Europe and Russia: on the edge of a break-upOrkhan Sattarov, the head of VK's European office"Free trade from Lisbon to Vladivostok" is the proposal made several times by Vladimir Putin which used to seem possible, but which now, after the events in Ukraine, seems almost surreal. The last time Putin made this proposal was in January 2014 after the Russia-EU summit ended. It happened before the crisis of power in Ukraine divided the country and resulted in the loss of the Crimean peninsula, before Russians in Ukraine began to be called "Colorado men", before the Russian president was referred to by the head of the Foreign Ministry by an obscene word, before the Ukrainians in Russia acquired the nicknames "dill", "Bandera" and "fascists", and the south-east of Ukraine turned into the arena of a new European war and before hundreds of thousands of shells and bullets were fired, before the deaths of thousands of soldiers and civilians and before dozens of controversial political decisions were adopted.Today Russia is almost as distanced from the West as the USSR was during the Cold War. Western media and leading politicians believe that the Russian side is directly or indirectly to blame for the crash of the Malaysian Airlines plane. Against this background there is a growing list of sanctions against Moscow. The government of Russia and governmental circles state that Western sanctions might in the end have a positive effect on the Russian economy, since they will stimulate the development of domestic industry and national technological progress. These statements are very similar to the ones voiced by the Iranian leadership, which has been forced to live under the yoke of Western sanctions for over 20 years. But the fact remains that the Iranians are now actively and unsuccessfully seeking ways to become closer with the West. Despite all the difficulties, the process of gradual abolition of restrictions on economic cooperation with Iran has begun and its assets are being unfrozen. The process, incidentally, might have painful consequences for Russia as a leading oil and gas player on the European market. The western path of Russia's development provided for the transfer of European technologies and capital with the purpose of modernizing Russia's national economy, the need for which is always talked about by Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev. Support for the growth of European economies by providing them with Russian natural resources, the availability of the vast Russian market and capital accumulated thanks to trading these resources and partially reinvested in the economy of EU countries is a recipe for smooth cooperation, which fully meets the objectives and long-term interests of both the EU and Russia. It is obvious that such a scenario could not satisfy the partners of Europe overseas, who see the creation of a unified and uncontrollable Eurasian economic space as a potential threat to their own hegemonic aspirations. Back in 2012 the legendary American geostrategist, an "honored gravedigger" of the USSR, Zbigniew Brzezinski, published an article entitled "To balance the East, to renovate the West." The article appeals to the idea of including Russia in the "Big West" project, which could become an effective counterweight to China's growing power. According to Brzezinski, the West very much needs a democratic Russia. Anyone who is familiar with the views of this American author with Polish roots can assume that the level of democracy in Russia was to be measured according to its accountability and loyalty to the interests of the West, with the United States playing the main role. Brzezinski rejects Russian ambitions to Eurasian leadership calling the Eurasian Union an "eccentric" project and a hopeless idea of Vladimir Putin. "Since any rapprochement of Moscow with the West will likely be preceded by the establishment of closer ties between the EU and Ukraine, it would be advisable to locate a collective consultative body (or at least an enlarged Council of Europe at first) in Kiev, the ancient capital of Kievan Rus. It would have a symbolic meaning in the light of the renovation and expansion of the West, as well as its new dynamics," Brzezinski wrote two years ago. Today, Ukraine has become a pro-Western country. The "Euro Maidan" movement sponsored by Washington bore fruit for American policy. Leaked phone calls of U.S. officials, in particular of Victoria Nuland, which were published on the internet clearly indicate that a transitional government was formed in Kiev under direct instructions from the White House. Undoubtedly, the election of Petro Poroshenko as the President of Ukraine also completely fits into the logic of the political process initiated by the United States. The U.S. has acted masterfully in Ukraine by almost completely removing it from the Russian sphere of influence and thereby undermining the potential of the Eurasian Union. Americans behaved in a similar way in 2008 in Georgia, pushing its former President Mikhail Saakashvili to take part in the military adventure against South Ossetia, which ended in the legal recognition of the independence of the two breakaway provinces by Russia. As a result, Russian-Georgian rapprochement in the foreseeable future was made impossible. As a result, a few days ago Tbilisi ratified its Association Agreement with the EU, once again demonstrating its pro-Western vector of development. Have U.S. analysts thought about a similar scenario? Probably yes. Jokes about the stupidity of Americans which became popular thanks to satirist Mikhail Zadornov should not become a reason for underestimating the analytical abilities of a country which annually invests 140 billion in education (counting only budget costs), one third of the entire Russian budget. At the same time, the "brain drain" is directed not from the U.S. and Europe to Russia, but in the opposite direction.It is obvious that Washington will demonstrate its principles in the geopolitical struggle with Russia in relation to Ukraine, since the loss of the south-east of Ukraine to Russia would mark the failure of U.S. policy on the continent. The key ally of the U.S. in its fight against Russia is the European Union. However, European countries, led by Germany, have close trade and financial ties with the Russian Federation. In total, European banks distributed loans worth 194 billion euros among Russian citizens and the Russian state, of which 80 billion are located in London banks. Despite this, the rhetoric of EU leaders, including Angela Merkel, has significantly toughened in the last few days. The German Chancellor has already urged to introduce "significant economic sanctions" against Russia because of the situation in Ukraine. Moreover, it must be done "as soon as possible." In such a delicate situation, the number one goal for Russia is to counteract the sanctions and lobby against them once they are introduced to prevent them from causing vast economic damage to the country. To achieve this goal it can speculate on the one hand on objective European economic interests directly linked to Russia. On the other hand, steadily growing anti-American sentiments in Europe, which have led many to be sceptical about critics of Kremlin policy, could play into the hands of Moscow. No wonder former CIA officer Edward Snowden was granted asylum in Russia. Finally, active contacts between the Russian political elite and ultra-right European parties with anti-globalization positions are also aimed, ultimately, at undermining U.S. influence in Europe. The key question is whether such methods are efficient in promoting Russia's own interests.
Orkhan Sattarov, the head of VK's European office
"Free trade from Lisbon to Vladivostok" is the proposal made several times by Vladimir Putin which used to seem possible, but which now, after the events in Ukraine, seems almost surreal. The last time Putin made this proposal was in January 2014 after the Russia-EU summit ended. It happened before the crisis of power in Ukraine divided the country and resulted in the loss of the Crimean peninsula, before Russians in Ukraine began to be called "Colorado men", before the Russian president was referred to by the head of the Foreign Ministry by an obscene word, before the Ukrainians in Russia acquired the nicknames "dill", "Bandera" and "fascists", and the south-east of Ukraine turned into the arena of a new European war and before hundreds of thousands of shells and bullets were fired, before the deaths of thousands of soldiers and civilians and before dozens of controversial political decisions were adopted.
Today Russia is almost as distanced from the West as the USSR was during the Cold War. Western media and leading politicians believe that the Russian side is directly or indirectly to blame for the crash of the Malaysian Airlines plane. Against this background there is a growing list of sanctions against Moscow. The government of Russia and governmental circles state that Western sanctions might in the end have a positive effect on the Russian economy, since they will stimulate the development of domestic industry and national technological progress. These statements are very similar to the ones voiced by the Iranian leadership, which has been forced to live under the yoke of Western sanctions for over 20 years. But the fact remains that the Iranians are now actively and unsuccessfully seeking ways to become closer with the West. Despite all the difficulties, the process of gradual abolition of restrictions on economic cooperation with Iran has begun and its assets are being unfrozen. The process, incidentally, might have painful consequences for Russia as a leading oil and gas player on the European market.
The western path of Russia's development provided for the transfer of European technologies and capital with the purpose of modernizing Russia's national economy, the need for which is always talked about by Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev. Support for the growth of European economies by providing them with Russian natural resources, the availability of the vast Russian market and capital accumulated thanks to trading these resources and partially reinvested in the economy of EU countries is a recipe for smooth cooperation, which fully meets the objectives and long-term interests of both the EU and Russia.
It is obvious that such a scenario could not satisfy the partners of Europe overseas, who see the creation of a unified and uncontrollable Eurasian economic space as a potential threat to their own hegemonic aspirations. Back in 2012 the legendary American geostrategist, an "honored gravedigger" of the USSR, Zbigniew Brzezinski, published an article entitled "To balance the East, to renovate the West." The article appeals to the idea of including Russia in the "Big West" project, which could become an effective counterweight to China's growing power. According to Brzezinski, the West very much needs a democratic Russia. Anyone who is familiar with the views of this American author with Polish roots can assume that the level of democracy in Russia was to be measured according to its accountability and loyalty to the interests of the West, with the United States playing the main role. Brzezinski rejects Russian ambitions to Eurasian leadership calling the Eurasian Union an "eccentric" project and a hopeless idea of Vladimir Putin.
"Since any rapprochement of Moscow with the West will likely be preceded by the establishment of closer ties between the EU and Ukraine, it would be advisable to locate a collective consultative body (or at least an enlarged Council of Europe at first) in Kiev, the ancient capital of Kievan Rus. It would have a symbolic meaning in the light of the renovation and expansion of the West, as well as its new dynamics," Brzezinski wrote two years ago.
Today, Ukraine has become a pro-Western country. The "Euro Maidan" movement sponsored by Washington bore fruit for American policy. Leaked phone calls of U.S. officials, in particular of Victoria Nuland, which were published on the internet clearly indicate that a transitional government was formed in Kiev under direct instructions from the White House. Undoubtedly, the election of Petro Poroshenko as the President of Ukraine also completely fits into the logic of the political process initiated by the United States.
The U.S. has acted masterfully in Ukraine by almost completely removing it from the Russian sphere of influence and thereby undermining the potential of the Eurasian Union. Americans behaved in a similar way in 2008 in Georgia, pushing its former President Mikhail Saakashvili to take part in the military adventure against South Ossetia, which ended in the legal recognition of the independence of the two breakaway provinces by Russia. As a result, Russian-Georgian rapprochement in the foreseeable future was made impossible. As a result, a few days ago Tbilisi ratified its Association Agreement with the EU, once again demonstrating its pro-Western vector of development.
Have U.S. analysts thought about a similar scenario? Probably yes. Jokes about the stupidity of Americans which became popular thanks to satirist Mikhail Zadornov should not become a reason for underestimating the analytical abilities of a country which annually invests 140 billion in education (counting only budget costs), one third of the entire Russian budget. At the same time, the "brain drain" is directed not from the U.S. and Europe to Russia, but in the opposite direction.
It is obvious that Washington will demonstrate its principles in the geopolitical struggle with Russia in relation to Ukraine, since the loss of the south-east of Ukraine to Russia would mark the failure of U.S. policy on the continent. The key ally of the U.S. in its fight against Russia is the European Union. However, European countries, led by Germany, have close trade and financial ties with the Russian Federation. In total, European banks distributed loans worth 194 billion euros among Russian citizens and the Russian state, of which 80 billion are located in London banks. Despite this, the rhetoric of EU leaders, including Angela Merkel, has significantly toughened in the last few days. The German Chancellor has already urged to introduce "significant economic sanctions" against Russia because of the situation in Ukraine. Moreover, it must be done "as soon as possible."
In such a delicate situation, the number one goal for Russia is to counteract the sanctions and lobby against them once they are introduced to prevent them from causing vast economic damage to the country. To achieve this goal it can speculate on the one hand on objective European economic interests directly linked to Russia. On the other hand, steadily growing anti-American sentiments in Europe, which have led many to be sceptical about critics of Kremlin policy, could play into the hands of Moscow. No wonder former CIA officer Edward Snowden was granted asylum in Russia. Finally, active contacts between the Russian political elite and ultra-right European parties with anti-globalization positions are also aimed, ultimately, at undermining U.S. influence in Europe. The key question is whether such methods are efficient in promoting Russia's own interests.
