This article was inspired by Barack Obama's speech in Berlin.
(Photo by The New York Times)
President Dmitry Medvedev's plan to redesign Europe's security system with Russia as its integral part, followed by the Russian foreign ministry's tough statements aimed at America and intended for McCain and Obama's consumption, show that the new Kremlin administration is serious about becoming a global player on the international geopolitical arena.
Interestingly, practically at the same time Pentagon came out with its new military doctrine which mentions Russia as a potential security threat. Here is a direct quote from the June 2008 National Defense Strategy report: “Russia’s retreat from openness and democracy could have significant security implications for the United States, our European allies, and our partners in other regions…. Furthermore, Moscow has signaled an increasing reliance on nuclear weapons as a foundation of its security. All of these actions suggest a Russia exploring renewed influence, and seeking a greater international role.”
The Republic of Georgia, including the disputed regions of Abkhazia and South Ossetia
So, here we are, almost like in the good old days of the U.S. – U.S.S.R. confrontation. Now, who is to blame? It did not have to happen this way. When the Soviet Union collapsed America had two options. One choice was to make every effort to integrate a Russia liberated from communism with the West by offering large-scale financial assistance and by building a new global security structure from Vancouver to Vladivostok, as pledged by President George Bush Sr. The other was to try to weaken and isolate Russia by surrounding it with new NATO members, expanding U.S. influence in the former Soviet space, encouraging the construction of new oil and gas pipelines that would bypass Russia, and eventually placing it on the potential enemy list. All this had to be done, of course, with fanfares blaring of spreading democracy – while obvious deficiencies of the democratic processes in other former Soviet countries could be conveniently overlooked as long as these toed the Washington line.
It looks like the people who were and still are pushing this agenda are somewhat deaf and blind to the world's new realities. Military dominance, the status of the world's largest economy, and perhaps a messiah complex – all these factors make them reluctant to accept the fact that the idea of promoting American values as universally binding is no longer feasible. People are not stupid, and they see democracy promotion for what it is – a convenient smokescreen for gaining geopolitical advantages.
In any event, one should admit that all of us who were rooting for the first option have obviously lost to our opponents. Whether this victory might benefit America in the long run remains to be seen. From our – perhaps naïve – point of view it is better to have a country with huge stockpiles of nuclear weapons that can annihilate America a hundred times over on your side, and Russia in the early Nineties was ready to join the West. However, it was turned down rudely by those who felt that Russia would never recover from an economic collapse and would have no choice but to go on swallowing every bitter pill like Serbia bombing, “color” revolutions, NATO eastward expansion, a missile defense system in Eastern Europe, oil pipes rerouting, and other unpleasant facts.
However, a miracle happened and Russia was able to rise from the ashes. This was quite unexpected and huge bureaucratic machines in Washington and Brussels kept pushing Russia around until the Bear roared back. The first strong signal came on February 10, 2007 in Munich when Putin delivered a very tough message to the U.S. The West went ballistic, and that day marked the symbolic beginning of a new international world order in which Russia no longer can be easily dismissed as a non-significant factor.
Now Medvedev has begun sending even tougher messages. Though lacking Putin’s hard-hitting expressions they do not sound any more appealing to the West. It looks like the anticipated “red line” or the “line in the sand” has now been drawn. If I read the situation correctly, Russia will not allow a military takeover of South Ossetia and Abkhazia by Georgia even if the U.S. or NATO offer Tbilisi their military and/or political support. I hate to sound alarmist, but the way I interpret these messages is this: if Washington continues increasing pressure on Moscow by pushing Georgia and Ukraine into NATO, there is a good chance for an eventual military confrontation by gross miscalculation .
Does America need all this while being bogged down in Iraq and Afghanistan, when one of our strongest allies, Pakistan became a safe harbor for Al-Qaida and Taliban and when Pakistan’s secret services are helping the terrorists to kill American soldiers? Unfortunately, neither McCain nor Obama seem to have any ideas on how to avert this looming crisis. America needs a new leader with a greater and clearer vision of the world – but it looks like presently there is no one around who fits the bill.
Edward Lozansky is President of the American University in Moscow.
