Not quite detente yet, but it's a start.

Commentary, prepared by the editorial team of commonspace.eu

Russian officials delighted with Kerry-Putin meeting, amid nostalgia for cold-war style diplomacy that recognised Russia's superpower status

There is one bit of cold-war nostalgia that senior Russian officials and diplomats constantly hanker for. It is the time when the US and the USSR were the two undisputed superpowers in the world and their two leaders could sit together and decide any issue in the world whilst still holding the nuclear button to each other's head. "Ah, those were the days, when Russians and Americans could talk to each other as equals", some could be heard saying. According to some Russian propoganidsts what has happened since 1991 has been one big misunderstanding. Soon the world will come to its senses, and Russian power will be recognised once more.

This mindset partly explains Russian excitement and glee at yesterday's visit to Sochi of US Secretary of State John Kerry, and his meeting with President Putin - the first since the Ukraine crisis erupted.

Officially, the Kremlin was not euphoric, but it could hardly hide its pleasure either. The Russian News Agency Itar-Tass reported that Russian Presidential aide Yuri Ushakov stated that the Kremlin does not qualify talks of Russian President Vladimir Putin and US Secretary of State John Kerry as a breakthrough, but as first signs of understanding that the two great powers should get their relations back on track. "Our president proceeded in the conversation from our fundamental interest in seeing bilateral relations get back to normal," Ushakov said. "As it was emphasized, it meets the interests of Russia, and we hope the interests of the US, and is extremely important from the point of view of ensuring international stability and security," he added. "Proceeding from this, we consider the talks very useful, necessary and positive," he added.

Ushakov said the talks had been long, open, quite friendly and businesslike. He said Kerry had relayed regards from the U.S. president to Putin. He quoted Kerry as saying President Obama was very interested in Putin's receiving the state secretary. There was no written message, he added. Ushakov also said a meeting of the two countries' leaders was not discussed at talks, although possibilities for that did exist.

Earlier the Russian Foreign Ministry had spelled out the Russian position even more clearly,saying that Russia is ready for constructive interaction with the United States, but on an equal basis.

There is ofcourse much to be said for respect and equality in relations between any two states. That Russia should demand this from the United States is not surprising, nor unreasonable. But there is a sub text to the Russian rhetoric, namely that the United States and Russia should return to a time when they could decide the fate of nations, without these other nations having much say in the matter. A country that has just occupied and annexed part of its neighbours' territory, as Russia did in Crimea last year, may very well seek such a way of doing international relations. The United States must not succumb to these temptations. That is not to say that US diplomacy should not be talking to the Russian side on all issues, at the highest levels. Dialogue is an important part of a process to resolve international crisis. European leaders have also continued talking to the Russians after the start of the Ukraine crisis, and that is not only understandable but also desireable. But there should be no deals on the fate of smaller countries behind their backs.

There are many issues, including on the European continent, which require the goodwill of both Russia and the United States if they are to be resolved. Ukraine is one example, others are Nagorno-Karabakh and other conflicts in the post Soviet space. There is a framework in which these issues need to be discussed and action for their resolution taken - it is the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE). One hopes that in their re-energised dialogue Russia and the United States will find time to discuss how they can make the OSCE a meaningful framework once more, and how they can bring in back respect for the principles and norms that underpin that organisation.

This commentary was prepared by the editorial team of commonspace.eu.

photo: President Putin greeting US Secretary of State John Kerry in Sochi on Tuesday, 12 May 2015. (picture courtesy of Itar-Tass).

 

Related articles

Editor's choice
News
Landmines present to the European Union both a contradiction and a dilemma

Landmines present to the European Union both a contradiction and a dilemma

Finland’s decision to buy one million landmines creates a serious contradiction in the policy of the European Union, and is symbolic of a bigger dilemma facing European countries as they get used to the need to acquire “hard” power to face an increasing threat from Russia. Finland is seeking to acquire one million anti-personnel mines at a cost of 100 million euros. Finland, together with Poland, Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia last year abandoned the Ottawa agreement, the international framework that bans the use of anti-personnel mines, which the EU had been instrumental in establishing and supporting. All five countries cite the threat from Moscow as the reason. Colonel Riku Mikkonen of the Army Command told Finland’s national news agency STT that officials are now gathering information from suppliers regarding the deal, the AFP news agency reports. Helsinki would like domestic manufacturers to supply the mines, with contracts signed by the end of 2027 and production up and running by 2028. “It would be useful in many ways if Finnish companies produced the anti-personnel mines in Finland,” Mikkonen said. About half a dozen Finnish firms qualify, he told STT. “However, at this stage, buying the mines from abroad is not totally ruled out,” he added. LANDMINES PROVIDE THE EU WITH BOTH A CONTRADICTION, AND A DILEMMA Eliminating landmine contamination worldwide is one of the EU’s main soft power postures, and it basks in its record as the biggest funder of anti-landmine action in the world. But the fact that 5 of its 27 member states  have now left the Ottawa Treaty dents the EU moral high ground. It is a contradiction that is too big and important to be ignored. It also presents the European Union with a deeper dilemma. The threat from Russia is changing what the EU has stood for decades, namely a force for good able to mobilise its considerable soft power for the greater good of humanity. How the Union will implement this change will define its future. In the meantime landmines have not become any less lethal, benign, or unimportant. They remain in many parts of the world a major threat to life, an impediment to prosperity, and a potential trigger to further conflict. The 22 EU members states that still adhere to the Ottawa treaty must regroup, and be more assertive in their quest against anti-personnel land mines. All the reasons why they supported the Ottawa treaty in the first place still exist. The message must be clear: NO TO LANDMINES!
Editor's choice
News
Pashinyan says that he wants peace treaty with Azerbaijan by 2031

Pashinyan says that he wants peace treaty with Azerbaijan by 2031

Armenia should sign and ratify a peace treaty with Azerbaijan before 2031, Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan said. He described the objective as the top priority for his administration. Earlier, the Armenian prime minister also spoke about a possible land-swap with Azerbaijan Armenia and Azerbaijan should agree to establish a clear, conventional border without enclaves or exclaves, Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan said. Armenia controls three Azeri enclaves inside its borders while Baku controls one Armenian enclave – those could be subject to a land swap, Pashinyan announced.

Popular

Editor's choice
Interview
Thursday Interview: Murad Muradov

Thursday Interview: Murad Muradov

Today, commonspace.eu starts a new regular weekly series. THURSDAY INTERVIEW, conducted by Lauri Nikulainen, will host  persons who are thinkers, opinion shapers, and implementors in their countries and spheres. We start the series with an interview with Murad Muradov, a leading person in Azerbaijan's think tank community. He is also the first co-chair of the Action Committee for a new Armenian-Azerbaijani Dialogue. Last September he made history by being the first Azerbaijani civil society activist to visit Armenia after the 44 day war, and the start of the peace process. Speaking about this visit Murad Muradov said: "My experience was largely positive. My negative expectations luckily didn’t play out. The discussions were respectful, the panel format bringing together experts from Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Turkey was particularly valuable during the NATO Rose-Roth Seminar in Yerevan, and media coverage, while varied in tone, remained largely constructive. Some media outlets though attempted to represent me as more of a government mouthpiece than an independent expert, which was totally misleading.  Overall, I see these initiatives as important steps in rebuilding trust and normalising professional engagement. The fact that soon a larger Azerbaijani civil society visits to Armenia followed, reinforces the sense that this process is moving in the right direction." (click the image to read the interview in full)