Hesitation in the choice of strategy

Because of the  war between Russia and Ukraine  the neighboring countries  has faced a choice. On the one hand, you must express support for Ukraine, which has undergone gross interference, which is protected by the civilized world. On the other hand, you should not go into open confrontation with Russia. On the one hand, your behavior should not differ significantly from the behavior of the collective West, should be in sync with it, and on the other hand, you should avoid the wrath of Russia. Difficult choice, right?

Success in life depends on how correct our choice is. Success or failure is determined by people's choices. The political nature and fate of states are similar to the fate of people. The further evolution or decline of states is determined by economic and political vectors.

Of course, it is impossible to equate the idea of ​​the character of a person with the character of the state. Hikmet Hajizadeh, one of the greatest democrats of modern Azerbaijani politics, quoted the words of a sociologist: “A person can say: “I am dying, but I do not give up.” But as applied to the state, such an approach is unacceptable.” In this sense, the state's ability to make decisions that are adequate to national interests is determined by its nature and wisdom. Because the state as an institution must, from a strategic point of view, direct society in the right direction. Right directions are connected with rational-pragmatic interests and adequate choice. So, in what direction should the state move?

Since childhood, we have been affected by a dilemma - in which direction should we move “to where the dog barks, or to where the light is visible?” no doubt, in order to unconsciously prepare for decision-making. This is also done in order to temper in us the will to make a choice. And making a choice is not only a matter of determining your destiny, but also a manifestation that characterizes the strength of your will. In this sense, by our choice, we express not only our success, but also our essence. By this, we bring clarity to the question of our place in the world. Who are my friends, so am I. As I am, so are my friends.

Can we maintain our neutrality to the end, isolating ourselves from the rest of the world and remaining outside the rules of the global game? How long can we keep the balance, adhering to the concept of "balanced politics"? These questions should give us serious thought.

Trying to please everyone, we will not please anyone. By remaining neutral, we may achieve some small things. But we cannot develop. Being neutral, we may not catch the "wind" of the global conjuncture in the sails. We can maneuver in the corner of the boxing ring to avoid accurate punches. Having avoided blows from the right, we can maneuver to the right ring for a breather. But what will we gain by running to the right, then to the left? After all, not a single victory in life is achieved by running?!

The world powers will say that it is time for us as a state to finally make our choice. And I don't think there is an alternative to the direction that most of the prosperous countries have converged on.

In the world's political ocean, there is a minority that swims against the current, and a majority that swims with the current. In the face of this two-way flow, we must make a choice not to look like a black sheep. The famous aphorism says - "Not going where most of the world is going means not going anywhere."

So, in what direction should we, as a state, direct the vector of development of our economy? Should we take part in the construction project of the USSR 2.0 or take a course towards the collective West?

I think our answer should be this: we should strive for Euro-Atlantic integration and work closely with the Collective West!

Union "Turan" can be considered a newly formed association that needs long-term construction. We have just started building this road. We must put aside dilettantism in order to expect its real results, its "fruits" in the near future - this is amateurism from which you should get rid of. It is impossible to sow and reap at the same time. Because it is not clear when this idea will become a structured development platform. In any case, we must be committed to this idea and play an active role in the process of its implementation. But, this is the platform of the future, an idea designed for tomorrow.

Our path of development is close cooperation with the collective West (USA, EU, Western countries), which has become prosperous and democratic. We must follow the path of joint cooperation in the field of innovation, economic development models, ways to achieve prosperity, the traditions of developing democratic institutions, mechanisms for ensuring human rights and freedoms, and so on. Our statesmanship and national interests require us to make such strategic choices.