It is important to know the difference between an 'ally' and an 'imperial partner'. The latter has the propensity to abuse the principles found in true ally relationships (protect, deliver, sacrifice, commit, and work for the other best interest).
Ally definition (verb), to unite formally, as by treaty, league, marriage, or the like (usually followed by with or ...Meaning "to form an alliance, join, associate". As a noun, ally is normally that person or entity that you've agreed to work with. In this case, Russia is the ally of Syria, etc. Can it be depended on to not resort of imperial tendencies where the end product is imperial scheming?
One should look for signs before it becomes a done deal of treachery. For instance, what is your imperial partner relation to other imperials who are fighting against your ally?
Red flags should be raised when Russia is meeting with the arch nemesis of Syria (Israel) more than it seems its meeting with Syria. While words like 'de-confliction zones' and 'protecting against accidental damage' sounds practical, in real battlefield terminology, but there really no place for the soft diplomacy. You are either fighting to protect your ally, or is compromising your ally to the desires of its enemy.
In the case of Israel-Russia or even Turkey and Russia, the lines of being an ally has been blurred more than once. For instance, both Turkey and Israel have occupied, occupies and invades your ally's territory with impunity. What can Russia possible explain in allowing this constant infringement as the ally of Syria.
The difference in ally and imperial partner lies in the word imperial. Imperials do not necessarily see partners or allies as equal. I other words, once they've achieve their objective (sooner than later), chances are that any illusions about partnership or ally are dissipated.
This is the nature of the beast (imperial) that people don't care, or won't talk about but the bottom-line is that a genuine imperial don't care about partnerships as much as they cares about enriches their imperial largess by any means necessary. This writer believes that today's imperialists are ripe for considering revolting against the norm.
In the real geopolitical landscape, most weaker entities prefer an ally versus an imperial partner. While it is possible to have both at the same time, not locking the imperial entity in to a binding understanding can mean the difference in life and death battles, and the final status of ones country. Once again, the imperial tendency is to bargain away any and all 'spoils' that it feels can be used to enhance its standing among other imperials.
Also, there is rarely a public debate where the difference between the two meanings are debated. If an entity is helping another entity in a war, then most likely it is assumed that they are allies, period.
The Face of Imperialism Matters
Yet it would be wise for the ally who is depending on an imperial partner to recognize the signs of of decay before it's too late to respond; or before it becomes at-risk for losing everything achieved.
For instance, If a Donald Trump is advocating the total destruction of Iran, and their allies are just accepting, voicing objections, but is not doing enough to stop the leader of an imperial nation in its tracks, their actions rings hollow (The US is one imperial that is not a candidate for any change - at this time). The only alternative is to stop it.
Once again, being an optimist for change, I propose that the bad habits of imperialism can be defused or changed - but this can only happen when an imperial has consciously made the decision to revolt against the status quo. Russia has an opportunity to do this if and when they are able to replace their rhetoric with concrete actions that will truly make the world multi-polar - oppose to one that is brutalized and controlled by one nation (US) who uses proxies (including terrorists) to implement their imperial intent.
Not until then, and only then, will weaker countries be able to stop using so much energy to try and effectively navigate sociopath imperialist. They can't make them change, and must get what they can from them while the getting is good.
Pin these additional thoughts to your reasoning processes
In a war, the imperial partner seems to have blurred the lines between permanent ally and temporary ally. For instance, when you can't determine whose side the imperial partner is on, that should raise a red flag. For instance: When your imperial partner is having strategic meetings with a long term nemesis, or that nemesis aggression seems to be ignored (or even accommodated), there can be a real problem
As mentioned earlier, imperials see themselves as being in charge. Some even find it degrading to be ask to become an ally of a lesser entity. Hence, it's best that this attitude is identified as soon as possible. His is a very complex status in imperial behavior. While most imperial see themselves as arch rivals of other imperials, they also have an unspoken agreement where they would deal with non-imperials as puns or spoils in the large picture. The imperial structure demands that imperials hate other imperials but they most also respect them as co-imperials.
Imperials only answers questions that they feel need answering. They are masters of deceit and obfuscation of facts. They can be considered the essence of double talk and hypocrisy. Indeed, that imperial partner does some good things and deeds with his/her ally, but pushing the envelope may cause much arm. Leaning he limits can save the day, and give he ally wiggle some wiggle room
Imperials never fall in love. In other words Imperials are the epitome of selflessness, greed, and cold-heartedness. This does not mean that they can't charm the shirt off of your back, or to implement charm initiatives that makes them look like saviors of the universe, but knowing the game can save one, or a whole nation from harm. Just remember the phrase “desolation of abomination”, within this context of this article, it means nothing is sacred. Whatever it takes for the imperial to exude strength and secure power (yes, many lives are destroyed) they feed on it.
It really is special to have an imperial make-up, as the whole world evolves around you. Go to any mental hospital and discover that nothing makes one in mental vice more happy than for others to cater to his/her needs – no matter how bizarre.
It would behoove those who are part of the mechanism of society functions to become aware that not all sociopaths are locked into an institution. This writer suggests that the majority of sociopaths are now running the the world.
It would be foolish to think that they will just go away, because they won't.
Learning how to co-exist with the sociopath may be the only practical path for survival. As this article has attempted to make clear is that most of our friends and allies in today's world change with the wind. They may be on you side one day, and on someone else side another day. Either way, the best way not to become a victim is to stay on the the alert. It may be appropriate to create or to add a department in your government that plans for the most unexpected occurrence from an ally – seriously.
When the President of Libya deliberately did things to accommodate allies (destroying nuclear development; agreeing to openness, etc.) little did he appear to know that this foundation of trust would become his undoing – ultimately leading to his nation being invaded and destroyed, and himself being raped and murdered. While it is necessary to have trusting relationships, those trusting relationships would be balanced by common sense and logic. If the leadership of your country is not able to provide a basic commonsense apparatus of defense, then don't expect to gain any additional freedoms in the global community. Rather, expect that those that you have are at-risk.
Building a defense to try to short circuit the innate destructive nature of imperial partnerships may help to save you and the people who are depending on your leadership for a season, but when an imperial decides to do the right thing by starting to understand that they are not the only 'kids on the block' only an imperial revolution that promotes changing some of the hegemonic and selfish concerns of a few will save the day.