Russia Is Much Smarter This Time

	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. Letters to the editor should be sent by fax to (7-495) 232-6529, by e-mail to [email protected], or by post. The Moscow Times reserves the right to edit letters. Email the Opinion Page Editor

Chinese Communist leader Mao Zedong loved to say, "The world's two superpowers, the Soviet Union and United States, collide and collude, and the more they collide, the more they collude." By all accounts, Mao's interpretation of relations between Moscow and Washington is still relevant today under Barack Obama's presidency.

Obama, who campaigned under the slogan "Change We Can Believe In," is serious about making fundamental changes to U.S. foreign policy, including its relations with Russia. To be sure, George W. Bush's hegemonic, unipolar approach to global affairs conflicts with Obama's basic political beliefs. Obama is not driven by "democratic fundamentalism" or neoconservatism, nor does he have the same close ties to the military-industrial complex, intelligence agencies or Texas oil magnates. What's more, the roughly 65 million Americans who voted for Obama are expecting him to institute real changes to U.S. foreign policy.

Regardless of Obama's convictions and background, the new global architecture would have objectively required the White House to change its foreign policy in any case following Bush's legacy. Even going back to the two U.S. administrations preceding Bush, the United States' global status was heavily boosted by one external factor -- the internal dissolution and voluntary capitulation of its arch rival, the Soviet Union -- although it didn't stop Americans from rejoicing that they "won" the Cold War.

Before the economic crisis, the United States was undoubtedly much stronger than any of its competitors, This inflated the perception in the Bush administration that the United States was the shining star of the civilized world -- the singular superpower with a moral mission to bring freedom and prosperity to other nations. Now, of course, these illusions have been shattered as the crisis has delivered a significant blow to the U.S. economy and its overly ambitious foreign policy agenda.

But this by no means implies that the Obama administration will give up the U.S. position as the dominant global leader. There has never been a case in history when the strongest, richest and most-developed nation in the world voluntarily gave up its predominant position, and Obama will certainly be no exception to this axiom. Although U.S. global ambitions will be less aggressive and messianic than during the two Bush terms, the United States will still continue to compete for prominent global leadership. This means that there will inevitably be more collisions with the other leader powers, including Russia, which are unwilling to accept the diminutive role as "junior partner" to Washington. The other main centers of power -- Russia, China and Europe -- all have equally legitimate claims to global leadership.

In addition, economic factors will continue to be the main driving force that shapes U.S. foreign policy. The United States will continue to compete for dominance in foreign markets, and the battle for control of energy resources and delivery routes will be particularly heated. This will undoubtedly lead to collisions with other competing powers.

It is important not to forget that the military-industrial complex remains a key factor behind Washington's aggressive foreign policy. Generals at the Pentagon have access to huge stockpiles of arms -- including state-of-the-art weapons and technology untested in real battle conditions, which they are itching to use. Therefore, the constant need to create enemies -- and provoke fights with them -- will continue.

Thus, Obama will be bogged down in a complex, self-contradictory battle between a new global reality of multipolarity and old hegemonic baggage that the United States can't completely get rid of. It is therefore understandable why Russia, which was burned badly by its blind euphoria with the United States in the early 1990s, will be skeptical about Obama's lofty promises of a fundamental change in U.S. foreign policy.

Although there are many opportunities to expand U.S.-Russian cooperation -- particularly in nuclear nonproliferation and fighting terrorism in Afghanistan -- conflicts between Moscow and Washington in the former Soviet republics are virtually inescapable. The United States, motivated by superpower ambitions and cold geopolitical calculations, will continue to embrace and support anti-Russian leaders in Georgia, Ukraine and other former Soviet republics. Russia will never come to terms with the American eagle sinking its talons into Russia's backyard. There can never be normal U.S.-Russian relations as long as this continues.

The current U.S.-Russian standoff in some ways is even worse than during the Cold War. From 1945 to 1991, Europe was sharply divided into two distinct zones of influence. During this period, Moscow and Washington did not cross into each other's backyard but collided in proxy battles in faraway places, such as in Vietnam, Congo and Yemen. (Afghanistan, which bordered the Soviet Union, was an exception.) The situation is completely different today, when the battle line runs right along Russian borders.

The United States will face serious problems as it attempts to strengthen its position globally. Washington will have to make tough -- and dangerous -- decisions on the Middle East, Afghanistan, Iran and Pakistan that will harden existing anti-U.S. sentiment in those regions.

We welcome the first positive signals coming from the Obama administration, but at the same time we don't feed ourselves with illusions that we there will be paradise under the new U.S. president. After the Cold War came to an end, we were all caught up in the same wave of optimism that quickly turned into deep disappointment. This time around, we won't be so naive.

Yevgeny Bazhanov is vice chancellor at the Foreign Ministry's Diplomatic Academy.