From Russia, With Love
Russia celebrates the Democratic victory.
by Igor Khrestin
11/09/2006 2:25:00 PM
WHILE THE EUROPEAN UNION "sighed with relief" and welcomed the "Canadians of American politics" back into control of Congress after a 12-year hiatus, Russian analysts and policymakers found themselves torn between Bush-bashing gleeful postmortems (a "great victory for democracy") and mild apprehension at the worsening state of bilateral affairs.
For its part, the Russian press largely hailed the political acumen of the American people. "America Returns to Democracy," declared the headline of the daily Izvestiya; Moskovskiy Komsomolets greeted the election results saying, "Hangover: Democracy Has Won in America." Komsomol'skaya Pravda had the most novel take: "Hussein's Harsh Revenge: Americans Rebuff the White House Team That Caused Carnage in Iraq."
Russian policymakers offered a more muted, but no less divisive, take on the electoral results. Speaking to a Russian radio station, Konstantin Kosachev, the head of the international affairs committee in the lower house of the Russian parliament (the Duma), speculated that a victory for the Democrats might be the key to a more balanced foreign policy. For Russia, he noted, "conflicts between the White House and Congress are, in some ways, more comfortable than their 'complete and universal' brotherhood."
But with bilateral relations descending to Cold War levels in the recent months, Democrats in control of key House committees may be the worst prescription for the Kremlin. In an interview to Komsomol'skaya Pravda, Sergei Markov, director of the Moscow-based Institute of Political Studies, stated that "there is a risk now that Moscow will become hostage to squabbles between a Republican president and a Democratic Congress." He added that Russia needed to "get ready" for tough criticism on press freedom, status of NGOs, interethnic relations, and human rights--that "favorite theme" of Democrats.
Historically, Soviet leaders found it much easier to work with Republican leaders, from Richard Nixon to George H.W. Bush. An independent Russia bucked that trend with a warm relationship between Boris Yeltsin and Bill Clinton. "Bill and Boris" became the stuff of legends, as aptly described by Strobe Talbott's authoritative account, The Russia Hand. President Putin likewise initially found a good partner in George W. Bush, a relationship sealed less by the legendary gaze into the Russian leader's soul, than by cooperation in the war on terror, nuclear non-proliferation, and energy issues.
However, along with the perception of most Europeans, Russians largely saw Bush's aggressive foreign policy as the key to global instability. In a recent survey conducted by World Public Opinion, only 25 percent of Russians saw U.S. foreign policy as having a positive influence in the world and only 13 percent approved of America's use of military power. Interestingly, despite the Kremlin's hand-wringing over the "Russophobe tendencies" in U.S. politics and society, Americans were much more positive about their former Cold War rivals: 40 percent thought Moscow's foreign policy had a positive influence in global affairs and 51 percent approved of its impact on U.S. interests.
But as noted by a number of analysts on both sides, a repeat of the post-9/11 "honeymoon" is not likely. With the White House reeling from losses in Iraq, a more assertive Russia is more increasingly viewed as an impediment to, rather than an ally for, American foreign policy. For Russian elites, "independent foreign policy" and "strategic pragmatism" has meant opposition to Iran sanctions and a carte blanche in the post-Soviet space. Even mild American criticism on Chechnya is met with cold rebukes by Russian officials.
As Carnegie Endowment scholar Dmitry Trenin recently noted, "Until recently, Russia saw itself as Pluto in the Western solar system, very far from the center but still fundamentally a part of it. Now it has left that orbit entirely: Russia's leaders have given up on becoming part of the West and have started creating their own Moscow-centered system."
The midterm elections will not change that trend. With two years before presidential elections in both countries, a "who lost Russia" debate is on the horizon in the United States, while the Kremlin has already deployed the "comrade wolf" bugaboo as a policy tool. In this hostile environment, the loss of Russia-friendly Curt Weldon or the reelection of Hilary Clinton--who recently equated Moscow with Beijing in terms of contradicting American "global imperatives"--hardly matters for Russian elites.
Igor Khrestin is a researcher in the Russian Studies program at the American Enterprise Institute.
Russia celebrates the Democratic victory.
by Igor Khrestin
11/09/2006 2:25:00 PM
WHILE THE EUROPEAN UNION "sighed with relief" and welcomed the "Canadians of American politics" back into control of Congress after a 12-year hiatus, Russian analysts and policymakers found themselves torn between Bush-bashing gleeful postmortems (a "great victory for democracy") and mild apprehension at the worsening state of bilateral affairs.
For its part, the Russian press largely hailed the political acumen of the American people. "America Returns to Democracy," declared the headline of the daily Izvestiya; Moskovskiy Komsomolets greeted the election results saying, "Hangover: Democracy Has Won in America." Komsomol'skaya Pravda had the most novel take: "Hussein's Harsh Revenge: Americans Rebuff the White House Team That Caused Carnage in Iraq."
Russian policymakers offered a more muted, but no less divisive, take on the electoral results. Speaking to a Russian radio station, Konstantin Kosachev, the head of the international affairs committee in the lower house of the Russian parliament (the Duma), speculated that a victory for the Democrats might be the key to a more balanced foreign policy. For Russia, he noted, "conflicts between the White House and Congress are, in some ways, more comfortable than their 'complete and universal' brotherhood."
But with bilateral relations descending to Cold War levels in the recent months, Democrats in control of key House committees may be the worst prescription for the Kremlin. In an interview to Komsomol'skaya Pravda, Sergei Markov, director of the Moscow-based Institute of Political Studies, stated that "there is a risk now that Moscow will become hostage to squabbles between a Republican president and a Democratic Congress." He added that Russia needed to "get ready" for tough criticism on press freedom, status of NGOs, interethnic relations, and human rights--that "favorite theme" of Democrats.
Historically, Soviet leaders found it much easier to work with Republican leaders, from Richard Nixon to George H.W. Bush. An independent Russia bucked that trend with a warm relationship between Boris Yeltsin and Bill Clinton. "Bill and Boris" became the stuff of legends, as aptly described by Strobe Talbott's authoritative account, The Russia Hand. President Putin likewise initially found a good partner in George W. Bush, a relationship sealed less by the legendary gaze into the Russian leader's soul, than by cooperation in the war on terror, nuclear non-proliferation, and energy issues.
However, along with the perception of most Europeans, Russians largely saw Bush's aggressive foreign policy as the key to global instability. In a recent survey conducted by World Public Opinion, only 25 percent of Russians saw U.S. foreign policy as having a positive influence in the world and only 13 percent approved of America's use of military power. Interestingly, despite the Kremlin's hand-wringing over the "Russophobe tendencies" in U.S. politics and society, Americans were much more positive about their former Cold War rivals: 40 percent thought Moscow's foreign policy had a positive influence in global affairs and 51 percent approved of its impact on U.S. interests.
But as noted by a number of analysts on both sides, a repeat of the post-9/11 "honeymoon" is not likely. With the White House reeling from losses in Iraq, a more assertive Russia is more increasingly viewed as an impediment to, rather than an ally for, American foreign policy. For Russian elites, "independent foreign policy" and "strategic pragmatism" has meant opposition to Iran sanctions and a carte blanche in the post-Soviet space. Even mild American criticism on Chechnya is met with cold rebukes by Russian officials.
As Carnegie Endowment scholar Dmitry Trenin recently noted, "Until recently, Russia saw itself as Pluto in the Western solar system, very far from the center but still fundamentally a part of it. Now it has left that orbit entirely: Russia's leaders have given up on becoming part of the West and have started creating their own Moscow-centered system."
The midterm elections will not change that trend. With two years before presidential elections in both countries, a "who lost Russia" debate is on the horizon in the United States, while the Kremlin has already deployed the "comrade wolf" bugaboo as a policy tool. In this hostile environment, the loss of Russia-friendly Curt Weldon or the reelection of Hilary Clinton--who recently equated Moscow with Beijing in terms of contradicting American "global imperatives"--hardly matters for Russian elites.
Igor Khrestin is a researcher in the Russian Studies program at the American Enterprise Institute.