Russian-Western Relations: Courting the Bear
By Eric Walberg
ccu.org, November 19, 2008
A flurry of meetings last week — in Nice, Brussels and Sharm
El-Sheikh — show the changing face of Russian-Western relations, says
Eric Walberg
Russia ’s struggle to become a respected player in
world affairs moved forward tentatively this past week with a
Russian-European Union summit in Nice. Participants said Friday that the
meeting underlined improved relations. The European trade commissioner,
Catherine Ashton, said talk had been “robust, but very open. Presidents
Sarkozy, Barroso and Medvedev were very direct with each other in the
spirit of having a dialogue.” European Commission President José Manuel
Barroso, using rather “robust” diplomatic language, ridiculed the
Russian threat to station missiles in Kaliningrad, made just hours after
Obama had won the US presidential election last week: “If we start with
the idea that there are missiles on one side or the other, we come back
to the Cold War rhetoric which is, I would even say, stupid.”
President Nicholas Sarkozy of France, who was host of the Nice meeting
between Russia and the 27 member-nations as EU president, helped
Medvedev back off. He made it clear that the US should reconsider its
missile defense plans in Poland and the Czech Republic . “Between now
and then,” referring to talks on a new security architecture for Europe
— a Russian proposal — to be held by the Organisation for Security and
Cooperation in Europe , which includes the US and Russia , next June,
“please no more talk of anti-missile protection systems,” Sarkozy said.
The deployment of a missile defense system “would bring nothing to
security in Europe .” The Russian leader welcomed Sarkozy’s conciliatory
approach, saying that all countries “should refrain from unilateral
steps” before discussions on European security take place. “If we share
one home, we should get together and make agreements with one another,”
meaning the Russians will not follow through with their threat if the US
agrees to a “Zero Option” with regards missiles in Europe .
Although he holds the rotating presidency of the EU, Sarkozy was
actually moving beyond his official mandate, since the bloc has little
power over defense matters. The Czechs, who take over the EU presidency
in January, and Poles were furious with Sarkozy. “We hope that the
project will continue,” Polish Foreign Minister Radek Sikorski said
after meeting his Czech counterpart Karel Schwarzenberg. Polish Prime
Minister Donald Tusk huffed Thursday that Russia was not part of the
plan. “The anti-missile shield is the subject of contracts between
Poland and the United States , and other countries are not — and will
not — be participants in these negotiations.” Alexandr Vondra, the Czech
deputy prime minister, said he was “surprised” by Sarkozy’s comments,
which, he said, contradicted French statements at the NATO meeting in
Bucharest, and exceeded Sarkozy’s purview as EU president. “There was
nothing in the EU mandate to talk about missile defense.”
This
is a fine example of Sarkozy at his hyperactive best, one where he used
his antennae well, sensing the shifting weather patterns and attempting
to divert a needless and destructive storm, which, he would no doubt add
in his own defence, would hit the Poles and Czechs even harder than the
rest of Europe . This whole episode shows the weakness of the EU:
pipsqueaks are vaulted into the diplomatic big leagues and can pursue
petty grudges which leave the EU helpless to pursue a sensible agenda.
French president Jacques Chirac was undermined in 2003 by these
parvenues who slavishly hung on every lie coming out of the US
concerning Iraqi WMDs, preventing a strong European resistance to the
criminal invasion of Iraq . Good for the Sark .
The French
leader’s nod to the Russian proposal for a new European security
structure also elicited jibes. The Euro fans of America and foes of
Russia see the Russian president’s proposals as a direct attempt to
undermine NATO. And so what? This senseless Cold War relict merely
raises hackles and sticks its imperial nose where it doesn’t belong. The
EU and Russia are already working together on peacekeeping — through the
UN — as seen with the current EUFOR mission in Chad , which includes 320
Russians. Who needs NATO to police the world? Good for Medvedev.
Overriding squawks from Lithuania , Europeans also agreed Monday to
resume talks with the Russians on a longterm EU-Russia pact on the
economy, energy and security matters. Negotiations were suspended after
the Russian war with Georgia in August, but since then the financial
crisis has underlined the need for rapprochement. “We don’t need a Cold
War. We need cool heads,” said Barroso. Even Russophobe German
Chancellor Angela Merkel said, “I think it is better to talk with each
other than about each other.”
While Russian and European
leaders were extending olive branches to each other in Nice, their
foreign ministers were chattering at a NATO meeting in Brussels about
their latest pet project — putting pressure on Turkey to deploy
permanent NATO navy forces in the Black Sea and the Bosphorus, one of
the most strategic waterways of the world and located in Turkish
territorial waters. Turkey is rightly concerned that such move would
violate the 1936 Montreux Convention, which limits the total weight of
the warships that a country which does not border the Black Sea can
deploy to 45,000 tons, and eventually harm its sovereign rights over the
straits, not to mention its booming economic ties with Russia. Turkey
has long opposed the deployment of NATO navy forces on the Black Sea,
saying the region is perfectly safe and the Black Sea countries’ joint
patrol missions are more than sufficient.
But these Euro and
NATO intrigues are far less important that the behind-the-scenes
activities now going on in US conference rooms, where president-elect
Barack Obama’s political plans for accommodating Russia are now in high
gear. Relations with Russia are the cornerstone to the empire’s success
during Obama’s presidency. The world, certainly Europe and NATO, is now
holding its breath, waiting to see what Obama will do about the missiles
and the Georgians, with the ball firmly in his court.
Unfortunately, he can’t hit it back for another two months. In the
meantime, the discredited Bush regime is doing its best to dig potholes
in the court and make Obama’s task doubly hard. A fine example took
place last weekend in Sharm El-Sheikh , Egypt , with yet another of the
pointless meetings that Bush has sent his beloved Condoleezza Rice on.
It took barely an hour for Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov to
dismiss the supposedly new set of proposals she brought concerning START
(Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty) and missile defense. “The current US
proposals are insufficient because the Bush administration is seeking to
make the decision [on the deployment of the missile shield]
irreversible,” a Russian source said. Lavrov insisted that any new
discussions on the European missile shield should involve Russia , the
US and the EU and must be based on respect for common interests rather
than on a unilateral decision made by Washington . But absolutely no one
is fooled by Bush anymore as his 76 per cent disapproval ratings show.
If anything, such tired attempts at covering the empire’s tracks merely
give Obama more food for thought.
The tone Obama sets in
relations with Russia will be vital to the success of his presidency.
Medvedev, like Obama, is still an open book. In his state of the union
address the same day as Obama’s stunning victory, Medvedev revealed
ambitious plans to strengthen Russian democracy, condemning state
interference in elections, mass media, civil society and the economy —
all of which gives birth to corruption in the bureaucracy. He proposed
that those parties falling below the 7 per cent threshold in
parliamentary elections, yet reaching more than 5 per cent, should be
represented with at least one or two deputies in the State Duma,
increasing diversity, that only elected deputies should become governors
of Russia’s regions or members of the Federation Council, and that local
governments and non-governmental organisations have greater say in the
legislative process. He called for less state control of the media:
“Freedom of speech should be secured by technological innovation.
Experience shows that it is practically useless to ‘try to persuade’
bureaucrats to leave mass media alone. One should not try to persuade,
but extend as broadly as possible the space for the Internet and digital
television.”
If Obama wants to make any progress in the empire’s
affairs abroad, be it in Afghanistan , Europe , Iraq , Iran , he will
have to wrestle the Cold Warrior Washington establishment into
submission and make peace with Russia . This will have the truly
wonderful side-effect of strengthening Medvedev’s hand in his own
struggle with statist authoritarians.
This is the way for
America to encourage democracy around the world — by refraining from
threatening other countries and interfering in their affairs. If
American is not perceived as a threat by Russia, constantly intriguing
and pushing its European allies into “stupid” Cold War stand-offs,
Russia will be able to continue its halting, democractic transformation.
***
Why the concern with Russia ?
Well, it has not a few trumps up its sleeve which Obama would be wise
to note:
* the perennial steel-fist-in-velvet-glove Russian gas
supplies to Europe, now strengthened by Gazprom’s Southstream pipeline
plans which look set to scuttle the anti-Russian Nabucco pipeline plan.
The latter will hardly be feasible given the economic meltdown emanating
from the US and infecting the entire world. The Russian hold on European
gas supplies looks very secure.
* its continued nuclear energy
cooperation with Iran. If the US expects to see any conciliatory move
from Iran it will have to take Russia into account.
* its control over the fastest and cheapest transit routes for NATO
military supplies to Afghanistan . They just happen to be the rail and
air links through Russia and former Soviet Central Asia. Already, Russia
has signalled it will not necessarily be so hospitable to NATO use of
these precious routes.
* the overriding US object in the near future:
stablising Iraq . The next few years in Iraq will be troubled, to say
the least, and Russian cooperation with the West will be vital.
* cooperation in dealing with the international financial crisis and
threatening world recession. The Russian economy has rapidly integrated
into the world economy during the past two decades, for better or worse,
bringing with it Russian mafia, liberal use of offshore banking and
other dubious western inventions. This means it is an important part of
any solution.
The Russian hold on gas supplies to Europe is
nothing to worry about. The Russians have always been reliable partners,
from WWII on, as long as the West plays ball and doesn’t push them too
hard. Measured, stable diplomacy is all they ask. Iran threatens no one,
despite hysterical Israeli rhetoric, and will no doubt go on Obama’s
backburner, despite whispers in his ear from the Zionists in his camp.
Since Afghanistan and dealing with the world depression are the
centrepins of Obama’s foreign policy, he would be very foolish to
provoke the Russians needlessly on high profile but meaningless issues
like the missiles and expanded NATO membership.
Eric Walberg can be reached at
www.geocities.com/walberg2002/
Fair Use
Notice
This site contains copyrighted material the
use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright
owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance
understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic,
democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this
constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for
in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C.
Section 107, the material on this site is
distributed without profit to those
who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information
for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml.
If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of
your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the
copyright owner.