Rebuilding the U.S.-Russia Relationship

Among the most important foreign policy prioritiesunipolar periods and seen aspirations to world
likely to face the next U.S. President will be the tasksupremacy. And what hasn't happened in world
of rebuilding the eroding U.S.-Russia relationship. Russiahistory?
is currently engaged in a policy of employing itsHowever, what is a unipolar world?
diplomatic leverage to "counterbalance" the United...It is [a] world in which there is one master, one
States. In the future, if the diminishing relationship issovereign. And at the end of the day this is
not repaired, Russia could well begin to put its hardpernicious not only for all those within this system,
power into play, as well. Such a development wouldbut also for the sovereign itself because it destroys
diminish the United States' ability to safeguard anditself from within...
advance its critical global interests at a time when itI consider that the unipolar model is not only
has suffered a major loss of credibility at enormousunacceptable but also impossible in today's world. And
cost in the wake of its decision to go to war in Iraq.this is not only because if there was individual
The challenge of bringing about an improvedleadership in today's-and precisely in today's-world,
relationship is still a manageable one. However, if thethen the military, political and economic resources
United States is to have a reasonable chance atwould not suffice. What is even more important is
success, it will need to understand Russia's concernsthat the model itself is flawed because at its basis
with regard to American unilateralism and makethere is and can be no moral foundations for modern
appropriate policy changes that limit its unilateralism tocivilization.
situations where unilateralist approaches are trulyAlong with this, what is happening in today's world...is
necessary.a tentative to introduce precisely this concept into
In the post-Cold War world, fears the consequencesinternational affairs, the concept of a unipolar world.
of state failure and instability on its expansiveAnd with which results?
frontier. Clifford Gaddy and Fiona Hill of TheUnilateral and frequently illegitimate actions have not
Brookings Institution explained, "Given its location in aresolved any problems. Moreover they have caused
volatile neighborhood encompassing Central Asia, thenew human tragedies and created new centers of
Middle East and Northeast Asia, and including severaltension. Judge for yourselves: wars as well as local
states on a potential collision course with the Unitedand regional conflicts have not diminished...
States-Iraq, Iran, China, and North Korea-Russia isToday we are witnessing an almost uncontained
extremely vulnerable to the unintendedhyper use of force-military force-in international
consequences of U.S. action. A unilateralist approachrelations, force that is plunging the world into an
on the part of the United States, Putin believes couldabyss of permanent conflicts. As a result we do not
prove disastrous for Russia."have sufficient strength to find a comprehensive
The still fairly recent and aggressive turn tosolution to any one of these conflicts Finding a
unilateralism by the United States was driven bypolitical settlement also becomes impossible.
perceptions of a new global reality that followed thePutin explicitly blamed the United States for such
end of the Cold War. When the Cold War concluded,developments. "One state and, of course, first and
the Soviet Union was in the last days of its life (soonforemost the United States, has overstepped its
afterward, it fractured into a number of economicallynational borders in every way," he charged, "This is
and politically weak successor states). At that time,visible in the economic, political, cultural and
the U.S. appeared to have gained primacy in worldeducational policies it imposes on other nations." A
affairs, especially in the eyes of an emergingfull-fledged rupture in U.S.-Russia relations is still
Neoconservative school of foreign policy thought thatavoidable. In fact, the relationship can still be repaired
was beginning to diverge from the pragmatic Realismfairly easily, as unilateralism, and not a clash of critical
that had predominated through the end of the Coldinterests between the two nations, is at the root of
War. In their view, a "multipolar" world had beenthe worsening relationship. A pragmatic,
replaced by a "Unipolar" one. "The center of worldinterest-driven U.S. foreign policy that restores
power is an unchallenged superpower, the Unitedprimacy to diplomacy, eliminates idealistic "Regime
States, attended by its Western allies," leadingChange," and returns emphasis to relations between
Neoconservative thinker Charles Krauthammer wrote.allies and great powers can overturn the unilateralism
He added, "There is today no lack of second-rankthat is currently harming the relationship. Specifically,
powers. Germany and Japan are economic dynamos.such a policy would entail among the following
Britain and France can deploy diplomatic and to somefeatures:
extent military assets. The Soviet Union possesses- A negotiated energy pact in which the United
several elements of power-military, diplomatic andStates and Russia would ensure cooperation with
political-but all are in rapid decline. There is but oneregard to Central Asia's energy resources and bring
first-rate power and no prospect in the immediatean end to the emerging energy rivalry now evolving.
future of any power to rival it." The Soviet Union,In the partnership, both nations would embrace the
according to Krauthammer, had become nothingprinciple of open access and collaborate to address
more than a "second-rank" power and one that wasissues that might arise. Neither would make unilateral
in "rapid decline" to boot.decisions that would undermine the core interests of
Russia was humiliated. At the same time, it wasthe other.
constrained by its major weakness. Emboldened by- Full support for Russia's fight against terrorism in its
the march of world events, Neoconservative thinkerssemi-autonomous Chechen region and elimination of
believed that the new "Unipolar" world made U.S.demands that Russia to negotiate with the Chechen
consideration of the major interests of the world'sterrorists. Such calls are unreasonable and have
other great powers relatively less important than in itangered Russia's government. In the aftermath of
was past. Under such an assumption, they advocatedthe Beslan massacre-Russia's 9/11-Putin blasted U.S.
an increasingly assertive unilateral approach to U.S.calls for negotiations angrily exclaiming, "Why don't
foreign policy toward creating a safer world.you meet Osama Bin Laden, invite him to Brussels or
In stark contrast, Russia saw unilateralism asto the White House and engage in talks..."
hazardous to international peace and security. Today,- Full NATO membership and responsibilities and
Russia continues to believe that single-powerauthority within the relationship that would be
hegemony and a unilateralist approach to foreigncommensurate with its role as a great power. Until
policy are dangerous and destabilizing. Consequently, itthat happens, no missiles or missile defense systems
views U.S. unilateralism as posing a threat to its criticalwould be placed in countries that constitute Russia's
interests and wellbeing."Near Abroad." The existing NATO guarantee of
Toward that end, Russian President Vladimir Putin hascollective security would be maintained. At the same
consistently spoken out on those issues. On May 8,time, Russia would commit to working with the U.S.
2001, he declared that "claims to world domination...stilland NATO to help mitigate missile threats or, if
are the cause of many wars" and that "these sortsnecessary, help contain the countries against which
of claims still linger on today and this is verythe anti-missile system is intended to afford
dangerous." A day later, he added, "Our entireprotection.
post-war [post-World War II] history teaches us that- A free trade agreement to more closely integrate
no country can build a safer world for itself alone,Russia into the global and western economies. Such a
and even more so, cannot build its security to themutually beneficial interdependence could mitigate
detriment of others."Russian "counterbalancing."
Following the 9/11 terrorist attacks, a wholly- Restoration of a military doctrine of pre-emption as
Neoconservative approach to foreign policyopposed to proactive war. Proactive war, particularly
blossomed in the U.S. Unilateralism became arguablyin the absence of a credible and imminent threat to
the major means by which the U.S. conducted itsnation's critical interests, undermines respect for the
relations with the international community. "Regimenorms of international law and increases instability in
Change" replaced "Containment" and "proactive war"the region in which such conflicts occur. Application of
replaced "pre-emption." In June 2002, the U.S.military force before diplomacy has been exhausted
withdrew from the ABM Treaty. In March 2003, itmakes it more difficult for nation's to achieve
invaded Iraq in the face of strong Russian oppositiondifferences in the diplomatic arena, as countries
and in the absence of a United Nations Securitywould more than likely focus on deterring an attack
Council resolution. Currently, it is pursuing plans tothat could occur before meaningful negotiations had a
place 10 missile interceptors in Poland and a radarchance to find agreement.
system in the Czech Republic to construct a limitedNone of these policies would compromise critical U.S.
missile defense shield against countries such as Iran.interests. None of these policies would harm to U.S.
Russian alarm grew.national security. Instead, they would create a
On February 10, 2007, President Putin made a seminalpost-unilateralist framework under which the
speech that detailed his objections to thegeopolitically important U.S.-Russia relationship could be
Neoconservatives' "Unipolar" vision and U.S.renewed and improved. Such a development would
uniltateralism. Excerpts from Putin's speech at thebe mutually-beneficial to both countries and could,
Munich Conference on Security Policy detail his viewsover time, be a force for increased stability in parts
and follow:of the world where stability is currently difficult to
The history of humanity certainly has gone throughachieve.