Skip to main content

Lost Russia

As the hapless George W. Bush and the venomous Vladimir Putin gather for a summit at Kennebunkport, there is a sense of lost glories. These summits are no longer the peace or war, life or death discussions that they were under the cold war. However that is not to say that the meeting could not have some highly significant consequences. Particularly if Dubya repeats his "I looked into his soul" stuff from their first meeting in Ljubljana.

The fact is that Putin is a despot at home and an aggressive expansionist abroad. The American idea of who "lost" Russia, as laid out by Marshall Goldman in this piece, is very dangerous. It is not a question whether Dubya lost Russia- in fact Russia never truly joined the West, and is certainly not a part of it now. The US, as a part of NATO, has treaty commitments to countries that Russia has explicitly and dramatically threatened- as Estonia's President Ilves will have have reminded the Administration when he visited Washington last week.

The repeated use of illegal and aggressive measures has already put Putin's Russia beyond the pale. It is not the case that friendly concessions from the West will be reciprocated, rather they will be treated as signs of weakness. Therefore the West must return to its traditional policy of "containment": recognising that Russian intentions towards third parties are likely to be malign to the interests of democratic powers.

We have already woken up to the attempts by Russia to split NATO by alternately isolating then rewarding different members- with the exception of the UK, whose anger at Litvinenko's murder is not so easily stilled.

The shear brutality of Russian policy in recent weeks has already placed dramatic strain on the political connections between the West and Russia. However, the failure to adhere to minimum standards of rule of law has also undermined Russian attempts to attract inward investment. Although BP managed to make a profit (largely by ensuring a strong dividend flow) , the fact that even BP has failed to secure its position, despite clear commitments and legal contracts, has warned off many other investors. Although some may say that capitalists will always chase a profit, the fact is that the real issue is risk-reward, and unless the rewards of doing business are absolutely stellar, the risks are simply insurmountable for most major direct investment- as the withdrawal of DSG, the British retailer, from a proposed investment in Russia has shown quite clearly.

Bush is a discredited President, and any supposed "historic deal" that he may emerge with from his discussions with the Russian leader will more likely reflect his own weaknesses than any significant improvement in Russo-American relations. We watch with interest and concern.

Comments

So? said…
How do you propose to contain Russia? What does containment mean? During the Cold War the Soviet Union had little to offer, except ideology, which was superficially attractive to the commoners, liberal arts academics and their snot-nosed students, but a threat to the elites (can you say "redistribution of wealth"?). Unless a society is totally unstable (war, famine, plague, etc.), all large changes are caused by the actions of at least some part of the elite. So the Soviet Union was an easy threat to rally against for all the Western elites. What threat does Russian money and energy offer to these elites now? Notice how the most anti-Russian voices in the West are American, since they have the least direct investment in Russia? I'm sure if you clinched a gread deal in Russia, you'd be praising, or at least, tolerating her.

Popular posts from this blog

Concert and Blues

Tallinn is full tonight... Big concerts on at the Song field The Weeknd and Bonnie Tyler (!). The place is buzzing and some sixty thousand concert goers have booked every bed for thirty miles around Tallinn. It should be a busy high summer, but it isn´t. Tourism is down sharply overall. Only 70 cruise ships calling this season, versus over 300 before Ukraine. Since no one goes to St Pete, demand has fallen, and of course people think that Estonia is not safe. We are tired. The economy is still under big pressure, and the fall of tourism is a significant part of that. The credit rating for Estonia has been downgraded as the government struggles with spending. The summer has been a little gloomy, and soon the long and slow autumn will drift into the dark of the year. Yesterday I met with more refugees: the usual horrible stories, the usual tears. I try to make myself immune, but I can´t. These people are wounded in spirit, carrying their grief in a terrible cradling. I try to project hop

Media misdirection

In the small print of the UK budget we find that the Chancellor of the Exchequer (the British Finance Minister) has allocated a further 15 billion Pounds to the funding for the UK track and trace system. This means that the cost of the UK´s track and trace system is now 37 billion Pounds.  That is approximately €43 billion or US$51 billion, which is to say that it is amount of money greater than the national GDP of over 110 countries, or if you prefer, it is roughly the same number as the combined GDP of the 34 smallest economies of the planet.  As at December 2020, 70% of the contracts for the track and trace system were awarded by the Conservative government without a competitive tender being made . The program is overseen by Dido Harding , who is not only a Conservative Life Peer, but the wife of a Conservative MP, John Penrose, and a contemporary of David Cameron and Boris Johnson at Oxford. Many of these untendered contracts have been given to companies that seem to have no notewo

Bournemouth absence

Although I had hoped to get down to the Liberal Democrat conference in Bournemouth this year, simple pressure of work has now made that impossible. I must admit to great disappointment. The last conference before the General Election was always likely to show a few fireworks, and indeed the conference has attracted more headlines than any other over the past three years. Some of these headlines show a significant change of course in terms of economic policy. Scepticism about the size of government expenditure has given way to concern and now it is clear that reducing government expenditure will need to be the most urgent priority of the next government. So far it has been the Liberal Democrats that have made the running, and although the Conservatives are now belatedly recognising that cuts will be required they continue to fail to provide even the slightest detail as to what they think should guide their decisions in this area. This political cowardice means that we are expected to ch