Moscow acts in opposition to NATO ('Asia Times online', China (Hong Kong))

0
Moscow acts in opposition to NATO ('Asia Times online', China (Hong Kong))Many probably don’t know that the key phrase of former US President Ronald Reagan is “trust but verify” in fact - just a translation of the Russian proverb doveryai, no proveryai (in the text in Latin letters - note.). Two decades after the end of the Cold War era, Moscow wants to return a controversial phrase from the American repertoire and attach it to the Russian “reset” of relations with the United States.

The blow received by US President Barack Obama in midterm elections to Congress, exposing NATO’s WikiLeaks plans to defend against “possible Russian aggression”, announcing the US decision to deploy air units at the Lask base in Poland, the belligerent speech of Senator John McCain, who questioned the entire doctrine underlying the “reset” with Russia — all of this has caused anxiety in Moscow.

Not surprisingly, the signal last week, sent on Saturday from the CSTO summit in Moscow, was that Moscow wanted to strengthen its own alliance as a "key element of security in the post-Soviet space," and its prestige should increase globally.

The mid-term elections in the United States leave Russia, like many other countries, at a loss: not too much hope they place on Obama's ability to carry out a “reset”. McCain’s speech at the Johns Hopkins School of International Studies last Friday was a signal that the reset would most likely hit the tough opposition of the Congress, dominated by Republicans.

McCain questioned the need for a reboot at a time when “Russia is becoming less and less able to be global, a great power on a par with the United States; when American and Russian interests mostly diverge; when they do not have common values; when the Russian political system "irresponsible and predatory" is conducted by a "quasi-criminal ruling syndicate," which "steals, lies, and kills its own citizens with virtually no impunity."

Recalling continuing disagreements with Russia over missile defense in Europe, Russia's overwhelming superiority in tactical nuclear weapons and different approaches to open energy markets, McCain called on the Obama administration to be “more assertive for our interests and values” and to join Russia in the WTO with its commitment to the rule of law.

Last month’s intentional friendliness at the NATO summit in Lisbon could be anything but remain unspent. At the same time, WikiLeaks' revelations questioned the sincerity of NATO regarding the “reset” with Russia. From US diplomatic messages, it is clear that NATO was carrying out plans to protect the Baltic countries from possible Russian military aggression, and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton wished to keep these plans secret from Moscow.

Moscow states that these plans were approved at the Lisbon summit, although the alliance said it was looking for a “true strategic partnership” with Russia, based on the common security interests and the need to address “common, jointly defined challenges.”

Moscow is annoyed. Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said: “On the one hand, NATO ... is negotiating with us on important documents aimed at partnership, and on the other hand is making decisions about the necessity of defense from us behind our back ... We have raised these questions and we expect get answers. I believe we have that right. ”

At the same time, after talks in Washington between Obama and Polish President Bronislaw Komorowski in Washington on Wednesday, the two countries announced that they were strengthening their defense ties in the spirit of the US-Poland strategic cooperation agreement between the US and Poland, which includes air cooperation Poland.

Moscow declares: “It seems that we are witnessing the old reflex of NATO, embodied in strengthening the power to the detriment of the security of other countries - even more strange after the positive result of the Russia-NATO Council summit and the statements of the alliance that ... “We (Russia) are forced to take into account the plans of the United States - Poland when embodying our own programs for building armed forces and working with our allies.

Thus, the CSTO summit in Moscow on Saturday took place against a complex political background. Initially, the agenda was focused on improving the Alliance’s response to crises "in order to strengthen the CSTO capacity to counter security threats and challenges."

Simply put, the CSTO actually prevented Uzbekistan from intervening in the crisis in Kyrgyzstan in June, and the informal summit in Yaroslavl in August gave authority to change the status of the CSTO "for the sake of increasing efficiency .. in the area of ​​immediate response." The success of Moscow, which persuaded Tashkent to agree to change the status of the CSTO, is interesting, while Uzbek President Islam Karimov attended the meeting on Saturday.

The summit supported the Declaration of Cooperation in the international arena. Moscow is clearly interested in strengthening the role of the CSTO at the international level, as opposed to NATO self-defense, proclaimed at the Lisbon summit as the only global security organization. A decision was also made on collective peacekeeping forces and on commitments "outside the region" in the image and likeness of what NATO has in Afghanistan.

Thus, the CSTO member countries expressed their will not only to fulfill peacekeeping tasks, but also “to provide these peacekeeping forces under certain conditions for operations conducted by a decision of the UN Security Council”. The Moscow Summit emphasized the “foreign policy cooperation” of the CSTO members, like the NATO system.

It is obvious that the CSTO took into account the results of the NATO summit in Lisbon. The participation of Uzbekistan in the summit strengthens the grip of Moscow. There is a clear cooling in relations between Uzbekistan and the United States. Clinton during a visit to Tashkent on December 2 publicly rebuked the Uzbek government. She said that in the field of human rights, Uzbekistan should “translate words into deeds”.

Addressing a group of non-governmental organization leaders in Tashkent, Clinton said: "I advised him (Karimov) to demonstrate her commitment by a number of steps to ensure genuine protection of rights and fundamental freedoms in this country." Clinton revealed that she raised questions about the restriction of religious freedom, torture and child labor in Uzbekistan. "We raised these issues ... and we will continue to work to improve human rights in Uzbekistan, as part of the expansion of our bilateral relations."

Washington has reasons to be displeased with Tashkent. Karimov has teamed up with Russia to neutralize US actions in an attempt to entrust Central Asia with the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, and more importantly, Tashkent openly criticized the US military strategy in Afghanistan.

At the CSTO summit in Astana on December 1 (where Karimov was absent), Uzbek Foreign Minister Vladimir Norov condemned the OSCE and its structures for “failing to play a positive role in preventing and neutralizing bloody events” in Kyrgyzstan in June. This was an accusation of Washington’s attempt to drag the OSCE into Kyrgyzstan as a replacement for the CSTO in the region.

Even more directed was Obama’s criticism of Obama’s strategy. "It is becoming more and more obvious that there is no military solution to the Afghan problem, and the strategy of conciliation chosen by the coalition forces does not lead to the expected results."

Norov reiterated Tashkent’s proposal to find an alternative solution to a peace settlement in Afghanistan through multilateral negotiations under the auspices of the UN. He said: "The essence of the Uzbek initiative is based on the recognition that the internal affairs of Afghanistan must be decided by the Afghan people with the help of states whose security interests include ending the war and promoting stability in Afghanistan." He stressed that negotiations should be carried out "with all the main warring parties."

In sum, at the CSTO summit, the following was manifested: first, there is the unspoken, but underlying, Moscow suspicion of NATO intentions. This fear is carried out in the form of a new determination to build the CSTO as a counterweight, which will challenge NATO’s claims to position itself in the post-Soviet space and its statements about its exclusivity as a global security organization.

Secondly, the states of Central Asia are deeply concerned about the deteriorating situation in Afghanistan and the failure of the US military strategy. They view Moscow as a guarantor of regional security. This is manifested in the readiness to strengthen the CSTO rapid reaction forces and simplify the decision-making process within the alliance to meet crisis or unforeseen situations.

Thirdly, the US intentions in Afghanistan are far from transparency, and the open question of ending the American military presence is at stake. The picture remains vague in terms of the exact situation developing on the Afghan border with Tajikistan. Indeed, US intelligence has secret ties with Central Asian rebels operating in Afghanistan, and the countries of Central Asia are very cautious about US democratic projects in the region.

Fourthly, the Moscow summit paid a lot of attention to the activities of the CSTO in the field of strengthening the rule of law, border security and military policy. The readiness of the CSTO to play its role in Afghanistan is obvious in the scenario after 2014. Next week, Afghan President Hamid Karzai will visit Moscow. The CSTO is also moving towards building links with Pakistan in order to counter drug trafficking.

Finally, the Moscow summit focused on strengthening the role of the CSTO in foreign policy. This was manifested in the US attempts to deepen differences within Central Asia and play the role of a diplomatic violator in order to curtail Moscow’s integration process in the region. If the CSTO member countries want to conduct peacekeeping operations in the world's hot spots, then they need to coordinate their foreign policy. CSTO copies the behavior of NATO.

In sum, Russia believes in the need to “reset” relations with NATO, but seeks to “test” its sincerity. As Lavrov stated, “serious questions arise” because of the contradictory tendencies in the positioning of NATO in relation to Russia. Moscow decided to support the CSTO as an effective counterbalance alliance, just in case the McCain way of thinking triumphs in Washington.
Our news channels

Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest news and the most important events of the day.

"Right Sector" (banned in Russia), "Ukrainian Insurgent Army" (UPA) (banned in Russia), ISIS (banned in Russia), "Jabhat Fatah al-Sham" formerly "Jabhat al-Nusra" (banned in Russia) , Taliban (banned in Russia), Al-Qaeda (banned in Russia), Anti-Corruption Foundation (banned in Russia), Navalny Headquarters (banned in Russia), Facebook (banned in Russia), Instagram (banned in Russia), Meta (banned in Russia), Misanthropic Division (banned in Russia), Azov (banned in Russia), Muslim Brotherhood (banned in Russia), Aum Shinrikyo (banned in Russia), AUE (banned in Russia), UNA-UNSO (banned in Russia), Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People (banned in Russia), Legion “Freedom of Russia” (armed formation, recognized as terrorist in the Russian Federation and banned)

“Non-profit organizations, unregistered public associations or individuals performing the functions of a foreign agent,” as well as media outlets performing the functions of a foreign agent: “Medusa”; "Voice of America"; "Realities"; "Present time"; "Radio Freedom"; Ponomarev; Savitskaya; Markelov; Kamalyagin; Apakhonchich; Makarevich; Dud; Gordon; Zhdanov; Medvedev; Fedorov; "Owl"; "Alliance of Doctors"; "RKK" "Levada Center"; "Memorial"; "Voice"; "Person and law"; "Rain"; "Mediazone"; "Deutsche Welle"; QMS "Caucasian Knot"; "Insider"; "New Newspaper"