My profile:
 | |
|
To Our Readers |
|
The Moscow Times welcomes letters to the editor. Letters for publication should be signed and bear the signatory's address and telephone number.
| |
| | |
As a matter of fact, the U.S. president’s visit this month was a positive step along the difficult path of improving U.S.-Russian relations. Recall how former U.S. President Bill Clinton behaved during his visits to Moscow. He spoke as a patron educating the young, naive Russians on the ways of democracy and the market economy. He was followed by former U.S. President George W. Bush, who behaved like the arrogant boss of the whole planet. Bush turned a deaf ear to requests and complaints coming from Russians and other “provincials,” and became upset when any of them acted willfully.
Obama spoke to Russian leaders as equals in a manner befitting the leaders of sovereign states. The U.S. president could not behave otherwise; after all, Bush’s grandiose plan to build a Pax Americana, a global empire led by the United States, came crashing down with a bang. The United States, overburdened by its attempt to shoulder world hegemony, collapsed and fell into the clutches of a severe crisis affecting both domestic and foreign affairs.
The United States must undergo its own perestroika, and American voters put Obama in the White House because of his realization of the need for change and determination to carry it out. Of course, the United States is like a huge ocean liner, and its course cannot be changed quickly. But Obama is trying, and this includes efforts to improve U.S.-Russian relations.
Thanks to this and a corresponding attitude on behalf of the Russian leadership, concrete results were achieved during their first full-fledged negotiations. The leaders renewed the process of a balanced reduction to nuclear weapons and reiterated their commitment to enforcing nuclear nonproliferation. The summit produced a new level of cooperation on Afghanistan. Washington has expressed its willingness to take Moscow’s concerns regarding missile defense into account. It is also clear that Obama has no intention of lecturing or judging Russia on its political life.
Of course, Washington and Moscow continue to disagree over the former Soviet republics, and will likely remain rivals in that region. But Russia must understand that even the United States and Europe together cannot replace it or crowd it out of that region as long as it establishes proper relations with its former fellow republics. This includes acknowledging the right of the young states to strengthen their sovereignty and territorial integrity and to expand their ties with other countries, including those in the West. It also means that Russia must take a sincere and active interest in the progress and prosperity of all of its neighbors, demonstrating impartiality in disputes between the former Soviet republics and with regard to their internal problems.
Some people might object by pointing out that various former Soviet states are behaving improperly. That is true.
But Russia’s goal should not be to show them who is bigger and stronger but to earn their respect and trust so that they come to view Russia as a positive leader.
A true leader is one who conducts himself with integrity and flexibility, and who is willing to forgive the shortcomings of those around him.
What’s more, if Russia achieves major progress in its economic, scientific, technological and cultural development, and if it succeeds in building a democratic society, its neighbors — and even the United States — will naturally want to establish closer ties. When that happens, the need to “reset” relations will no longer exist.
Yevgeny Bazhanov is the vice chancellor of research and international relations at the Foreign Ministry’s Diplomatic Academy in Moscow.
