The prospect of cooperation with the West remains open for Russia and Russian citizens, and if they made certain arrangements, it will be a real success.
May 25 following the meeting with President Donald trump the President of the European Council Donald Tusk said that the European Union and the United States have disagreements about Russia.
Although the details of these differences are not disclosed, we can assume that trump is a more cautious attitude towards Russia than Tusk, despite a scandal about the relations of Russia with the White house.
According to the American Agency Bloomberg, some sources indicate that Russia has to trump some impact, but it could mean that trump is still committed to the idea that it may establish working contacts with Russian President Vladimir Putin.
However, what kind of character would have these contacts, it is still not clear. This question is more complicated than a simple ideological dilemma on how to appease the Russian regime and to protect American military and economic interests. The key issue is whether the United States is to build long-term relations with Russia, so they evolved and after will expire on presidential terms Donald trump and his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin.
The answer to this question can be negative. Some enemies of Putin, especially in the Ukraine, I hope that his corrupt, dependent on oil, the regime will lead Russia to a collapse and split, as happened with the Soviet Union, so no need to build a relationship with her for the long term, because all that is required in this case is to have a strategic patience and the result will be achieved.
Harsh economic sanctions and pressure on oil prices in the end should contribute to Russia’s enemies their own purposes, but it can have serious consequences. So already in the past when Western leaders feared the collapse of the Soviet Union, because he believed that it would become a threat to global stability. Time showed that their fears were exaggerated. So, the mafia is not acquired Russian nuclear weapons, there was no wars in the post-Soviet space like the one that erupted in Yugoslavia.
A waiting game the destruction of Russia inside the similar tactics of the Komodo dragon, which bites its victim and let the poison in her blood. Then this giant lizard watching her victim until she bleeds out. The problem with this approach is that the hunting of the dragon ends when the victim dies, but Russia will not die, even if will be destroyed. Anyway, the fact that Russia will collapse, highly unlikely, because its economy is more flexible than the economy of the Soviet Union.
With the collapse of the Russian Federation, the United States will have to establish relationships with many resource-rich regions, but their political inclinations and military motives are unpredictable. However, States that after the collapse of the Soviet Union, began to focus on the Western States, were a minority, even after all the efforts made by US for twenty-five years. The view that after the collapse of Russia, it will be easier to deal with, is mistaken, especially when you consider that then it will be more susceptible to the threat of Islamic fundamentalism than Western countries.
Thus, probably, the idea of identifying with Russia long-term relationships based on acceptance of the fact that this country will continue to exist for some period of time, is not so bad.
© AFP 2017, Benoit Doppagne / BelgaПрезидент of France Emmanuel macron, Prime Minister of Belgium Charles Michel, NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg
The United States may prefer to perceive Russia as a geopolitical competitor, which poses a threat to Western values, and as a country that can have a destructive influence on the electoral process in many countries. In the end, the old traditions, which protects Putin, are traditions of Russians for many centuries, and they will not disappear with the disappearance of Putin.
The Russian President decided to make these traditions the essence of Russia and to fight to turn it from a short-term phenomenon in politics in a clear and principled position.
Thus, all you need to do to the United States, it is a conclusive way to show and prove that they can use the power regardless of who is in charge of Russia, Putin or someone else. However, it is unclear whether the United States to apply this approach every time when Russia is pursuing a provocative policy.
Increase or decrease the popularity of the US administration after the decision on the intervention in Syria to overthrow Bashar al-Assad? How many American voters would support a military adventure of the USA in Ukraine?
It is obvious that the reckless American policy is not seen in Moscow as a credible proposal. Putin is always willing to go the extra step, because his policy does not reject democratic reforms, and the likelihood that Russia in the future there will be leaders like him, is negligible.
There is an alternative tactic of the Komodo dragon approach. It is to be overlooked the fact that Putin is considering the Orthodox conservatism of Russia as a bulwark against Western threats, and eventually begin to consider Russia part of Western civilization.
From this point of view it is possible to build a clear strategy, which involves cooperation with Russia when it acts as a Western state. For example, Russia’s support for the secular regime of Bashar al-Assad in the fight against Islamist groups to Western tradition. Despite all the crimes committed by Assad, the fall of the Syrian regime could lead to the fact that non-Sunni communities in Syria remain without any protection.
If Russia will support Assad and act as his ally in the war against ISIS (banned in Russia — approx. ed.), this would not conflict with current American practice support regimes in the middle East that have affected the “Arab spring”, as well as the practice of creating alliances with repressive Gulf States. On the other hand, the United States is not bound by any moral or ideological commitments to support the Syrian opposition.
In contrast, the seizure of territory in Ukraine had been carried out against Western traditions. In addition, after these events, the United States had the right to attempt economic and institutional strengthening of Ukraine, despite the fact that they made a mistake in the choice of political forces, which were supported. However, the corruption in the current Ukrainian leadership threatens the influence of Western values in this country. However, the refusal of the US to provide weapons to the regime in Kiev was the right decision, because the armament of the regime could contribute to the escalation of the conflict, which in turn could harm the Western world.
Russia is working to ensure that the major free trade zones and open borders, as evidenced by her attempts to create a customs Union with the States of the former Soviet Union, as well as a positive attitude towards migration. In addition, we should support the desire of Russia, despite the political obstacles to extract as many benefits from membership in the world trade organization. However, economic sanctions are pushing Putin to take revenge, that is pushing the country in the opposite West direction.
© RIA Novosti, Alexei vitvitskiy | go to potbanging supporters of the European Union in Rome
The fact that economic sanctions had negative consequences for the Russian state and Russian companies. As a consequence, the West needs to soften visa policy to provide Russian citizens with the opportunity to study in Western universities and work in Western companies.
The real reason why the European Union has such a policy in relation to Ukrainian citizens, is not what it should reward the government of Ukraine for good behavior, and the desire to give the Ukrainians the opportunity to adopt the Western way of life to learn Western norms and rules and set them in Ukraine. Russian citizens must also be a possibility, if their government cannot provide them an alternative.
The agreement on Syria, an increase in the volume of trade, the easing of the visa policy so that the Russians could repeat the Ukrainian scenario of rapprochement with the West, the extension of sanctions against Russian officials, as well as the struggle with the Russian state propaganda is for many people a very controversial policy. However, because the interaction with the current Russian leadership is only necessary in an amount sufficient to maintain in the long term point of view, that Russia is part of the West.
The Russian regime is willing to change to a greater extent than most Western countries, however, the modes are constantly changing, and society is not, therefore, necessary to keep the door open for Russia and Russians. If certain conditions are fulfilled, in the future this policy will be a big success.