“Reset” of relations

There were so many discussion on U.S.-Russian “reset”, but nobody knows exactly if it happened and what is this exactly. However, it is certainly tactical game. By offering a "reset" the Americans are not going to abandon its strategic objectives, according to which the U.S. has a global domination in the world. But methods of achieving that will be definitely revised. (Cooper) Russian acceptance will be recognized when it will not be lecturing about the "correct"democracy, "market" freedoms and "the only correct" values. (Shuster)

Anyway, both countries have their own goals to achieve by this partnership: for the United States, it is to preserve or increase dominance in the world, while for Russia - to change its perception of the Western partners, who, after the 1990s, tend to see it as weak and à priori hostile country. (Krastev) Another common objective of the United States - a global coalition to protect the stability that can prevent the collapse of the international system. (Stott)

Although "realism" has always focused on national security, it has never been an apology of the war. The main question that "realists" of modern world has to answer is how to maintain a maximum long-term peace acknowledging the imperfections of human nature and social relations. They realize that the world will never be perfect. Therefore, the countries’ policy is based not on abstract ideas of good, evil and justice, but on interest. (Krastev)

At the moment there is no positive effects of the “reset” in relations between Russia and the United States. It was just a proposal to try to bring the relationship back to normal or remove unnecessary tension. (Battler) It is obvious that the new American administration is trying to get rid of the inheritance of the previous administration and update all policies, including foreign. For this moment, there is no clear strategy how will this process, probably because foreign policy poorly versed Obama and Hillary Clinton. In comparison, Condoleezza Rice, a professional politician is in the geo-strategic and international relations, where Hillary Clinton - an expert on the "internal" policy. (Kosyrev) From this perspective, the "reset" does not look like "tactical game" , it is just another way to look at the whole range of US-Russian relations. (Battler)

But anyway, the current American administration is a classical example of “realistic” strategy: absence of permanent enemies or alliances, allows it to exchange easily friendship with Iraq to friendship with Russia. The stated policy by Hillary Clinton's "three Ds» (Diplomacy, Defense, Development) is actually consistent with the approach inherent to political realism. (Gamage)However, it is impossible to believe that the U.S. would abandon the missile defense system in Eastern Europe or NATO expansion. (Budoff and Foley)

This policy is determined by objective factors. First of all, the geo-economics runs with existence of unipolarity , where the center engaged by the United States. Secondly, the geo-strategy (a superset of geo-economics), is also centered by the U.S. (Battler)

The first factor caused by economic power of the United States, surpassing Japan(next in the list) almost in three times. The second - with the foreign policy potential (FPP)* (Battler), the amount that at the end of the Bush administration has reached 730 billion dollars, is actually ahead all developed countries’ FPP combined. (Miller)

These parameters are compelling the United States, at a minimum, maintain sole hegemony in world politics. At the same time FPP (which is more than 30% of the budget) is an overload, even for such a superpower like the U.S. (the best option for the budget ratio of the runway for a superpower should not exceed 20%). Hence the challenge: to reduce FPP to redirect freed amounts to solving the problems in domestic politics. (Battler)

In fact, what has already begun is reducing of military spending for the next fiscal year to $ 550 billion. The decline in international activities requires the United States two important changes in its international policies: to shift part of the cost of maintaining global economic stability and security of its allies in Europe and Japan, and remove not necessary tension in the relations with the strategic enemies: Russia and China. (Executive office of management and budget of the President of the USA)

Also the current events on international map make some countries to reconsider their international policy: crisis in economics or world politics cause alliances: geo-economic temporary alliances, that during the high-risk crisis can be developed till geopolitical alliances. (Sestanovich)

Both the U.S. and Russia today nave extremely nervous mood, because now they again realized the fact of their vulnerability. The financial crisis can turn into a paranoid even completely sane people, but in the case of the United States and Russia, it is even more expected: paranoia has always been a part of their relationship. (Kosyrev) (Nalivaiko) The increasing economic and political destabilization of the former Soviet Union created a situation in which both Russia and the West feel obliged to intervene. However, in the same time, Russia can recognize intervention by the West as an attempt of encirclement of Russia, while the West is considering intervention of Russia as the Kremlin's desire to obtain the area of the self-interest. (Kosyrev) Any resumption of negotiations between Russia and the United States will be complicated by political and geopolitical shifts in the former Soviet Union. (Shuster)

Of course, America's strategic partnership with Russia will demonstrate the ability to maintain U.S. leadership in the post-American world, while Russia will be able to prevent the formation of partnerships between two “big” nations, where the United States and China will be the only serious players. If Washington can establish negotiations with Iran without Russia, Moscow will lose its strategic importance, and if negotiations pluck, Iran could become a nuclear power and American arguments for intervention will look more convincing, because the U.S. tried to use the methods of diplomacy. (Gates) Due to this, U.S. policy has reasonable expectation that its pressure on Russia in terms of cooperation now can bring more success than ever before. (Battler)

It is the fact that Kissinger restarted the US-Russian dialogue - a visual indication that Washington takes seriously the Russian fascination with realism. Also the duo Obama - Clinton is very well positioned to offer a "realistic policy" towards Russia. But аs history teaches us that a successful "politics of realism" of any administration requires this administration not to be positioned itself as a "realistic". Nixon was elected, not because he was a realist, he was elected because he was a fierce fighter in the Cold War. That antirealistic record and Obama, and his secretary of state could play a role in the return of realism in American foreign policy. (Commission on U.S. Policy toward Russia)

* The foreign policy potential (FPP) of a state is calculated by the potential financial cost for international activities. Its main components are the costs of defense and international operations (plus all other means of foreign influence, which share is usually small relative to the "principal").

Works Cited

Baker, Peter. Russia and U.S. Report Breakthrough on Arms. Washington: The New York Times, 2010.

Battler, Alex. The 21st century: The world without Russia. American University & College Press/American Book Publishing, 2004.

Budoff, Peter and Else Foley. Clinton stresses "three Ds": defense, diplomacy and development. Washington: Medill on the Hill/Northwestern University, 2009.

Commission on U.S. Policy toward Russia. The Right direction for US Policy Toward Russia. Nixon Center, 2009.

Cooper, Helene. Promises of "Fresh Start" for U.S.-Russia Relations. New York: The New York Times, 2009.

Executive office of management and budget of the President of the USA. THE BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2009, HISTORICAL TABLES. Washington: U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, n.d.

Gamage, Daya. Diplomacy-Development-Defense: Tools Obama Administration will use To address global challenges – Hillary Clinton. Washington: Asian tribune, 2009.

Gates, R. A Balanced Strategy. Reprogramming the Pentagon for a New Age. Foreign Affairs, 2009.

Kosyrev, Dmitry. U.S.-Russian relations have been reset. What next? Deauville: RIA News, 2011.

Krastev, Ivan. Methods of "reset". Moscow: Russian Journal, 2009.

Miller, Matt. The courageous Progressive Caucus budget. New York: The Economist, 2011.

Nalivaiko, Peter. Russian-American relations at the present stage: there was a "reboot"? Moscow: UDK Studio, 2010.

Sestanovich, S. What has Moscow done? Rebuilding U.S.-Russian Relations. Foreign Affairs, 2008.

Shuster, Simon. US-Russia Relations: In Need of a New Reset. Moscow: TIME World, 2010.

Stott, Michael. Chilly welcome awaits Obama in Russia. New York: Reuters, 2009.