14 November 2007
For Personal Use Only

• Source: WPS Defense and Security

WPS Defense and Security-Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov met with the Federation Council to explain the current “moment of truth” in international relations and what he believed it might result in.

The Russian Foreign Ministry entertains no illusions whatsoever concerning any impending improvement in the international situation. Some cautious optimism is there all the same. President Vladimir Putin’s speech in Munich became a central event in development of the global and European policy. Everything that followed only confirmed correctness of the Russian analysis of the prevailing trends in the international situation and the forthcoming moment of truth. Although the Cold War has been history these last fifteen years, political establishments of foreign countries, those of Western states in the first place, have proved themselves unable to adapt to the new reality.

The matter is pressing indeed. Will man be able to complete transformation of the global and regional security frameworks in accordance with requirements of the new era? Will man be able to close the ranks in the face of new threats and challenges? And what if not? Slowing down of this transformation and failure to set up open frameworks of collective security is alarming. Moreover, it seems that revolutionary methods will fail to overcome the inertia of previous approaches and instincts including the political-psychological idee fixe concerning containment of the Russian Federation.

It is this inertia that foments what experts regard as an approaching “multiple crisis” in the relations between Russia on the one hand and the European Union and the United States on the other. A great deal of problems await solutions - Kosovo, Treaty on Conventional Arms in Europe, realization of the American plans to install elements of the national missile defense in East Europe, Iran with its nuclear program. This is what the moment of truth is about.

New Russia which is clearly on the rise is one of the principal factors that determine the shape of the current phase of the international relations. The West in the meantime is at the crossroads. Monolithic unity of the Cold War era is history. Neither the ideological motivation necessary for it is present, nor the Soviet military threat for that matter.

American foreign political crisis is a key nuance that makes things so much harder for all of the international community. First and foremost, the matter concerns a crisis of the very basis of America’s messianic foreign political philosophy. No way of saying how long it will take the United States to get accustomed to the role it plays in the international affairs nowadays - the role of a participant in the chorus of world powers, even if “the first among the equals” perhaps.

End of the Cold War enabled Western Europe - together within the framework of the European Union and singly (like Germany, France, Italy, Spain) - to launch independent and individual foreign policies. Unfortunately, these countries do not appear to be psychologically prepared for it yet. It is particularly true of the political elites that remain hostages of the old cliches and phobias. This is what the Americans make use of when they frighten their European allies with “authoritarian” Russia.

Future of the existing European security framework is a key issue. As things stand, it is still centered around the ideology of “triumph in the Cold War”. This ideology generates a backward drag, sparks friction and irritation. The general impression is that the European security framework stopped cold in its evolution. Moscow was quite correct when it suggested its transformation by way of making the OSCE a full-fledged regional organization.

All these problems, neglected for so long, cry for a solution. Fundamental depravity of the existing framework is at the same time its principal weakness. Most institutions (NATO, Treaty on Conventional Arms in Europe, OSCE) designed to a larger or lesser for the purpose extent of confronting Russia in the first place remain just that - instruments of Russia’s “containment” or “education”. That is why Russian participation in these structures or whatever is a cornerstone that holds everything together. Withdraw it, and all of the European architecture will collapse. Something new will have to be invented to replace it, something designed with Russian interests taken into account.

Hence the situation with the Treaty on Conventional Arms in Europe. Washington’s games (provocation, in fact) with the US national missile defense have only deteriorated the situation, the fact that our Western partners only begin to grasp. That is why the Americans go to all these lengths to prevent Moscow from imposing a moratorium on implementation of the Treaty on Conventional Arms in Europe. That is why US State Secretary Condoleezza Rice and Defense Secretary Robert Gates played it by the ear when they saw that the Kremlin wouldn’t be cajoled or bullied anymore.

It may only be added that driving its partners in a corner is the last thing Russia wants. Moscow is prepared to pool efforts with the international community and start looking for an acceptable compromise - but only as long as Russia’s national interests are safe and European and European-Atlantic policies show signs of impending improvement. Some progress in this direction has been made already but much more is needed for an actual breakthrough.

The US Administration clearly split over the matter; new American proposals in the matter of national missile defense should be treated with caution. The Americans have not even been able to formulate them and put them down yet.

The situation being what it is, Moscow went out of its way to encourage its partners into becoming more cooperative. Russia suggested collective reaction to potential missile threats to Europe. Cooperation of this kind will dramatically alter our relations with the United States and elevate them to an unprecedented level. It will pave way to establishment of an open collective security framework involving the interested European countries thus providing a new impetus to all of the European and global policy.

By and large, it is clear that Europe cannot solve the problems it is facing through deployment of the past approaches and without constructive cooperation with Russia. It even goes for NATO’s expansion into the post-Soviet territory. The problem posed by the nuclear program of Tehran may be solved too. Some European partners clearly perceive the wisdom of a moderate and flexible policy with regard to Tehran. In fact, everyone but decision-makers in Washington (hawks in Bush’s Administration) knows that this problem cannot be solved by sheer strength of arms.

It was so on the eve of the G8 summit in St. Petersburg last year, and history repeats itself now. Once again, Russia finds itself under maximum pressure which is expected to alter its internal development and play ball with the international community. Russia withstood the pressure then. Russia will withstand it again now. It actually seems that some foreign partners of ours are finally coming to terms with understanding that predictability of Russia’s internal development and continuity of its foreign policy will benefit everyone.

Filed by Kyle D'Souza under East-West Relations: Central and Eastern Europe