Jewel Samand/Getty Images
By Anya Degtyarenko
NEW YORK, Sept. 27 — Russian President Vladimir Putin’s address to the U.N. General Assembly on Monday will be his first such appearance since 2005. Putin’s aides have billed the speech as a bold proposal that could provide a way out of the Syrian crisis. In fact, by changing to topic of conversation from Ukraine to Syria, Putin the would-be peacemaker sees “a golden opportunity,” as New York Times noted last week, to serve his strategic goals.
For the most of the world, Syria is a scene of tragedy. Russia’s perspective is unique, however, as one of the few major powers (Iran being the other) that supports the regime of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. The US and others have consistently rejected the notion that support for Assad is the best way to counter the rise of the bloody fanatics of the Islamic State (ISIS). Putin, we can assume, will insist on disagreeing at the UN this week.
The details of Putin’s address remain secret but the goal of breaking the two-year isolation of Russia appeared to be well on the way to being achieved. On Thursday, President Barack Obama agreed to what the White House said were "repeated requests" for a meeting with Vladimir Putin. The two leaders were reported to have their formal meeting on the margins of the United Nations General Assembly on Monday.
“Until the beginning of the Russian operation in Syria, the US-Russia relationship looked like chess game, in which one player does not pay attention to the board in general (USA), and the other party is constantly moving and hustling to draw attention to yourself, ” said Vasily Gatov, Senior Fellow of USC Annenberg Center on Communication Leadership & Policy. He added that while Syria is an important argument in the equation, this is not exactly a transformative attention and American policy is not going to change.”
Igor Mintusov, Russian political consultant and professional manager of election campaigns, agreed.“For Putin, the Syria issue is the reason to meet with Obama while for Obama, it is the reason to attend the meeting.” “Until the beginning of the Russian operation in Syria, the US-Russia relationship looked like chess game, in which one player does not pay attention to the board in general (USA), and the other party is constantly moving and hustling to draw attention to yourself, ” said Vasily Gatov, Senior Fellow of USC Annenberg Center on Communication Leadership & Policy. He added that while Syria is an important argument in the equation, this is not exactly a transformative attention and American policy is not going to change.”
Coincide general consensus exists among Russian affairs experts that no smooth way forward exists for US-Russia relations in spite of Putin’s recent diplomatic efforts. Award-winning journalist and Russian affairs analyst Andrew Nagorski considers that Putin's speech at the UN or his meeting with Obama won’t change anything fundamentally in the US-Russia relationship: “It's a transparent attempt by Putin to try to demonstrate that Russia still counts on the world scene. His country and its citizens are paying the price for those destructive policies.” Nagorski remarked the irony of that Putin “had many chances early in his rule to work with the West and the rest of the world to promote an agenda that would be a win-win situation.” And regardless of the UN speech, “those are all blown chances now.”
The prominent Russian political consultant Evgeny Minchenko claimed that “we find ourselves in a situation of the New Cold War, which is not easy to get out.” Evgeny pointed out that the talks are less likely to improve the relationships: “Americans pay much more attention to overthrow Assad. So the role of Putin, who protects the illegitimate government of Syria, can only be seen as negative.” He also proposed that while Obama’s mandate is almost over, Putin is going to run for another term in 2018 and probably stay until 2024. Mark Galeotti, an expert in transnational crime and Russian security affairs, is skeptical about progress between Putin and Obama. “Moscow will need to make some substantive moves over the Donbas (Eastern Ukraine) before there can be any greater reward,” Mark explained that out of the talks with Washington. He expected Putin to push but for Obama to hold the line because “after all, it rankles that at present the Americans are treating Moscow as even more of a pariah than Tehran.”
Meanwhile, far from the halls of power, communities of ethnic Russians and Ukrainians worldwide are waiting for the outcome of Putin’s speech. In New York, “A Stand Up To Putin at the UN” rally got under way at 10 a.m. on Sunday, the morning before the speech. Another rally was to take place when Putin starts his speech on Monday. Vera Golubkova, who attended the Sunday protest, said: “For me it is first of all an act of solidarity with Ukrainians. I was born and raised in Russia. There is a lot of tension not just between Russian and Ukraine, but also between Russian and Ukrainian communities in the US. It is important for me to let local Ukrainians know that not all Russians have lost their minds.”
Considering the described troubling factors in the history of US-Russia relations, the tension is evident. Expert opinion hints towards a quite negative perspective of the relations. The opinion of Russian and Eastern European immigrants, however, does not represent the opinion of Russian citizens, who hope to benefit from Putin’s diplomacy. The war against ISIS is the point where US and Russian interests intersect and explain the willingness of Washington to understand Putin’s decisions. The negotiations on Syria cannot, however, compromise Putin’s intervention in Ukraine. The situation is likely to remain painful and “frozen” until time and, possibly, the results of the upcoming presidential elections in both countries push some major shift towards progress.
Very informative article, I love Andrew Nagorski's quotes!
ReplyDelete