What kind of policy regarding Russia is proposed by experts in the American media

Photo: Press Service of the President of the Russian Federation

The deterioration of relations between the United States and Russia is one of the top topics in the American and world media, and therefore many experts give their recipes for how the two countries should interact.

ForumDaily gathered some of them.

The introduction of new US sanctions against Russia led to a sharp deterioration in relations between the two countries. No such deterioration has been observed since the end of the Cold War.

Such an opinion in its column for publication Politico expressed the director of an international consulting company Kissinger associates, former director of the Russian section of the US National Security Council, Thomas Graham.

The parties accuse each other and declare that they are seeking to improve relations, behaving as if hostility between them is just an undesirable, but short-lived, step.

Although many in the United States blame the deterioration of relations between Russian President Vladimir Putin, in fact, relations between the two countries have always been difficult, and the periods of their cooperation are short.

The USA has problems not only with Putin, but also in general with Russia.

The two countries have been in conflict since at the end of the 19th century the USA became a great power and began to compete with the Russian Empire for influence in Manchuria.

Perhaps global events have changed the specifics of rivalry, and technical progress has increased its danger. But the spheres of disagreement remained the same: the system of values, zones of influence, principles of world order.

The periods of interaction between Washington and Moscow were short, and their mutual relations were never so friendly as they are usually portrayed. Even relations within the framework of the anti-Hitler coalition during the Second World War, which the Russians consider to be a model of cooperation, were overshadowed by suspicions. The war was fought not so much together as in parallel, and it ended with the signing of an agreement that divided Europe into two opposing camps.

Hopes for more friendly relations and the development of cooperation after the collapse of the Soviet Union were, as it turned out, elusive. According to the United States, their victory in the Cold War meant that Russia, like all other countries, had little choice but to accept a world order based on liberal-democratic principles and free market laws that ensured peace and prosperity for the West. .

Russia, gripped by a devastating socio-economic crisis, did not particularly support the projects of Washington, but nevertheless agreed to accept them. But after Putin underwent a recovery in the Russian economy and the revival of traditional trends, historical differences and tensions in relations resumed. With the beginning of the crisis in Ukraine three years ago, they reached the highest point and led to an almost complete rupture of relations.

For a start, Washington should recognize the harsh truth: Russia will not soon be - or even never will be - a liberal democratic country that will fit into Western structures.

At the same time, Russia's considerable presence in the world arena is ensured due to its good geographical position in the very center of Eurasia, its nuclear arsenal and the unique wealth of its natural resources. Not to mention its increasingly efficient army, a world-class diplomatic corps, a creative scientific community that has extensive experience in the use of the latest technologies for the implementation of national objectives, as evidenced by the level of skill and achievements of Russia in cyberspace. Despite the projected further decline, Russia will still remain a major player.

Washington has no choice but to interact with Russia as it is.

One option is a policy of containment and isolation, supported by punitive measures in the form of sanctions - and today the political class of the United States prefers these measures. But Washington cannot completely isolate one of the largest economies in the world, especially now that major non-Western powers are gaining weight on the world stage — especially China and India — are not ready to follow America’s example.

The best option would be to maintain a pragmatic relationship with Moscow and focus on containing geopolitical rivalries in order to minimize the risk of full-scale conflict. The United States must resolutely defend its vital interests, but at the same time they must be prepared to find compromises on other issues, if this does not threaten to undermine their basic principles.

For this, we would have to insist, for example, on the full restoration of Ukraine’s territorial integrity and sovereignty, but to make it clear to Moscow that we are ready to consider alternatives to Ukraine’s possible membership in NATO, given that Russia strongly opposes this membership and in this regard is adamant.

Washington and Moscow should recognize that amid growing global turmoil there is a need for a more balanced relationship.

He expressed his opinion on how the US should build relations with Russia, he said in a blog for The New York Times former Deputy Director of the CIA (2000-2004 years), lecturer at the School for Advanced International Studies at John Hopkins University (Washington) John McLaughlin.

On October 7, 2016, James Klapper, then the director of national intelligence, and the Department of Homeland Security published the first official US statement that Russia is interfering in our elections. When my colleagues and I asked representatives of the Kremlin and foreign ministry officials to comment on this, they (as expected) categorically rejected the accusations. They began to speculate in the spirit of Kremlin rhetoric, arguing that the United States was to blame for all the problems in Russian-American relations. They condemned the US policy of expanding NATO expansion, their policy in the Balkans, in Libya, the development of democracy in the countries of the former USSR and in Syria, not to mention many other things.

Along with this, the Russian media controlled by the state actively discussed the topic of war: if Hillary Clinton was elected, Russia and the United States would be on the brink of war, and the Russians should prepare bomb shelters.

It reminded me of a lesson I learned from my previous experience with the Russians: they always know what they want. Therefore, you should know what you want - otherwise they will crush you. In today's Russia, the question is what Vladimir Putin wants, since it is he who dictates and commands in all serious matters. And its goals are obvious: undivided dominance within the country; powerful impact on their neighbors; the weakening of Western institutions, such as NATO and the European Union, and the “great power” influence in key regions like the Middle East.

But what do we want? Of course, we cannot yield to Russia and allow it to act in its own way - whether it is a question of interfering in our elections or of violating the borders of independent states that hope that we will enforce international agreements that we and they have signed. Nevertheless, we must avoid real war with a country that has a lower threshold for the use of nuclear weapons than ours.

In addition, we should not fall into the trap, thinking that this is just a new cold war, and then act in accordance with the instincts developed in those times. Still, that cold war was simpler: it was an uncompromising global confrontation between two diametrically opposed ideologies, one of which was destined to disappear. The collapse suffered their ideology. They lost their country, empire and communist economic system.

Then the fight was like a game of checkers. Today it is a game of chess.

The current clash with Russia cannot assume complete victory without the second act, because, unlike the USSR, Russia will not disappear anywhere. Therefore, our strategy should be focused on establishing clear boundaries for Moscow.

We cannot force Russia to welcome NATO at our borders, but we can work to strengthen the alliance’s unity and deterrence strategy. We can counteract Russian diplomacy aimed at wavering members of the alliance, and rely on such measures as the recent advanced deployment of NATO forces in the Baltic countries and Poland - always including in these measures the conditions for easing pressure on Russia.

We cannot force Russia to abandon the espionage habit that originated in tsarist times. But we can strengthen the forces and means of our counterintelligence and — very importantly — begin to systematically expose the disinformation spread by the Russians, the “fake news” they fabricated per our citizens.

We cannot change the geography or force Russia to not pay attention to the neighboring regions, with which it has developed strong trade and cultural ties. But we can continue to punish Moscow for seizing territory or carrying out hidden operations of influence in order to weaken the independence of the neighboring country and limit its foreign policy opportunities. We can provide Ukraine with a more advanced defensive weapon in order to defend it against the Russian invaders.

We cannot keep Putin from striving for foreign adventures like the Syrian one. But if the Trump administration ever comes to its senses and focuses, we will be able to direct our actions towards restoring our leadership in critical regions.

As for internal changes in Russia, one of the deputies of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine told me during our conversation in Kiev: "Ukraine is the only former Soviet republic that can change Russia." She had in mind that the Russians consider Ukraine the cradle of a historical Slavic state (founded in the 9th century) and see Ukrainians as their closest ethnic relatives. If Ukraine could overcome rampant corruption and become a prosperous democratic state, this would be an incentive to create the same system in Russia. Helping Ukraine is one of the most promising strategies for us, which Putin is afraid of. That is why he invaded Ukraine.

In other words, the task today is not to destroy Russia again, as it was when the USSR collapsed. The point is to curb Russia's most vicious tendencies as Russia recovers.

Translation of texts prepared edition Inosmi.

Read also on ForumDaily:

How does it feel to be Russian in modern America

About Russians in America

US media asked what Russian Americans think about Trump and Putin

Four waves of Russian immigration: who are these people

How do American Muscovites live

Do you want more important and interesting news about life in the USA and immigration to America? — support us donate! Also subscribe to our page Facebook. Select the “Priority in display” option and read us first. Also, don't forget to subscribe to our РєР ° РЅР ° Р »РІ Telegram  and Instagram- there is a lot of interesting things there. And join thousands of readers ForumDaily New York — there you will find a lot of interesting and positive information about life in the metropolis.