Realism on Russia
Candidates’ Putin tacks unwise
The Republican presidential debate hosted by CNN on Sept. 16 was certainly confrontational and entertaining. The candidates addressed many topics, including the topic of Russia’s return to Cold War tactics and its aggressive behavior in what Russia considers its sphere of influence.
One thing was clear as the candidates took on Vladimir Putin: The GOP debate on foreign policy, especially as it relates to Putin and Russia, is premature and adolescent. This phenomenon may be driven either by the fact that the candidates do not have credible foreign-policy experience or because the public does not demand a more comprehensive debate on the issue.
Russia’s President Vladimir Putin is an offensive realist. Offensive Realism is a philosophic theory of international relations first articulated by John Mearsheimer, where the world of international politics is dominated by aggressive state behavior due to the anarchic nature of the international order. Offensive Realism differs from Defensive Realism in that it stipulates that nation states are power-maximizing mechanisms and they will act offensively when the opportunities and capabilities permit.
Putin also uses the United States and the current international tension to justify his autocratic regime. It is clear, therefore, that negotiating with Putin is counterproductive if such negotiations are not orchestrated in conjunction with a complex system of pressure points that involve a wide array of foreign-policy strategies including military and economic tools.
During the debate, Donald Trump suggested that he could negotiate with Putin and stated that Putin simply has no respect for President Barack Obama. Carly Fiorina stated that she would not talk or negotiate with Putin, but rather would resort to hard tactics by deploying troops to Europe and by conducting military exercises near Russian borders.
The candidates, however, do not understand that Russia is a regional power and you cannot simply sweettalk them out of their national interest strategies, nor can you stop talking to them altogether. Russia is a complex organism and should be dealt with pragmatically and in line with our national interests.
Even at the height of the Cold War when the United States engaged in the policy of containment, a policy which was first articulated by American diplomat George Kennan, the United States used diplomacy and engaged with the Soviet Union when such strategy were necessary. The policy of containment advocated for a limited engagement with the Soviet Union, while applying pressure methodically in strategic places. The policy also called for selective engagement with Russia when doing so made good sense and was vital to the national interests of the United States.
Bringing the policy of containment back with important modifications to address the changed nature of Russia could be useful. However, the candidates seem to misunderstand this notion of selective engagement and the importance of dialogue even in the most difficult situations.
The Obama administration has already launched a much colder approach toward Russia than ever implemented after the collapse of the Soviet Union.
The Russian economy is under extreme pressure due to a comprehensive sanctions package put in place by the United States and the European Union. It is likely that the relations will keep deteriorating and it certainly appears that we are headed toward the re-implementation of the containment strategy.
We will continue to put pressure on Russia on strategic issues and places and engage with Russia selectively and diplomatically when doing so is in our national interest. The United States is also likely to keep providing economic and military support to the independent states surrounding Russia, which in the long run will create a more democratic and stable region capable of offsetting Russia’s hegemonic ambitions in the region. A methodical and strategically sound approach will be necessary, but resorting to a neo-conservative rhetoric is not helpful.
Unfortunately, some of the GOP candidates do not appear to be educated on the topic. To presume that Putin’s behavior and Russia’s state actions are caused by a lack of respect toward Obama or that it is possible to completely disengage a country diplomatically and do as we wish militarily without severe security repercussions for the global community is shortsighted at best.