Russia continues to seek its place in the new sustainable world coordinate system
The peculiarity of Russian-American relations is an abundance of verbal reasoning. These are complemented by the pseudo-scientific concepts, analytical and predictive delights propaganda tide of optimism and pessimism ebbs. All of this — on the background of a small concrete and practical business of filling these relations.
In striking contrast are, for example, relations between Washington and Beijing: it is dominated by big business factors against which the pale and discolored existing political differences. This is particularly evident when the United States and Russia violently seize on the propaganda field on issues such as the "Magnitsky Act" or the "law of Dima Yakovlev". Do I have two powers of understanding which is heavily dependent on international security, be spent in the lists of those?
This is definitely a relic of the "cold war," remnants of the past in mind going into the history of the elite, who was born and grew up in the years when we were ready to "fight for peace as long as there will be no stone unturned." In the U.S., where the political old-timers more and the conditions for their longevity better squires of the era in number, but our younger and cockiness in the desire to assert itself, though puny strength is not enough.
During the "great confrontation" when the Soviet Union and the United States is essentially divided the world into two camps, panting like two sumo wrestler, tried to push each other out of the coveted circle, everything was clear.
Both superpowers know and respect the rules of the game. They understood that a direct confrontation between them is unacceptable and carefully avoided such situations. I remember one day, Henry Kissinger, his favorite gesture took the tie Andrei Gromyko, took him aside, and in the ear said, "Here you left Cuba after the missile crisis, but left there mechanized brigade. You understand that we have never dealt a blow to this team, because the shed blood of your soldiers — then start a world war! ".
Crises were many, and in their scope, they were steeper, but the parties to exercise restraint and accuracy. Perhaps the only time we came together head-on during the Korean War, when our pilots jet fighters MiG-15 was successfully repulsed the Americans. But repeated attempts to curb U.S. Air Force aircraft to enter our airspace for serious conflicts is not even considered. "The offender went into the sea!" — Usually to communicate to the public, when the plane was shot down. Washington kept quiet because everyone understood how that cat, "whose meat is eaten."
Political leaders never seriously intended to use nuclear weapons, and the growth of nuclear arsenals, the main concern was the limitation of strategic offensive arms.
It was during the "cold war" was a direct telephone line Kremlin-White House to avoid any accidents that could be the spark for the explosion. Yes, we were the enemy forces, and preferred to be compared in the "third world", dragging the rope to his side, but avoid direct confrontation. There was mutually recognized "military parity", which dictated such a course of conduct.
The world has changed dramatically in the late eighties — early nineties, when the Soviet Union was dissolved, the Warsaw Pact, and Russia went into political oblivion, losing orientation in the surrounding area. Our missiles aimed to nowhere, all around us on all sides surrounded the "partners", we managed to give the U.S. more than 50,000 square kilometers of the Bering Sea, was nearly gave the southern Kurils. Our weight is a subject of world politics, was brought to a minimum.
Since that terrible then, we did not find a stable place in the new world coordinate system. We are still alive reflexes of a great power, but has lost its muscles.
Memorable turn the plane with the Foreign Minister Yevgeny Primakov on U.S. shores back in Russia, the theatrical cast Airborne Battalion to Pristina, where Westerners to solve their problems in the Balkans, ignoring Moscow — signs of our great-atavism and real powerlessness.
United States in the years to do whatever they please. The main meanness of them is the great deception: promised not to expand NATO to the East as a sign of gratitude for our withdrawal from Eastern and Central Europe, they treacherously lured there by the year 2004 all the Baltic states, as well as the Czech Republic, Poland, Hungary, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia and Bulgaria, and even began to drag Georgia and Ukraine. But this — their corporate style. It is clearly visible for the example of the West in Kosovo, Iraq and Afghanistan.
National self-interest is the norm of U.S. behavior in the international arena. After the events of September 11, 2001 scared to loss of common sense to the American political establishment insisted on unilateral U.S. withdrawal from the ABM Treaty of 1972, which dramatically spoiled the atmosphere in the relations between our two countries.
Well-known American economist and political scientist Paul Craig Roberts in 2009 observed: "It can hardly be called a U.S. policy towards Russia responsible and cautious, it is irresponsible and aggressive."
Washington does not understand the principle of real partnership of equality, because of the existence of the United States with anyone and never built their relationship on this basis. All of their contractors, they will certainly consider lower in rank and weight. This historical legacy imposes an indelible mark on the mentality of the political elite. And even if the chair of the U.S. President is a man with a broader perspective on the world and historical perspective, the establishment will inevitably play a role inhibiting ballast. So it was with Abraham Lincoln, F. Roosevelt, John F. Kennedy. Now the White House is not sitting very fierce hawk, and quite sane Barack Obama. He, as we have reported, in particular, was against the adoption of the "Magnitsky Act", but the U.S. president is not all-powerful, he can not overcome the resistance of the Congress — the heaviest inertial body of the American political machine. To be reckoned with these features the United States.
Russia began to find themselves only with the arrival of Vladimir Putin to the Kremlin, and this was particularly evident during his second term. The most significant milestone was his speech in Munich, February 10, 2007, when he publicly gave an objective assessment of the actions of the West in the international arena and clearly outlined the position of independent Russia. It was so unusual that the U.S. started talking about the beginning of a new phase of the "cold war." But in Russia, many do not understand their president: a large part of our political establishment, related their personal financial and business relations with the United States, began to search for a new center of power. Showered with talk of a possible split in the Russian elite. All this, taken together, affect the foreign policy of Russia, which is inherent in more reactive than the quality of thought, the system concept. We can, on the one hand, firmly and resolutely rebuff Georgian adventure in South Ossetia, actively supported by Washington and the West in general, but on the other — to give a "green light" to the U.S. and Western aggression in Libya.
Let's be frank: the solid foundation of rela
tionship between Russia and the United States is not, and therefore there is no reason to speak in a normal full partnership.
U.S. twice surpass us in terms of population, 10 times the size of GDP, 30 times — on the military budget, they have gone far ahead in the development of scientific and technological capacity.
We are de jure as an independent sovereign state and we have a significant nuclear missile fist that for the time guarantees the inviolability of its sovereignty. We have no ideological and political incompatibility as in Soviet times, but by itself it makes no geopolitical advantage in the competitive world.
Economic relations between Russia and the United States is poorly developed, considering the size and potential of our countries. Russian exports to the U.S. consist mainly of oil and oil products, as Americans hold almost a third of all investment in our oil industry. We export to the U.S. market metals, fertilizers, precious stones and other small things. In a good year scraped 25-30 billion dollars. We buy three times less than the cost: vehicles, machinery, and some to shame and food. Among the U.S. foreign trade partners Russia takes 23rd place. That's all the "foundation".
How many years have we loudly call upon the U.S. investors to come to Russia, but the result is trifling. In addition to the fuel and energy unit, a pair of car assembly plants, but small bridgehead in the banking and insurance sector we do not have American capital.
And how many times the American business tycoon thrown into the eyes of our greeters at international forums, "That's when you are going to invest your money in your economy is, then, perhaps, we will come!".
But in today's world, everything is solved in the economy — is the main battlefield where victory forged and trampled down the losers.
The current Russian-American relations are filled with numerous conflict zones, sometimes wearing a minor, if at all pustyashny character. U.S. Ambassador to Russia Michael McFaul on March 19 during a visit to St. Petersburg, met with the local community. His bombarded with questions about the difficulties in Russian-American relations, and he said: "For me, there is a topic of Syria, is the subject of adoption, but there is no topic of apartments and houses for your senators and deputies in the United States. We are an open society. " And then, being angry, said: "Two plus two is four. If we can not agree on this, we can not agree on anything! ".
Let's walk through this "conflict" zones.
The missile defense.
Americans are obsessed with the idea of making their country is invulnerable to any weapon that could hypothetically be used against any U.S. state or group of states. This idea has fallen ill late President Ronald Reagan, but it has infected the entire country. Since then, the victorious Americans on movie screens beat all comers to their miracle weapon to save yourself and your lifestyle. But that's flying around the earth asteroids inspire Americans to the same terror as the other "neprodvinutye" earthlings. More than 30 years have passed since birth the idea of "Star Wars," spent hundreds of billions of dollars, and the end result is just as far as the horizon for a person lost in the desert. There is still no solution to the problem of global security, and it is unlikely to be found taking into account the improvement of the means of attack. The experience of history teaches a means of attack always goes before remedy. Our military experts and specialists from the Institute of USA and Canada believe that we should not get hung up on the debate about missile defense. Not as difficult as it is painted.
The problem of Syria.
U.S. somehow believe that "non-constructive" Russia's position prevents the solution of the crisis. They forget that Russia is not alone in his assessment of the situation, stick to the same line of Beijing and other countries. The Americans are developing a military solution removal of Bashar al-Assad from power by the Libyan scenario. Their military report that everything is calculated and prepared. Russia, taught by bitter experience, sees the solution to the problems in negotiating a peace settlement with the participation of all concerned Syrian parties, without the pressure and threats from the outside. UN and the great powers should use their influence to encourage all parties to the negotiating table. In the end, such a scenario could become standard for other possible crises.
Choosing between violence and a lot of blood on the one hand, and the negotiations on the other, the preference should be given to the second way. Syrian problem — rather, it is a worldwide concern than the Russian-American.
Iran.How many copies of broken during the long battles over the issue of Tehran's nuclear program! The best part of our, and the world public had the impression that the views of the United States and the Russian Federation on this issue are different. But recently the press secretary, Dmitry Peskov, Putin told an American journalist and publisher Paul Saunders: "In fact, we are in the same position as our American partners on Iran, so that in the strategic plan, we share one and the the same value. We do not want to endanger the non-proliferation regime, but at the same time, we recognize the right of Iranians to peaceful nuclear energy. " Moscow believes that it is necessary to conduct diplomatic dialogue with Tehran, using our collective influence on him.
Iran's position has also long been known. Publicly and bilaterally Iranians convince the U.S. that they do not produce atomic weapons, and work on programs that the peaceful use of nuclear energy. But the United States are under tremendous pressure from Israel, who, possessing nuclear weapons, most of all fears that the region will be another state with the same arsenal. Therefore, they insist that Tehran was deprived of "the possibility of producing a nuclear weapon," that is, the pre-emptive strike on Iran's production capacity. U.S. wittingly or unwittingly helped Israel acquire atomic weapons — in an American prison to this day sits Israeli spy Jonathan Pollard, who dealt with atomic espionage. Now their concern — soothe and restrain Israeli "hawks."
I believe that the first step to establishing a lasting peace in the Middle East must be the announcement of the nuclear-free zone in the region of the world — on the model of Latin America.
"The concern in the U.S. about the indoor climate in Russia" — a formula in vogue among American politicians and journalists.We have it more often and closer to the sense of call "interference in the internal affairs of Russia." There really is a problem that is unlikely to dissipate soon. In Soviet times it was called the dissident movement, she now took the form of "non-system opposition", whose members also travel to the U.S., get out of there political and financial support, are made in a variety of non-profit organizations with which the Russian government is quiet but persistent struggle. America, its Congress and journalists consider their lifestyle the best in the land, and actively try to export it to other countries. An exception is made for those who are 100 percent agree to play by American rules in the world, such as Middle Eastern monarchies, dictatorships in Latin America, Africa … the Soviet Union, and now Russia — a favorite destination for American teachings on "how to live" .
Overseas "mentors" can not understand that our states and peoples have different histories, different traditions, different ethnic and religious composition. We are in different stages of socio-economic and democratic development. They do not know our saying "In Rome do as the Romans do." It is quite understandable that a rebuke that I gave D. Sands mentioned in a conversation with P. Saunders, saying: "Those concerns you mentioned, we can not take into account, and will not be taken into account, because it is our internal affairs our internal policies. We — a democratic country that shares the values of the whole world, but we are a country that will solve all their problems, the inner and the like, without any interference from abroad. "
It's all clear. With this chronic sore for both of us — the United States and Russia — will live long.
To facilitate mutual inconvenience would be well advised to our American counterparts do not use double standards apply the same criteria to all the nations of the world without exception.
Selective use of his interpretations of "democracy" and "human rights" issues a desire not to fight for the triumph of these principles in the world and continue to cling to the technology of the "cold war."
We can mention a few points where our relationship with the U.S. "spark" — North Korea near the Russian foreign countries, the question of Palestine, Venezuela. But we will not find anywhere else such a clash of vital interests of the U.S. and Russia, which would justify the periodic onset of frost in our relations.
Especially for the Century