From Russia with Love: U.S.-

Russia Relations, 1991-2017

“There are at the present time two great nations in the world, which

started from different points, but seem to tend towards the same end. I

allude to the Russians and the Americans. Both of them have grown up

unnoticed; and whilst the attention of mankind was directed elsewhere,

they have suddenly placed themselves in the front rank among the

nations, and the world learned their existence and their greatness at

almost the same time.”

-Alexis de Tocqueville (Democracy in America, 1835)

Dr. Mosher already covered the Cold War era so my goal is to pick up where he left off and only VERY briefly cover US-Russian relations since the collapse of the Cold War/USSR around 1991

Best to start with how I see and analyze global politics, from the lens of rational choice theory and realpolitik…

Rational Choice Theory *Focus is on individuals *From this perspective, I assume that individual policymakers in Russia and the U.S. act rationally to increase their own power/self-interest Classic scholars of this RCT are mostly economists like: Becker, 1976; Downs, 1957; Olson, 1965; Schelling, 1960

Realpolitik *Focus is on policymakers, or statesmen, conducting foreign policy/diplomacy for their respective states *Realpolitik is a form of diplomacy based on practical considerations and policies rather than moral or ethical premises. It centers on the most practical means of securing national interests (eg perhaps allying with fairly unsavory regimes such as Saddam Hussein in Iraq during the 1980s to secure broader regional interests or working with the Mujahedeen in Afghanistan in the 1980s in order to bring down the USSR…) Classic Scholars of this approach: Niebuhr, 1979; Morgenthau, 1983; Kissinger, 2014

2 distinct phases in US-Russia relations since the end of the CW:

Phase 1: 1993-1999/Yeltsin and Bush I-Clinton era 1. Characterized by Russian/Yeltsin weakness and acquiescence to US-led NATO and EU expansion into Russia’s near abroad 2. U.S.-Western dominance

Phase 2: 2000-Present/Putin and Bush, Obama, Trump era 1. Characterized by Russian/Putin efforts to reverse NATO/EU expansion, resist US hegemony, and possibly reconstruct parts of the old Soviet empire (i.e. Georgia, Crimea, Ukraine, Baltics?) 2. Increasing Russian assertiveness and U.S.-Russian friction

Let’s take a brief look at 2 things: 1. Political leaders and 2. Country to country relations in each phase

Phase 1: 1991-1999/Yeltsin and Bush I-Clinton era

A few words about Boris Yeltsin, George H. W. Bush and Bill Clinton 1) Boris Yeltsin: First elected President of post-Soviet Russia. Initially a hero for moving Russia in a more democratic and market oriented direction domestically though Russians didn’t care much for his more accommodating approach to the west diplomatically. Presided over Russian economic collapse and transfer of state wealth to Russian oligarchs. Sat back and watched (er…drank) as the US/West pushed NATO and the EU eastward

A few words about Boris Yeltsin, George H. W. Bush and Bill Clinton 1) Boris Yeltsin: a. Didn’t seem to understand RCT or Realpolitik though he was operating from a position of weakness and needing help from the west (mostly for capital infusions) b. Deeply unpopular and reviled for a collapsed and corrupt economy and weak and vacillating foreign policy c. Probably best thing he did from a strictly nationalist POV was the appointment of Vladimir Putin as his last PM in Sept 1999.

2) Bush I: A globalist and practioner of realpolitik to the core. A born patrician with noblesse oblige values. WWII hero, former congressman, CIA Director and Vice-POTUS. Protégé of Nixon and Kissinger. Definitely a realist and practitioner of a form of cautious realpolitik. Did a nice job ejecting Iraq from Kuwait without upsetting the balance of power in the ME, ridding Panama of strongman dictator and thorn in America’s side M Noriega without many casualties and helping manage the end of the CW.

Many probably best know him now for his penchant for telling David Copafeel jokes as he is literally grabbing parts of a woman’s anatomy he wasn’t invited or asked to grab… He recently apologized for this behavior…

2) Bush I: Cont.

Saw Russia as a competitor not an enemy and worked with

Gorbachev on START I (1991) and signed a US-Russia

strategic partnership same year which many marked as the

end of the CW. Didn’t have much of a chance to work with

Yeltsin.

3) Clinton: 5-term former Governor of Arkansas with zero FP experience, came to power as CW ending with vague ideas about how to navigate the newly emerging Post-CW world with the US as a hegemon in a unipolar “moment.”

His main FP advisors-folks such as M Albright, W Christopher, A Lake, and S

Berger were all former FP hands from Carter admin. and they all had grand

visions about moving Europe away from the brink of war, in a more peaceful,

democratic and market oriented direction by enlarging the number of former E

Block states into NATO and the EU (see charts).

Clinton shrewdly did this by befriending B Yeltsin and taking advantage of

Russia’s economic collapse and internal political chaos (ie using a form of

liberal, Wilsonian realpolitik to do so)

a. Note: According to Russia analyst Michael Crowley, this entire decade of

Russian weakness, acquiescence to American hegemony and general drift

humiliated the population and led almost directly to the ascension of V Putin,

who saw “the 1990s as one period of humiliation-domestically and

internationally…[with] Boris saying yes to everything Bill wanted-and that was

the US basically defining the order of the world and what Russia’s place in it

could be, and that Russia was too weak to do anything but go along” (J

Goldgeiger, former top Russia official on Clinton’s NSC Staff)

Phase 1 US-Russia Relations, 1991-1999 1) Dec. 1989 Malta Summit-Premier Gorbachev and President Bush declare Cold War “is over”… Note: Bush is a protégé of Nixon and Kissinger and very well schooled in Realpolitik; Gorbachev crashed the USSR so not sure his idea of national interests worked out very well for the USSR…

Phase 1 US-Russia Relations, 1991-1999 2) Dec. 1991 Gorbachev signs the USSR out of existence, CIS established

Phase 1 US-Russia Relations, 1991-1999 3) Boris Yeltsin elected first President of post-Soviet Russia and moves Russia away from command and control/totalitarianism towards markets and elections a. Early Yeltsin seemed strong and commanding and nationalistic…

Phase 1 US-Russia Relations, 1991-1999 4) Relations between Russia and the US continued to thaw/warm (under Yeltsin and Bush I and Clinton)

Phase 1 US-Russia Relations, 1991-1999 5) Yeltsin drunk most of the decade

Phase 1 US-Russia Relations, 1991-1999 6) Russian economy literally crumbles into depression (industrial output collapsed, inflation soared, price of oil collapsed, value of Ruble crumbled and Russia had to import grain…McFaul 2013)

Phase 1 US-Russia Relations, 1991-1999 7) Bush I and Clinton took advantage, like any good practioner of realpolitik, and began pushing EU and NATO expansion eastward…

Phase 2: 2000-Present-Putin/Medvedev and Bush, Obama, Trump era

A few words about Vladimir Putin 1) Putin: classic Russian nationalist, chess and judo player, lover of tigers and shirtless horseback rides, and practioner of realpolitik, shrewd and ruthless as hell in achieving Russian national/his personal interests. Sees world in zero-sum terms

A few words about Vladimir Putin

2) Former KGB agent (16 years), joined Yeltsin’s staff in 1996, acting

director of the FSB in 1998 and Yeltsin’s last PM in 1999. Became acting Russian

President when Yeltsin stepped down in Dec. 1999 and has more or less run

Russia since then

A few words about Vladimir Putin

a. According to Hermitage Capital Management CEO Bill Browder,

Putin is worth approx. $200B, which is more than Bill Gates, Jeff Bezos (formerly the

2 wealthiest) and Donald Trump are worth combined (Fortune 2016) though a

Kremlin source (Stanislav Belovsky) says he is worth between $40-70B (Panama

Papers is also a great source)

Vladimir Putin, cont. 3) First day he became Russian President (Jan 1, 2000) he told Russian troops their mission from then on would center on “restoring Russia’s honor and dignity” a. In essence, he wants to “make Russia great again”

Vladimir Putin, cont.

b. Per Crowley (2016), Matthews (2017), McFaul (2014) and many

others Putin felt the 1990s were a long decade of national humiliation (loss in Cold

War, collapsed economy, weak and vacillating president, dominant west dictating

terms to Russia re: NATO/EU expansion into its sphere of influence/near abroad, etc)

Vladimir Putin, cont.

c. He has spent his time as Russian President therefore trying to

restore Russia’s place on the world stage, piece back together the Old Soviet

Union, and thwart the 1 country which stands in the way of his global ambitions, the

US…

d. Relations with Bush and Obama were pretty bad, though both

Bush and Obama initially tried to reach out, unsuccessfully, to Russia

2) Bush Jr: Former governor of Texas, son of a POTUS and a man with zero foreign policy credentials save being son of a master… unilateralist to the core. Not an America-firster-globalist on trade, immigration, the EU and NATO and US-Mexico border.

2) Bush Jr:

Not big on details and not a chess player. Often made

decisions based on “gut” and “hunches” rather than

information.

a. Looked into Putin’s eyes and “saw

a good man” the US could work with,

esp. on national security/terrorism

b. Relations with Russia went south

FAST in his admin…

3) Obama: Like Clinton, came to Washington with zero FP experience or credentials. A multi-lateralist to the core. Like Bush, was a globalist not a nationalist. Very analytical (Spock like even), interested in details, somewhat naïve about the power game of intl. affairs.

3) Obama:

Tried to steer world in multi-polar direction. Believed in using

intl. regimes like UN to help solve global problems. Steered

us in a “lead from behind” direction.

a. Wanted to “reset relations with Russia” initially. Eventually

backed off when he realized Russia wasn’t interested in a

“reset”

4) Trump:

Unlike anyone to ever occupy the oval office. Came to

power with zero governing experience and zero foreign

policy credentials though he did campaign on a classic

America first agenda.

A classic American nationalist, poker player and golfer.

Practioner of an America-first approach to US foreign policy

4) Trump: He’s very clearly a lightening rod of unparalleled love or hate. He is a businessman willing to talk tough and seems willing to use force to achieve American national interests (missile strike in Syria) and tough talk to pressure our enemies (tough talk/tweets against “little Rocket man” in N Korea, dictators in Venezuela, and Cuba, etc).

4) Trump:

Doesn’t seem interested in specifics, details, or being

briefed

a. At least initially, saw Russia/Putin as a strategic

ally in fighting ISIS/al Qaeda, shoring up Syria,

helping contain lil Kim in NK, etc.

4) Trump:

b. Since then Trump has backtracked on any

possible Bromance with Vlad—signed a very

punitive economic sanctions bill and has been on

the defensive since revelations surfaced about

possible collusion between Trump/his team and

the Kremlin during the election to help him get

elected

US-Russia Relations: Bush and Putin 1) Bush on Putin after their first meeting: ““I looked the man in the eye. I found him to be very straightforward and trustworthy. . . I was able to get a sense of his soul” (NYT, 2015) 2) So W saw his soul and found Putin to be a good man but Putin opposed the US-led Iraq War, the NATO sponsored secession of Kosovo from Serbia in 2008 and the US plan to install a missile defense system in Poland in the mid-2000s

3) He also felt that NATO and EU expansion into East Europe (ie Poland, Hungary, Romania, etc) was a “provocative intrusion on Russia’s sphere of influence (NYT 2015) 4) He blamed the CIA for encouraging the so-called Rose Revolution in Georgia (2003) and Orange Revolution in Ukraine (2004). Putin ended up crushing both

5) Putin himself stated (April 2004) the breakup of the Soviet Union was the "greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the century” a. The "upshot" of the statement was that if the greatest geopolitical tragedy was the breakup of the USSR, the greatest geopolitical achievement should be the reformulation of a Russian superstate, said Ariel Cohen, a senior research fellow in Russian and Eurasian studies at the Heritage Foundation.

US-Russia Relations: Obama and Putin/Medvedev 1) Putin termed out in 2008 but his hand picked successor, Medvedev, made him PM…patently obvious who the real power was…

2) Barack Obama was elected US POTUS 8 months later and

vowed to “reset” relations with Moscow (replete with a poorly

translated Staples reset button)

3) Relations not only did not improve, they worsened…as

Russia annexed Crimea and then in 2014 moved in force

to crush the Orange revolution in Ukraine. Pres Obama

and the world community imposed relatively strong

sanctions in response and relations collapsed…

US-Russia Relations: Trump and Putin 1) Trump’s election was met with jubilation in Moscow (Owen Matthews Newsweek 8/10/17) and in large swaths of Trump voting America a. the expectation in Moscow/in Putin world was that they now had a potus “with whom he could do business, a pragmatist (practioner of realpolitik) willing to overlook Moscow’s annexation of Crimea, support for Syrian President Bashar al-Assad…and someone who would allow the Kremlin a free hand in exchange for Russian support against terrorism” (Mathews ibid)

b. On the campaign trail Trump regularly said he would steer the US-

Russia relationship in a positive direction: “I think I would have a very, very

good relationship with Putin and a very, very good relationship with Russia”

(Crowley Politico Dec 2016)

Putin and Trump, cont. c. Those hopes for a better relationship and increased cooperation have vanished into the haze of “the most punitive economic sanctions ever imposed on Russia as punishment for Russian meddling in Ukraine and Syria, along with [purported] election-related hacking.” Combine this with allegations of and multiple investigations/probes into possible Trump-Russia election collusion and talk of Trump-Putin bromance and US-Russia strategic alliance has faded

US-Russia Relations: Where do things stand now?

Here’s what the political establishment (both parties, intel agencies, etc) in Washington thinks…

Here’s what I think…

First, while I don’t think Russia is our enemy, I also don’t think it is our friend a. Frenemies? b. Putin is clearly bent on undermining our system, NATO, the West etc wherever and however he can c. I don’t think we are in a new Cold War but relations the last 3 administrations have been rocky, no doubt

Second, the US still has the upper hand in this relationship a. World is NOT multi-polar yet though China and India are gaining fast b. Russia v US economy, military spending, GDP growth, GDP p/cap etc. c. Only way Russia is stronger is total nukes

Third, in terms of Russia meddling in this election, we have no real proof that Putin/Russian govt. actually tried to influence the outcome a. But there are 3 serious parallel investigations occurring simultaneously (Mueller, Senate and House Intelligence Committees) so how about we stop speculating and wait for them to conclude to see exactly what is found? b. Hard for partisans on both sides to do this but it is the fair and objective way to see this rather than speculating about what happened based on leaks, innuendo and just plain partisan hatreds… c. Clear someone/some group in Russia made ad buys on FB, Twitter, Youtube but it isn’t clear who, for what purpose, and with what effect this “influence campaign” had on election 2016

Fourth, and finally, these “Russian covert influence campaigns” have a LONG and sordid history that date back 80 years so let’s not pretend this interference is unique a. They are generally designed to “deepen political and racial tensions in the US” not change election outcomes (Michael Hayden 2017; Ioffe The Atlantic Monthly, 2017) b. Fake news/misinformation is planted to “amplify pre-existing divisions on the ground” c. Don’t have to plant a fake news story now in an Indian paper and hope it gets picked up by the American media; now can just take out a FB or twitter ad buy, post and sit back as people or bots retweet, send, debate, and sow division…

Look around at all the division in the US: these campaigns are working like a charm…

Thought I’d leave you with a few funny memes and editorial cartoons of Putin and Trump…