It Takes Two to Reset

The Obama administration's efforts to reach out to Russia won't work as long as Russians don't take them seriously.

BY LILIA SHEVTSOVA | JUNE 16, 2010

With Russian President Dmitry Medvedev due to visit Washington next week, Barack Obama's administration is seemingly anxious to tout improved U.S. relations with Russia as one of its primary foreign-policy achievements. The two countries have "made significant strides in resetting relations" said the White House statement announcing the visit, a reference to the widely touted "reset button" policy announced last year. "President Obama and President Medvedev have collaborated closely to enhance the security and well-being of the American and Russian people," the statement continued.

The U.S. line on the reset is that agreement between the two sides on issues of mutual concern will help build the confidence needed for the United States to be able to make progress on other priorities. The American side apparently hopes that the reset will help Medvedev, who, unlike his predecessor, seems genuinely interested in rapprochement with the United States, consolidate his power. In light of all this, it would not be prudent to irritate Moscow with attempts to remodel Russia.

On the surface, the U.S. administration would seem to have every reason to consider this policy a success. Compared with the open hostility of 2008, U.S.-Russian relations have warmed up considerably. The two countries are now working together in areas of vital importance for the United States, including containing Iran and working to reduce the threat of nuclear weapons, and the concessions made to Moscow seem minor. In short, the pragmatic line followed by Obama's team looks to be effective.

The problem is that neither Kremlin politicians and analysts nor opposition Russian liberals see it this way. Many view arms control and nuclear proliferation as U.S. concerns with little political salience within Russia. As Sergei Markov, a Duma member and Kremlin mouthpiece, has argued, the reset is "not just about an agreement on START, but about the status of the Russian Federation and whether Russia is a great power or not."

The Kremlin is willing to help Obama try to earn his Nobel Peace Prize as long as he's aware that the reset is possible only on Russian terms: Don't meddle in Moscow's affairs; recognize its spheres of interest; and help with its economic modernization. The United States has fulfilled the first two conditions so far, but help on the third is not yet in sight. Moscow therefore must take a firmer line in bargaining with Washington: All concessions must be prepaid.

Sasha Mordovets/Getty Images

 SUBJECTS: RUSSIA
 

Lilia Shevtsova is a senior associate at the Carnegie Moscow Center.

GEORGEKZ

4:31 AM ET

June 17, 2010

On the above article

I am saddened to state that some articles are written just for the sake of having something written. Some do so to have more references to cite in their CVs, others simply meet the editorial guidelines of their magazine or act as prepaid authors, promoting somebody else's point of view. This publication is one of such. Slashing Russia, hinting to Mr Putin's uneasy image in the West, striking a difference with believed-to-be-more-democratic Medvedev, smelling another rat in US-Russia relations. It is clear that both America and Russia are thinking first of their own interests. To go forward concession after concession is the only way to go forward in diplomacy, where bargaining and trembling over small details go by themselves. Russia believes to derive some benefit from its improving relationship with America (by putting under control strategic weapons thus keeping the balance stable, mitigating America's stance on Russia's failed democratic reforms, etc). America does the same. It is a silly thing to accuse any of these countries, or any other, of being dishonest, as playing by your own rules is tantamount to playing safe and cool and being honest to oneself, in the first place. Moreover, the article is clearly pro-American, which is not bad in itself, but not too good for those who prefer rigorous facts to ungrounded presumptions or commonplace truth.

 

RSAFSOZ

2:57 PM ET

June 19, 2010

learning

In both countries against each other more moderate policies, began to learn to follow sikis.

 

JOSHSTU101

9:56 PM ET

July 15, 2010

Well, we can't really tell

Well, we can't really tell what's the real reason behind Obama's move in having a good relationship with them. Only he knows the real score behind all of this plans he are currently implementing. Hopefully, it's the best for all.Josh Stu