#15
Trud
No. 218
[translation from RIA Novosti for personal use only]
WHY DO WE NEED RAPPROCHEMENT WITH THE WEST?
By Vyacheslav NIKONOV, President of the Politika Foundation
President Vladimir Putin's visit in the USA was a triumph. NATO Secretary General George Robertson came to Moscow to discuss new mechanisms of cooperation with Russia and announced a review of Western attitude to the Chechen war.
At the same time, the Communist Party of the Russian Federation accuses Putin of "betraying national interests" and some of its members even chant anti-American slogans and call for solidarity with the Taliban. But certain liberals express the fear that the president is using Russo-American rapprochement as a smokescreen for tightening up screws at home. Some experts are saying that Putin is turning into another Gorbachev by making unilateral concessions (helping the USA in Afghanistan and evacuating Russian bases from Vietnam, Cuba and Abkhazia) and arguing that the Americans will betray us anyway.
It would not be an exaggeration to say that Putin has assumed a more pro-Western position than 90% of the Russian electorate and elite are prepared to tolerate, which will create serious political problems for the president in the future. And yet, Putin is right, above all because his opponents are wrong.
Putin is right above all because only certified madmen can call for supporting the Taliban. The Taliban is an order of Islamic fanatics whose goal is to push the world back into the era of the Prophet, the 7th century, which entails the liquidation of more modern layers and achievements of global civilisation. To attain their goal, they support all kinds of extremists, including Chechen bandits. Not long ago the Taliban saw their immediate goal in the occupation of Central Asian republics and a victorious march to Moscow. And the Northern Alliance was the only obstacle that prevented them from doing this... Should we feel sorry for the Taliban?
Putin is right because an anti-Western policy will be fatal for a country that has only 2.3% of the world's population and accounts for only 1% of the global output (the USA accounts for 29%), a country that badly needs major investments and novel technologies for creating an economy that would guarantee its defences and security and befitting living standards for its people. And the money and latest technologies are in the West.
Putin is right because by turning its back to the West Russia will not become a brother in the East. For Russia is not the East, where Russians are seen as Westerners and differences between Orthodox Christians and Catholics are not apparent. The probability of alliances in the East is minimal because there are no alliances there. The Russia-China-India triangle seems a utopia today because Sino-Indian contradictions are still very strong. We should also remember that Russia, with its modest economic and human potential, would be the dominated party in such a triangle, should it be miraculously created.
Putin is right because threats to our security are coming not from the West but from the South now. We know this very well and we can feel it very poignantly in Chechnya. And it would be silly, to put it mildly, to squander the money earmarked on ensuring our military presence abroad on bases in Vietnam or Cuba.
Putin is right because it would be strange to miss the chance of rapprochement with the leading countries of the world at a time when we have a common enemy and when Russia looks quite civilised and democratic compared to other members of the counter-terror coalition (Saudi Arabia or Uzbekistan). Russia's image has greatly improved, which will surely influence our credit rating. The recognition of Russia as a market economy country, the cancellation of the Jackson-Vanik amendment and the movement towards the WTO will create much better conditions for advance to the global markets, without which all export-oriented industries of Russia will have no future.
In addition, the goal of joining the club of privileged countries presupposes compliance with the rules of the club, one of which is respect for democratic freedoms.
This is why I think that the policy of rapprochement with the West is the right choice. But this does not mean that Russia and the West have become allies or that this will surely happen. Partnership looks very fragile so far. It is not clear how it will survive (if at all) the possible bombing raids at Iraq or the accelerated admission of Baltic countries to NATO. There are grounds for the fear of the eventual betrayal of Russia by the West, as there is no tradition of thanking for services rendered in the Western political culture.
Russia's partnership with the West has not been formalised. It will not be admitted to NATO, for who in the West wants to strain to ensure Russian security and even grant it the right of vetoing NATO decisions? The idea of British premier Tony Blair, which NATO Secretary General Robertson discussed in Moscow, is nothing more than a formula of a slight modification of the impotent NATO-Russia Council, which has been feigning effectiveness since 1997. Russia will not be admitted to the EU, because the EU may fall apart trying to upgrade the Russian economy to moderately European standards.
So, our relations with the West will not be too close, which means that the advocates of the distinctive Russian way need not worry. However, the benefits of such rapprochement are apparent and I don't see any dangers in it.
Next Article