Energy-rich Russia flexing its muscles abroad

Commentary

By THOMAS FEDYSZYN
The Group of 8 (G8) summit in St. Petersburg last weekend let Russian President Vladimir Putin show a beautiful city to world leaders. More important, it let him show a new and reinvigorated Russian foreign policy _ one no longer subservient to Western economic or military strength.

Russia has been an enigma to American policymakers for nearly a century, sometimes viewed as a mirror-imaged soul mate, sometimes as a mortal enemy. After the collapse of the Soviet Union and the 1990s implosion of the Russian economy, it mattered little which view America took. Today, however, things are different.

As the world's leading energy exporter, Russia has seen its fortunes wax over the last several years, particularly since the American-led invasion of Iraq. The recent surge in oil prices, provoked by U.S. foes in Iran and North Korea, can only delight the Russian president. So though Russia may not yet deserve its membership in the exclusive G8 club, Moscow has adopted an air of self-assurance not seen since the Cold War.

On the positive side, the influx of petrodollars has let Russia continue its movement to fully joining the world's economy. For example, its new wealth enabled Moscow to render the ruble a fully convertible currency, thereby making Russian enterprises much more attractive to foreign capital.

Conversely, Russia's petrodollars support a more aggressive arms-export policy, represented by the recent sale of jet-fighter aircraft and small arms to Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez. Additionally, for the first time in decades, Russian and Chinese troops last fall conducted military operations together. They did so under the auspices of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, an Asian group aimed at balancing American influence in the region.

In other moves contrary to U.S. wishes, Putin has tightened his control of the Russian media, muzzled domestic critics and otherwise consolidated his power.

Perhaps the most unsettling outcome of Russia's new hubris is its position on international terrorism. In apparent response to insurgents' recent executions of four Russian diplomats in Baghdad by al Qaeda-linked terrorists _ for which the Russian parliament blamed the United States _ Putin asked his Federation Council to rubber-stamp the use of security forces outside Russia, in an antiterrorist offensive. Russia already has troops deployed in neighboring Georgia, partly in support of separatists and partly because Moscow thinks Georgia has done too little to thwart Chechen guerrillas. Tensions between Russia and Georgia are rising and could easily result in armed conflict.

Georgia's decision to side with NATO and the United States on important security and economic issues has also upset Russia. Similar issues played out in the Baltics a decade ago. Then, Russia threatened but ultimately backed down as Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia joined the Western alliance. However, that was the impoverished and insecure Russia of the 1990s.

Today, Russia is much less likely to accede to the whims of a former satellite in the "near abroad." Under the cover of fighting international terrorism, Russia may plan to militarily engage a recalcitrant neighbor, notwithstanding President Bush's recent praise for Georgia's "Rose Revolution."

Russia knows that playing the energy card too aggressively will meet with G8 resistance, such as that shown last fall when Russia tried to blackmail Ukraine. However, world leaders must brace themselves to deal with a rich, confident Russia, which will no longer acquiesce in Western security or economic demands.

Whether genuine or just another Potemkin Village, every move by Putin is a sign that he will act as if Russia has returned to center stage. As this brings Russia into the world economy, so much the better; as it fuels the flames of Russian nationalism and unilateral adventurism, beware.

(Thomas Fedyszyn, a retired U.S. Navy captain, is a professor of national-security affairs at the U.S. Naval War College. In 1998-2000, he was chief of Russian and Ukrainian affairs at NATO, and in 1996-98 he was naval attache at the U.S. Embassy in Moscow. The views here are his own and do not necessarily reflect those of the War College or any other U.S. agency.)

__._,_.___

Complete archives at http://www.sitbot.net/

Please let us stay on topic and be civil.

OM





SPONSORED LINKS
United state bankruptcy court western district of texas United state life insurance United state patent
United state patent search United states patent office United state flag


YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS




__,_._,___

Reply via email to