National values are the collective beliefs of a nation, guiding the actions and behavior of its citizens.
Principles of governance are standards that oblige the state to secure the well-being of its people. Some states promote societal values designed to hinder governance in the interests of their people. This happens in dictatorships, semi-authoritarian regimes, and states where selective law enforcement or special interest legislation favors the oligarch class. We see characteristics of the latter in many advanced Western states and much of the developing third world.
In states with well-established strategic security infrastructures, the divergence in national values and governance have little effect on existential national threats. However, geopolitical buffer states, those with coveted lands, and others surrounded by belligerents must limit the bifurcation between national values and the mechanics of state security.
For example, in some ex-Soviet republics where power and influence are in the hands of oligarchs, either by design or by chance, the national spirit is downplayed or rendered of no personal economic value and replaced with success defined by the accumulation of wealth. With citizens exposed to propaganda centered around glorifying the rich and powerful, success becomes predicated on knowing people of influence in high places rather than through demonstrated competence. This self-serving, hyper-individualism degenerates state security institutions, including police, the military, and diplomacy, into defending the interests of the “successful” class. Such a class may even welcome limited interstate military engagements or economic restrictions as another business opportunity.
Expressions of national spirit need not be flag-wavers but rather those who might otherwise question the institutional protection of the rich and powerful. Some may demand transparency in governance or challenge the selective enforcement of the law in favor of the rich and powerful. Such demands are not in the interest of an oligarchy and may not be in the interest of regular citizens striving to maximize their accumulated wealth, using techniques associated with the “successful” class. We should praise hard work, business savvy, competence, and their rewards.
Suppose a society values instant profit based on a series of simple transactions with little collective strategic thought. In that case, such values easily permeate governmental structures where everything is transactional, including those in military and security structures, especially given the associated lack of transparency. Wars have been lost for less.
A state lacking critical values outside of economic individualism has little incentive to plan for its medium and long-term interests. Such states may fail. An example is Lebanon’s dire situation, with state coffers emptied and financial structures destroyed. The state is unable to secure the well-being of its people, and the people lack anything less than violent revolt in reaction. Finances were drained, with the rich and powerful subordinating the state for personal benefit. Luckily, Lebanon does not have active belligerents on its borders as the state would immediately collapse in a military confrontation. The same cannot be said for Armenia, with seventy percent of its borders actively blockaded.
Although Lebanon and Armenia have different regional dynamics and social structures, greed and oligarchy have no national boundaries. There is more commonality between oligarchs in Moscow, Tehran, Istanbul, Baku, Kyiv, Beirut, and Yerevan than their fellow citizens. “Fellow citizens” or “diasporan non-citizens” are dealt with as competitors in many cases. The United States has such characteristics when selective cabals determine national policies, with smaller states using this US model to justify their actions.
It should be odd that it took so long for the state of Israel to become the technology powerhouse it is today. Technology leaders were the United States, some European states, Japan, etc., but not Israel. This was not an accident but was the result of strategic planning. During the late 1940s through the 1970s, Israel’s highest priority was national security and the development of strategic deterrents. Israel was in a position where it could not make any geopolitical mistakes, including never having joined a military bloc. Its citizens and “diasporan non-citizens” were fully utilized to achieve these long-term ends, including highly trained ex-Soviet citizens, who were not considered “competition.”
When Israel’s state security reached a certain level, human and financial resources could thus be available to enhance its technology sectors. Without such a grand strategy, Israel would probably not exist today. None of this planning precluded its citizens from an increased quality of life.
When traveling through Rome for the first time, one is struck by the lack of Italian supercars on its streets, in contrast with their marketing prowess. Instead, one finds motor scooters and micro electric cars chained to posts like horses when parked.
The dire economic shadows of post-WWII Italy are so deep that vestiges of survival values remain. Yet today, Italy is the third-largest economy in the EU. Italy’s GDP is not the result of the once-powerful Italian Mafia. Chances are Calabria’s Ndrangheta Mafia, which went on trial earlier this year, had no interest in the medium to the long-term interest in Italy’s state security. Similarly, there is no reason to expect anything different from states that are either ruled by or protect similar oligarchs, oligarch wannabees, or mafias.
To update an old English expression, You can’t have your Bentley and drive it too.
Yerevan, Armenia
Author: David Davidian (Lecturer at the American University of Armenia. He has spent over a decade in technical intelligence analysis at major high technology firms. He resides in Yerevan, Armenia).
