Russia grows strong; Europe and the USA weaken

By Vestnik Kavkaza

At the end of 2013, right after terrorist attacks in Volgograd, the Russian Ministry for Foreign Affairs made a statement on its intention to continue “the struggle against the cunning enemy who knows no borders and can be stopped only collectively.”

According to Russian diplomats, “crimes committed in Volgograd, like the terrorist attacks in the USA, Syria, Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan, Nigeria, and other countries are of the same mould and have similar inspirers. In the context of provocation urges by heads of militants to consolidate jihad forces and involve new terrorists into the war, the position of some politicians who try to differentiate “good” and “bad” terrorists, depending on the settlement of their geopolitical goals, is obviously wrong.”

But for the failure in the struggle against the international terrorism, last year (at least its second half) would be beneficial for the Russian foreign policy. Alexei Pushkov, Chairman of the State Duma Committee for International Affairs, believes that not only the Syrian, but also the Armenian and Ukrainian directions were successful for Russia.

“There are several reasons for this. First of all, we see a relevant weakening of the USA’s role in international policy. The second fact was the weakening of the European Union as a foreign political player. This weakening is connected with a very serious crisis which is taking place in the EU. It explains the inconclusive policy by the EU toward Ukraine. The offer made to Ukraine by the EU was absolutely scandalous. What was offered? We give you our standards, we allocate a certain sum for development of democratic institutes – 660 million euros (not for the economy), and we give you an opportunity to persuade yourself that someday you will join Europe. A European myth was offered Ukraine. And for this they had to release Yulia Timoshenko, increase gas prices for the population, stiffen their budget policy, take IMF loans under very strict conditions. Actually, the country was offered a path to financial default and social instability,” Pushkov is sure.

According to him, if Ukraine signed the association agreement, it would turn into an economic semi-colony of the European Union, and the result of the elections of 2015 would be predetermined in the context: “The EU would gather all its forces in Ukraine to sabotage Yanukovych’s positions. It also confirms the weakness of the European Union. The $20 billion which Yanukovych asked from the EU to find a way out of the financial crisis in Ukraine is not a sum off the scale. A tenfold bigger sum was allocated to Greece. However, the EU didn’t go on the path. The EU failed to fulfill the task which it faced, if it really wanted to take Ukraine into the European zone of influence.”

Pushkov thinks Ukraine should be considered in the context of Armenia’s decision to join the CU: “The Armenian decision was less discussed, but it was the beginning of the crisis in the Eastern Partnership. It was a shock for Brussels when they found out that Yerevan rejected the signing of the association agreement. The domino effect reigns here. If one country signs, the second signs, and so on. And the EU counted on greater influence on Azerbaijan in this case, which doesn’t want to sign it, and that Azerbaijan will someday choose the path of the countries which have signed the agreement. But when neither Ukraine nor Armenia signs it, an absolutely different situation is established.”

Pushkov is sure that Russia “showed that it can use not only the financial leverage which we have, but also a diplomatic line.Russia didn’t set any conditions, nobody speaks about the Customs Union. It is about reduction of gas prices and Russia’s purchasing of Ukrainian state bonds, which will enable Ukraine to pay its debts off. I think the position is right. If it leads to something new in relations between Russia and Ukraine, it will be wonderful, but the choice is Ukraine’s. We don’t hide our interest in integration with Ukraine. But one thing is to show our interest and another thing is to impose any agenda on Ukraine. The year is coming to an end on a high note for Russia. It confirms the strengthening of our capacities and the weakening of the force centers which used to determine the international agenda.”