We were told there was to be a new rapprochement between the two countries overcoming tensions over issues such as the Russian-Georgian conflict. In March 2009, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton even presented a mock reset button to Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov in Geneva, although a slight mistranslation got the reset off to a somewhat rocky start. Russia’s final entry into the World Trade Organization with the help of creative Swiss diplomacy was seen as a major step in the right direction.
At the beginning of President Obama’s second term, rumors are already swelling about what the United States’ policy will be toward Russia during the next four years. On the eve of the same Munich conference where the reset was announced, the New York Times front page tells us that the new policy – the reset of the reset – will be the “cold shoulder”. Relying on “government officials and outside analysts (in Moscow) and in Washington,” the reporters inform us that the new policy will be one of “disengagement”.
Is this surprising? For those who have been following the bilateral relations – and I think they are becoming fewer and fewer – this should not be a surprise at all. The United States has withdrawn from a civil society working group as Russia has put more and more pressure on foreign non-governmental organizations. Americans will find it more and more difficult to adopt Russian children. President Obama will decline an invitation to visit Moscow this spring, and it would be most surprising if the new Secretary of State John Kerry makes Moscow his first official destination or even his first official telephone call. The issue of missile defense shields in Eastern Europe continues to seriously cloud the relations. The United States is unrelenting in its criticisms of Russia’s human rights policies. The Russian Federation is unrelenting in proclaiming its sovereignty over its internal affairs. For the moment, there seems to be a stalemate.
All this might seem trivial and nowhere near the level of tensions of the Cold War period except that Russian cooperation in the United Nations Security Council will be necessary for any legitimate solution to the Syrian crisis. Indeed, Russian and U.S. officials met Syrian opposition leaders at the recent Munich conference. And what about Iran? In other words, while the United States feels it can give the cold shoulder to Moscow, the Russians maintain that international stability if not peace and security cannot be maintained without their cooperation. While the West is caught up in the moment’s security threats in Africa, Russia is looking for an overall European security architecture.
An unofficial policy of the cold shoulder is very different from a dynamic Cold War policy of puppet regimes around the world or one of containment. On the other hand, it seems very distant from one of benign neglect. While the new Obama administration is being put in place, one hopes that at least the personal warmth between Secretary of State Clinton and Foreign Minister Lavrov will not become a cold shoulder with John Kerry. Giving someone the cold shoulder is not the best way to begin constructive diplomacy.