Everyone loses if Russian-Amer...
Everyone loses if Russian-American relations slip into a new edition of the Cold War. To prevent this from happening, we must first of all abandon the rhetoric that is, unfortunately, gaining strength on both sides. This conclusion is obvious. And if we try to dive deeper into the situation, then, in the words of Francis Fukuyama, the foreign policy of the United States needs to '... gracefully cope with an unfavorable change in the global balance of power and a serious decrease in US influence in the world.' Regarding US-Russian ties, Fukuyama wrote: 'The United States has never viewed bilateral relations as a political bargaining game in which Americans might give up something they want in exchange for concessions to Russia. We behaved like the Englishman from the old joke: when talking to a foreigner and seeing that he is not understood, the Englishman begins to repeat his words louder.'
In the fall of 2008, there was increased attention to Russian issues in the United States. It's bad that this started after Russia was forced to defend its interests by force, and not silently listen to words increasingly loudly repeated against itself, as in the joke told by Fukuyama. All Russia needs is respectful, equal relations with the West. Those who believe that anti-Americanism is genetically embedded in Russian politics are mistaken. I will cite only two facts that seem to speak for themselves.
Iraq. If Russia had pursued an anti-American course, it would undoubtedly have taken advantage of the impasse in which the United States found itself in Iraq. After all, it is still fresh in memory how in Afghanistan the United States supported and armed the Mujahideen fighting against us. Can anyone blame Russia for doing the same in Iraq?
Iran. If Moscow had adhered, as during the Cold War, to a 'zero-sum game' (which is disadvantageous for the United States - in the interests of Russia, and vice versa), then perhaps there would have been someone in the Russian leadership who advised the president: let's do everything for the US to get involved and get stuck in Iran. Let us remember how even before the entry of Soviet troops into Afghanistan. Brzezinski advised the American president to supply the Mujahideen with 'Stingers' and arm them with modern weapons, so that the USSR would eventually be drawn into Afghanistan. Can anyone today accuse Russia of intending to help the United States get 'drawn' into Iran?
So what's the deal? Is the inertia of perceiving Russia as the heir to the USSR during the Cold War so strong? Obviously this is also the case. But the main thing is still different. In the 90s, talk spread in the United States that Russia's century was over. And suddenly Russia rises and declares itself as a full-fledged player in the international arena. It is obvious that she is no longer sleeping. She concentrates.
In the fall of 2008, there was increased attention to Russian issues in the United States. It's bad that this started after Russia was forced to defend its interests by force, and not silently listen to words increasingly loudly repeated against itself, as in the joke told by Fukuyama. All Russia needs is respectful, equal relations with the West. Those who believe that anti-Americanism is genetically embedded in Russian politics are mistaken. I will cite only two facts that seem to speak for themselves.
Iraq. If Russia had pursued an anti-American course, it would undoubtedly have taken advantage of the impasse in which the United States found itself in Iraq. After all, it is still fresh in memory how in Afghanistan the United States supported and armed the Mujahideen fighting against us. Can anyone blame Russia for doing the same in Iraq?
Iran. If Moscow had adhered, as during the Cold War, to a 'zero-sum game' (which is disadvantageous for the United States - in the interests of Russia, and vice versa), then perhaps there would have been someone in the Russian leadership who advised the president: let's do everything for the US to get involved and get stuck in Iran. Let us remember how even before the entry of Soviet troops into Afghanistan. Brzezinski advised the American president to supply the Mujahideen with 'Stingers' and arm them with modern weapons, so that the USSR would eventually be drawn into Afghanistan. Can anyone today accuse Russia of intending to help the United States get 'drawn' into Iran?
So what's the deal? Is the inertia of perceiving Russia as the heir to the USSR during the Cold War so strong? Obviously this is also the case. But the main thing is still different. In the 90s, talk spread in the United States that Russia's century was over. And suddenly Russia rises and declares itself as a full-fledged player in the international arena. It is obvious that she is no longer sleeping. She concentrates.
