News 
 Opinion 
 Editorial 
 General 
 Russia 2008 is not the evil empire striking back 

Russia 2008 is not the evil empire striking back

27/02/2008 7:04:54 AM
The Russian leadership is set to change after presidential elections on Sunday. Will Russian foreign policy undergo transformation as well? In particular, how will the administration of Dmitry Medvedev, who is all but guaranteed to win the elections, handle relations with the West?

Medvedev, who is currently criss-crossing Russia on a campaign trail, has made a few programmatic statements which indicate a more liberal course in domestic affairs. He has promised less government intervention in the economy, greater respect for private property and a fair and transparent judicial system.

However, he has given away precious little about his vision of world affairs. An interview published in a popular Russian weekly on Monday is a partial exception to this reticence, and at first glance the message is not that promising: no radical thaw is to be expected between Russia and major Western powers.

In Medvedev's opinion, Russia has reached the limits of flexibility on many contentious international issues and, unlike the situation 10 years ago, won't buckle to pressure from the West when its interests are at stake. He believes that sometimes it is healthy and beneficial to bare one's teeth moderately, to remind Russia's interlocutors that they are not dealing with a third-rate power.

This is in line with the thinking of the incumbent Vladimir Putin.

A year ago, Putin delivered the now-famous speech at the annual Conference on Security Policy in Munich, outlining a litany of Russian grievances which included NATO's military build-up on Russia's borders, US plans to develop the new generation of strategic nuclear weapons and missile defences, and the West's attempts to export democracy.

Putin concluded that the Cold War mentality was still present among the decision-makers in the US and its allies, which makes cooperation and engagement difficult.

In the year that has passed, new irritants have emerged in relations between Russia and the West, such as Kosovo's independence, energy security, the scandal with Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe election observers in Russia, and the British Council affair, to name but a few. Coupled with the fact that Putin will continue to have a say in foreign policy-making for years to come, does this mean that these relations will continue to deteriorate?

Not necessarily. Russia's newly found assertiveness in foreign affairs, based on remarkable economic recovery, should not be equated with enmity and aggressiveness.

Russia remains inward-looking, trying to resolve many problems inherited from the period of Soviet collapse. A favourable external environment and working partnership with the West are vitally important in this regard.

Russia does not want confrontation, but these days it is prepared to stand up firmly for its security and economic interests.

What Russia demands is the chance to be heard and its position to be taken into consideration. Yes, there are many problems in bilateral and multilateral relations, but none of them is really fatal and irresolvable. As far as the Kremlin is concerned, constant discussion and compromise based on the principles of international law should be the method of choice to deal with them.

In Medvedev's words, we are ready for a dialogue with whoever is out there, so long as it is the dialogue of equals. Russia is not prepared to accept uncritically the faits accomplis masterminded by the US and Britain, often in disregard to the existing international norms and institutions.

As Putin put it at his annual press conference on February 14, the West should come to terms with the fact that a school teacher approach and colonial conditions are no longer applicable to Russia.

Russian investment abroad has become a particularly contentious issue over the past year. It causes a great deal of apprehension and even consternation in Europe and the US.

Addressing the security forum in Munich this year, a senior Russian official explained, "We do not aim to buy the entire Old World with our petrodollars.

"We simply do our best to achieve maximum economic benefits in the existing situation."

For his part, Putin suggested that if Russia allows foreign oil companies to work on its territory, Russian companies should be able to do the same overseas. He added that US objections to the expansion of Russian corporate giant Gazprom into Europe could be an example of unfair competition for markets at the behest of American firms.

This issue is particularly close to Medvedev, who has chaired Gazprom's board of directors since 2002, and has been in charge of channelling budget surpluses accruing from oil and gas into national development projects for the past three years.

In his interview, he defended Gazprom gallantly, adding that to an uncharitable mind the US would be a more likely candidate to carry the labels of financial aggressor or economic terrorist.

Russia circa 2008 is not an evil empire on the comeback trail. Rather, it could be likened to a corporation, a sort of giant Gazprom.

The country's president is the corporate chief whose main objective is to maximise profits and ensure physical security of the shareholders that is, the citizens. He may drive a tough bargain with foreign partners; still, its a bargain based on rational cost-benefit analysis and not an imperial drive. Unbridled confrontation, an arms race, and adversarial geopolitics are not conducive to a healthy bottom line. Last week, Putin offered an optimistic vision for future relations with the US: the fundamental interests of Russia and the United States will inevitably prompt the leadership in both countries into developing a positive dialogue as partners at the very least.

The likes of Senator Hillary Clinton will probably dismiss such a statement as yet another ploy by a soulless and cunning KGB agent bent on world domination. Accepting Putin and Medvedev as pragmatic leaders open to negotiation and compromise on reasonable terms seems to be a better course of action.

Dr Nourzhanov is at the Centre for Arab and Islamic Studies (the Middle East and Central Asia), Australian National University.

Print
Increase Text Size
Decrease Text Size
Page:
1

MOST POPULAR

01 Jul 09 | Year's biggest story not Iran, global warming or the global financial crisis - Wacko Jacko trumps them all, Dave Curry writes.
Yourguide to Your Toyota
A guide to what's on in Canberra - click here
 
Secure car parking - click here
 
Taste the music 28th July - click here
 
Ready, Set. Drive!
 
Classifieds
 SEND...
 SAVE...
 SHARE...