The clock is ticking down to the much awaited first visit of President Barack Obama to Moscow on July 6-8, and the once high expectations of “reset diplomacy” are undergoing a sharp re-negotiation among the policy circles of Washington think tanks. Will this be a breakthrough in relations, and the landing of a new strategic arms agreement? Or just the exchange of symbolic political credits, allowing each leader to walk away with at least the perceptions they were hoping to achieve?
While there has always been rather sharp division between two different camps on Russia policy inside the beltway, this battle of rhetoric has particularly heated up in recent weeks. First we had an op/ed from Andrei Piontkovsky, alleging that several leading minds on Russia in the United States were motivated by their personal financial connection to the Kremlin. Then there was the dramatic rallying call against the realist mindset published in the Washington Post from Lev Gudkov, Igor Klyamkin, Georgy Satarov and Lilia Shevtsova. Not more than 24 hours after the publication of the Washington Post piece, an answer from the other side came from Anatol Lieven, published in The National Interest, entitled “Russia’s Limousine Liberals,” which specifically attacked several of the aforementioned authors.
My editor caught up with Piontkovsky in Washington for an interview shortly after this publication to get a reaction on video. The sound quality has so far not come out as we had hoped, but stay tuned for at least some excerpts or at least a partial transcript.
I can’t tell you how any of this will turn out, or who, if anyone, will feel vindicated in their views with the results of the July meetings, but I do imagine that this disaggregation of DC policy community on Russia appears set to deepen before we see convergence.
Subscribe by Email
10 Comments
Yes, many in DC pine for the days when the drunken incompetent comprador buffoon Yeltsin submitted to the Wests’s every, every whim and desire.Alas, those days are gone, and these same folks just…. can’t…. stand… the idea of a Russian government that stands up for the interests of Russia.The thing they don’t understand is that the RF government, and Russians, learned from their experiences at our hands in the 1990s to expect lots of nice words from the USG, but no actual help dealing with Russia’s problems.They won’t get hosed this time, because their expectations of cooperation from the West are somewhere between trivial and non-existent. Various global-dominance-obsessed USians will bleat and whine, and Russia will continue on a path Russians with support from other Russians, rather than Western think-tanks and op-ed pages, decide upon.
This is actually sort of fascinating – a type of convergence between the russophobes and the apologists – they both want to make sure that relations don’t improve! Weird…
James, I agree with you. I think only moderates, or people who really care about Russia’s future, would like relations to improve. Russophobes only want the world to hate Russia, and any improvement in relations would make that more difficult — they’d become a minority. The Russian apologists want it to “hurt” — Russia was wronged (say, by being left out during the Yeltsin years) and it should be angry. Any improvement in relations would dilute this “rightful” anger.As in many cases, this political scale is really a circle, and the ends (the extreme positions) meet.Rkka, I think your post is quite typical of Russian apologists: you think America is bad, bad, bad, and that Russia simply “learned to distrust it” in the Yeltsin period — as if America (like Russia by the way) didn’t change every time it gets a new government, and as if Realpolitik considerations weren’t “nationless” (i.e. look at the circumstances…).Moderates, and people who really care about Russia (and the US, and, in fact, the whole world — it’s only one, you know) want relations between these two countries to improve.America could have helped Russia more in Yeltsin’s years. I think that, because of Cold War habits, America failed to take advantage of that time to really make friends with Russia. However… Are you sure Russia would have done any better, if it were in America’s position? Would Russia also have forgotten its Cold War habits and offered a helping hand to America if such had been the situation?I think Russia wouldn’t have (or at least it would have demanded full submission for that privilege), for the same reason that America didn’t — old habits die hard, and Russia and its people had hated Americans (see Soviet propaganda) for too long.Not because Russia (or the US for that matter) are “evil nations.” No; “evil nations” are a very rare thing indeed. Rather because of human nature, and because of the logistics and geopolitics of the time. Also because of the personalities of the main actors (leaders) involved.
@Asehpe – totally agree. There is a long laundry list of mistreatment of Russia by the United States, most notably a failure to reciprocate during the opening following the attacks of 9/11, when Russia opened up its airspace for operations in Afghanistan (though some would argue that the reward for that was to turn a blind eye to Chechnya). I also think there is little debate about the savageness of the 1990s, and how that period soured so many people on liberalism – this shouldn’t be surprising to anybody given the unprecedented dimensions of the transition from the Soviet Union. Oddly, even Anatol Lieven notes in his article that Russia still is a kleptocracy, just one in which the oligarchs hold duma seats as a formality.But there is a bad psychology going on in Russia with regard to the United States, and the current leadership has seized upon the always useful deployment of anti-Americanism to shore up support its authoritarian mandate. I think most Americans would be surprised to see the amount of hate propaganda churned out by the Kremlin outlets, while in the States most of the suburban soccer moms spending their days inside shopping malls knows almost nothing about what’s going on in Russia.Oddly, I think US-Russia relations could benefit from a good dose of healthy narcissism in Russia, starting with a gradual abandonment of the unending comparisons to the US, speculations on its evil plots in the world, and what sometimes seems like a national inferiority complex. What would happen if one day Russia just started talking and thinking about Russia, its future, its national project and meaning, and its vision of its role in the world?Hopefully something better than the ugly exchanges we’re seeing circa 2009.
“a type of convergence between the russophobes and the apologists – they both want to make sure that relations don’t improve!”Wrong James. I would like US-Russian relations to improve. I think the RF government would like US-Russian relations to improve. It’s just that, once the US foreign policy elite an dthe US Congress get done with our terms for a “reset”, they will amount to nothing less than another demand for unconditional Russian submission to the US.And the RF government have not the slightest reason to accept those terms.
Asehpe, Russians didn’t hate Americans during the Cold War. They remembered our WWII cooperation long after it was forgotten in the US. They remembered Lend-Lease far more than we remembered Operation Bagration, or even reverse Lend-lease. My parents travelled there in the 1970s-no hatred manifested to them that I remember them telling me about.Oh, and during the Cold War, the USSR always recognized US territorial integrity. The USA never recognized the USSR’s territorial integrity.
What can’t be denied about this so-called “debate” is that Piontkovsky and Shevtsova et al are RUSSIANS who deal with Russia face to face, while Lieven IS NOT.It’s pretty hard to find anyone who actually lives in Russia and works for democracy who will say the things a little maggot like Lieven will utter in his blissful isolation and ignorance.And, after all, who is to say that Lieven isn’t one of those on the Putin payroll described by Piontkovsky? He certainly has no record of standing up for human rights or democratic values in Russia.
JAMES:It’s ironic that your remarks are so one-sided!Where are the laundry lists, published by Russians, of all the things they’ve done to give offense to the Americans? Is this a one-way street? How dare Russians complain about American offenses without asking themselves what THEY have done wrong?! After all, America stands with many powerful allies while Russia stands utterly alone.Nonsense. Russians are undertaking ZERO introspection as to how they’ve alienated the United States, and you aren’t either. You routinely ignore this whole aspect of the equation.Frankly, if I were Russian, I think I’d be offended by your patronizing tone, which seems to imply Russians are children who can’t be held to the same standard as adult Americans.
RKKA:Your attempt to paint Russians as the helpless innocent victims of evil American aggression is hilarious. Not once at any point do you recognize ANY KIND OF MISTAKE WHATSOEVER made by Russians in antagonizing or alienating Americans. Your words read like a propaganda screed issued directly by the Kremlin, like the crazy rantings of a Ron Paul or Pat Buchanan.And your assertion that Russians didn’t hate Americans while a COLD WAR was raging is a new level of achievement in this regard, as is your suggestion that Russians chose to be governed BY A PROUD KGB SPY and to allow him to wipe out civil sociwty in Russia just because of America. What a typical ugly American, who imagines the US dominates the psyche of other countries, whose denizens have no ideas of their own! Priceless hypocrisy!Please continue spewing your nonsensical, unsubstantiated hysteria! It’s wonderfully amusing and a timely reminder of just how plumb loco the friends of Vladimir Putin really are.
Phoby, Phoby, Phoby.The RF government have reached out to help the US on many occasions. For instance, while NATO was bombing Yugoslavia, it was Chernomydin telling Milosovich to sign the paper that the Finn brought along that finally brought that war to an end. Then there was the political, logistical, and intelligence support to US operations in Afghanistan post-9-11. That has recently been renewed. For almost a year, NATO members such as Germany have been using Russian railroads to transport non-lethal materials and supplies to support their operations in Afghanistan, and this courtesy has recently been extended to US forces fighting there, and to lethal materials and supplies.So you see, dear Phoby, that “proud KGB spy” you babble on and on about is willing to help the US and NATO deal with serious problems.In return, there hasn’t been a millimeter of progress on the US making a purely symbolic, cost-free gesture like repealing the Jackson-Vanik Amendment.As for spewing nonsensical, unsubstantiated hysteria and priceless hypocricy, that’s your job, and I wouldn’t dream of taking it from you.