responsible for the current situation? Who is creating the fertile ground for the constant manifestation of Israeli expansionism? These questions have a rhetorical meaning. The answer lies in correct understanding of the situation in the Middle East, and as importantly, search for real ways out of the dangerous situation in which this region has been in for many years.
There is no doubt that the main reason for the dangerous nature of its permanent crisis is the policy of American imperialism. Trying, no matter what the cost, to establish its own control over this strategically important and oil-rich region, Washington acts as the instigator and organizer of the struggle against the Arab national liberation movement and, first of all, against progressive regimes. "Imperialism is trying not to fall off the saddle of history and uses all means for this."2 From the very beginning, Washington has used and uses the services of Israel in every possible way in the struggle against the national liberation movement of the Arab countries, although it does not refuse direct military intervention, while the ruling circles of Israel pursue a policy of aggression and expansion towards the Arab states and peoples.
The Soviet Union, united in its commitment to Leninist principles of foreign policy, stands with the Arab and all liberated states in their struggle to strengthen their independence. This line was reaffirmed by the 27th Congress of the CPSU.
The work is devoted to the analysis of the policies of two approaches to the Middle East conflict - the Soviet Union and the United States - from the beginning of the conflict to the present. The author does not claim to have covered the issues raised exhaustively, and we will gratefully accept all fair and noteworthy comments.
M.S. Gorbachev, USSR Central Committee Political Address at the Communist Party of the Soviet Union Congress of XXVII, February 25, 1985. 1986, p. 120
M.S. Gorbachev, CPSU Central Committee Political Address at the Communist Party of the Soviet Union Congress of XXVII, p.32
Thank you for something I can only have because you shared.