Published: 1 July, 2009, 08:52
Edited: 1 July, 2009, 08:52
US President Barack Obama will soon arrive in Moscow, marking his first visit to Russia while in office. However, in the days and weeks leading up to this occasion, with the aim of “resetting” Russia-US relations, there has been a concerted effort on a number of fronts to derail this enterprise. On the domestic front, some prominent Russian liberals have urged Obama not to engage closely with the Kremlin because of Russia’s claimed “values deficit.” On the foreign front, the issue of Georgia is again being used as a wedge to divide Moscow and Washington.
Since taking office, Obama has been provided with an enormous amount of advice on how to repair the Russia-US relationship, which was left on the barest of life-support by the Bush administration. The good news is that Obama appears willing to rebuild this bilateral relationship primarily on shared security interests. Indeed, until there is strong evidence to the contrary, it would seem Obama is embracing a realistic approach to foreign policy in general, and this includes Washington’s Russia foreign policy in particular. While I am cautiously optimistic that America will attempt to learn from its past foreign policy mistakes, there are those who demand that ideology, and the so-called “values agenda”, should remain paramount. In other words, it would seem that some believe there was nothing really wrong with Bush’s neocon agenda – it was good theory, but its implementation never reached expectations.
Many of Russia’s well-known liberals are not neocons, but they appear to suggest that the US should be party to solving Russia’s problems, as they understand their own country. In a Washington Post op-ed piece, “False Choices for Russia”, published on June 9 by Lev Gudkov, Igor Klyamkin, Georgy Satarov, and Lilia Shevtsov, we are told that “America has ignored the problems of democracy and civil society in Russia, but even turning a blind eye did not prevent the breakdown in the U.S.-Russian relationship -- and now Obama is essentially being asked to treat Russia as though it is incapable of democratic transformation.” Russia’s democracy project – with all its problems, successes, and challenges – is the sole affair of the Russian people. Now it is an obvious truism that, the more Washington meddles in the affairs of another, the more that state is seen as less than legitimate in the eyes of society and its liberals of all stripes.
The authors of “False Choices for Russia” continue the long and failed tradition of Russia’s liberal intelligentsia when looking to the West to remedy their country’s problems. I would advise Obama to ignore completely Russia’s liberals, up until the time Russian liberalism matures and accepts that it must work as a partner in Russian politics. To date, liberals in Russia only lecture and demean their own people, as well as criticize the current political elite without offering a coherent alternative. Russian voters have no interest in a liberal agenda and this is the reason Obama should have no interest in Russian liberals.
No one should be surprised that there are many liberal and neocon elements in the US and Russia who hope to influence Obama on how to engage Russia – after all, many make a living off supporting Washington’s policies and its various instruments of soft power. Truly improved relations Russia and the US would make them irrelevant and obviously redundant. This is where the foreign front comes to the fore – playing the Georgia card.
Washington’s “Georgia project” went into complete disarray when Mikhail Saakashvili attacked South Ossetia last August. It was supposed to be a quick war that would show the world “democratic Georgia”, after which America’s ally could continue the advance of western influence in the post-Soviet space at Russia’s expense. The result of that conflict was the emergence of two new states, South Ossetia and Abkhazia, and there is nothing that will change this reality on the ground.
Today, things are very different. Saakashvili is fighting the political struggle of his life – he may not be made to flee his country, but it is clear he rules as a very unpopular leader. This state of affairs has not deterred many in the US and some in Russia from using Georgia a flashpoint to warn Obama that Russia cannot be truly a strategic partner of the US.
Saakashvili is no longer the showcase of the neocon agenda. But this does not matter – Georgia can be used in a different way. In the past few weeks, the message coming out of western media and governments is support for Georgia – which in Georgia is deemed no longer important. However, mainstream media rarely points out that Georgia’s opposition is really no different from Saakashvili when it comes to foreign policy, which of course is pro-American and anti-Russian. Thus, nothing has really changed – Georgia, with its erratic leadership and political elite, continues to be used to undermine a Russia-US rapprochement. How Georgia actually enhances American foreign policy interests are never really explained, particularly in reference to Russia.
It is my hope that Obama comes to Moscow like he did to Cairo – with an open mind. Moscow and Washington do have their differences, but the commonalities are even greater. Russia’s democracy project has a long way to go, but its course can only be determined by the Russian people and not by ideologically-driven Americans and self-denying Russian liberals. Georgia has become a failed state because of foreign meddling. Obama can turn a new page with Russia if he is determined to adhere to the value of mutual cooperation and leave the Georgians to figure out their own affairs among themselves in their geopolitical neighborhood.