U.S. President Barack Obama called Russia a great country with talents and traditions in an interview with CBS. Obama assured that he had firm ties with Russian President Vladimir Putin. Sergey Oznobishchev, a professor of MGIMO, the head of the sector for military and political analysis of the RAS Institute of World Economy and International Relations, has commented on the motives of the U.S. president’s rhetoric.
- Sergey Constantinovich, what do you think is the cause of Barack Obama’s warming rhetoric towards Russia?
- The first thing that comes to mind, is that Barack Obama really thinks so. The second thing is that Obama started acting as a politician, not a citizen of his country. Because as a citizen of his country and a member of the political society of his country, he needs to crush Russia with criticism. Speaking of which, he reminds some members of the Russian elite that have regimes “for internal use” and “regimes for foreign use.” Here in Russia, we hear how politicians speaking for their audience are condemning America, yet their speeches for the international audience have totally different motives.
It is a manoeuvre. I actually believe that it is not necessary.
We have already got the carriage of anti-Americanism rolling, it is going downhill now. Stopping it will be very hard, it will be exceptionally hard to put the relations back on the rails of constructive cooperation.
Besides, since the first days of the crisis around Ukraine, before the voluntary adjoining of Crimea to Russia, Vladimir Putin was constantly emphasizing that we were committed to cooperation with the U.S. in the sector of security and other sectors. Even during the Q&A show with Russians in December, from a load of questions, Putin managed to pick one from the Internet, asking whether Obama would save him if he were drowning. [Putin called Obama an honest and courageous man who would certainly do so].
Those are all little hints that our relations are not worsening and we are not intending to worsen them.
- Is there a withdrawal from the policy of hints?
- Yes. Moscow has quit making hints, and Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said that there was no quarrel with the U.S., there will not be one and we were committed to close cooperation.
Americans are a bit bad with hearing, they have a poor understanding of humour, unlike the English, so Lavrov had to say it openly, calling for cooperation again, returning to cooperation.
But it is important to consider here that we acted the way we did [during the crisis in Ukraine], then we turned as though nothing had happened, jumped out on the arena in a white costume and said: “Well, so everything is fine, we are white, pure and fluffy.” For Western society, especially the American one, the conduct of Russia does not fit into international law, the behavioural rules, that which Obama has recently mentioned at the General Assembly. And this will remain a mark. Until the end of Obama’s term, it will certainly be hard to do anything. But we consider that Obama has finally perceived the signal, received the signal. There are other signals too.
- In the hint field?
- Not only. Recently, a group of prominent Russians and Americans was sitting on an island, they came up with about 24 points on what to do, how we should make it out of the crisis. [It was a group of executive and legislative experts meeting on Bojsto, an island not far from Helsinki. Supported by the Finnish Foreign Ministry, the Carnegie New York Corporation, the Institute of World Economics and International Relations, they composed a list of proposals for discussions by Russian and U.S. officials].
A solution to the crisis is needed, mainly for us and the United States of America. We need to pull the world out of the crisis, pull Europe and pull our relations with Ukraine. If Moscow and Washington are not engaged in solving cardinal problems of our times, the world, the world order and regional security, nothing works then. Look at the same problem in Iran. Everything had been dragging out until we started working together. The same with Syria. Moreover, as soon as we joined the process of settling the situation caused by the activities of Islamic State, everything started progressing.
… There are things that remain in the memory of the political class. Remember, as soon as the situation around Crimea started developing, we had brought everything forgotten in the West long ago to God’s light: Kosovo, NATO expansion going on for 20 years. NATO expanded to countries of the Baltic back in 2003. Then we had total silence, we said “Well, it is their choice.” Those things, they do not go unnoticed.
So, in reality, we need to start cooperation in practical directions, of which we have plenty, starting with terrorism and spreading, it has always been there.
- How harmful is the sanctions regime for Russian-American relations?
- Of course, we need to get back to normal relations because the sanctions regime is pressing very hard on our economy, and we start feeling it ourselves.
The sanctions regime and the regime of unfriendly relations with Russia block the path towards modernization. It was modernization that we prioritized during President Medvedev's term and later improved and supported by Putin. Modernization is mentioned in the Foreign Policy Concept, it says that the goal of our foreign political wok is to organize cooperation in modernizing the economy and innovative development.
But we cannot accomplish that goal, because the situation is in a dead end, finding an exit from which is very hard. What Obama said gives hope that we will gradually return to at least cooperation on the most topical issues, if not full-fledged cooperation (we will need a lot of time to come to that). There is no Cold War, but Cold War snow drifts have already appeared. We are starting to clear them off the road. The role of Moscow and Washington here is central.
If we talk with Europe through Germany, we cannot form normal relations with the rest of the world without taking into account the fact that the world orients itself towards Washington.
So Obama started realizing the need for corrections to his behaviour as a politician, not as a president of his country focused on an internal audience, but as a politician, as winner of the Nobel Peace Price. It is very pleasant, and I hope that it is not a single step, that it is a certain course, so signals are coming all the time. Diplomats, members of the expert community communicate, trying to stimulate the process of rapprochement and restoration of our relations. And in reality, after major crises that have happened in world history, in our bilateral relations, there may be a renaissance and breakthrough in several directions we could do nothing with before. First of all, we need to return to high-scale work on reduction and limitation of weapons and enforcement of world security, something we have recently put aside and cannot focus work on.
U.S. President Barack Obama called Russia a great country with talents and traditions in an interview with CBS. Obama assured that he had firm ties with Russian President Vladimir Putin. Sergey Oznobishchev, a professor of MGIMO, the head of the sector for military and political analysis of the RAS Institute of World Economy and International Relations, has commented on the motives of the U.S. president’s rhetoric.- Sergey Constantinovich, what do you think is the cause of Barack Obama’s warming rhetoric towards Russia?- The first thing that comes to mind, is that Barack Obama really thinks so. The second thing is that Obama started acting as a politician, not a citizen of his country. Because as a citizen of his country and a member of the political society of his country, he needs to crush Russia with criticism. Speaking of which, he reminds some members of the Russian elite that have regimes “for internal use” and “regimes for foreign use.” Here in Russia, we hear how politicians speaking for their audience are condemning America, yet their speeches for the international audience have totally different motives.It is a manoeuvre. I actually believe that it is not necessary.We have already got the carriage of anti-Americanism rolling, it is going downhill now. Stopping it will be very hard, it will be exceptionally hard to put the relations back on the rails of constructive cooperation.Besides, since the first days of the crisis around Ukraine, before the voluntary adjoining of Crimea to Russia, Vladimir Putin was constantly emphasizing that we were committed to cooperation with the U.S. in the sector of security and other sectors. Even during the Q&A show with Russians in December, from a load of questions, Putin managed to pick one from the Internet, asking whether Obama would save him if he were drowning. [Putin called Obama an honest and courageous man who would certainly do so].Those are all little hints that our relations are not worsening and we are not intending to worsen them.- Is there a withdrawal from the policy of hints?- Yes. Moscow has quit making hints, and Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said that there was no quarrel with the U.S., there will not be one and we were committed to close cooperation.Americans are a bit bad with hearing, they have a poor understanding of humour, unlike the English, so Lavrov had to say it openly, calling for cooperation again, returning to cooperation.But it is important to consider here that we acted the way we did [during the crisis in Ukraine], then we turned as though nothing had happened, jumped out on the arena in a white costume and said: “Well, so everything is fine, we are white, pure and fluffy.” For Western society, especially the American one, the conduct of Russia does not fit into international law, the behavioural rules, that which Obama has recently mentioned at the General Assembly. And this will remain a mark. Until the end of Obama’s term, it will certainly be hard to do anything. But we consider that Obama has finally perceived the signal, received the signal. There are other signals too.- In the hint field?- Not only. Recently, a group of prominent Russians and Americans was sitting on an island, they came up with about 24 points on what to do, how we should make it out of the crisis. [It was a group of executive and legislative experts meeting on Bojsto, an island not far from Helsinki. Supported by the Finnish Foreign Ministry, the Carnegie New York Corporation, the Institute of World Economics and International Relations, they composed a list of proposals for discussions by Russian and U.S. officials].A solution to the crisis is needed, mainly for us and the United States of America. We need to pull the world out of the crisis, pull Europe and pull our relations with Ukraine. If Moscow and Washington are not engaged in solving cardinal problems of our times, the world, the world order and regional security, nothing works then. Look at the same problem in Iran. Everything had been dragging out until we started working together. The same with Syria. Moreover, as soon as we joined the process of settling the situation caused by the activities of Islamic State, everything started progressing.… There are things that remain in the memory of the political class. Remember, as soon as the situation around Crimea started developing, we had brought everything forgotten in the West long ago to God’s light: Kosovo, NATO expansion going on for 20 years. NATO expanded to countries of the Baltic back in 2003. Then we had total silence, we said “Well, it is their choice.” Those things, they do not go unnoticed.So, in reality, we need to start cooperation in practical directions, of which we have plenty, starting with terrorism and spreading, it has always been there.- How harmful is the sanctions regime for Russian-American relations?- Of course, we need to get back to normal relations because the sanctions regime is pressing very hard on our economy, and we start feeling it ourselves.The sanctions regime and the regime of unfriendly relations with Russia block the path towards modernization. It was modernization that we prioritized during President Medvedev's term and later improved and supported by Putin. Modernization is mentioned in the Foreign Policy Concept, it says that the goal of our foreign political wok is to organize cooperation in modernizing the economy and innovative development.But we cannot accomplish that goal, because the situation is in a dead end, finding an exit from which is very hard. What Obama said gives hope that we will gradually return to at least cooperation on the most topical issues, if not full-fledged cooperation (we will need a lot of time to come to that). There is no Cold War, but Cold War snow drifts have already appeared. We are starting to clear them off the road. The role of Moscow and Washington here is central.If we talk with Europe through Germany, we cannot form normal relations with the rest of the world without taking into account the fact that the world orients itself towards Washington.So Obama started realizing the need for corrections to his behaviour as a politician, not as a president of his country focused on an internal audience, but as a politician, as winner of the Nobel Peace Price. It is very pleasant, and I hope that it is not a single step, that it is a certain course, so signals are coming all the time. Diplomats, members of the expert community communicate, trying to stimulate the process of rapprochement and restoration of our relations. And in reality, after major crises that have happened in world history, in our bilateral relations, there may be a renaissance and breakthrough in several directions we could do nothing with before. First of all, we need to return to high-scale work on reduction and limitation of weapons and enforcement of world security, something we have recently put aside and cannot focus work
