The world as a system may be battling a crisis, but crises - with all the pains that accompany them - do open up opportunities. In the current settings, Russia is presented with a choice of niches in the emerging global configuration, and its searches clearly meet with a measure of understanding in Americas, Europe, and Asia.
For Moscow, eying Europe is natural in the context. The resumption of Germany-Russia-France summits and the arrival of the participants of the Munich security conference at Moscow to meet the Russian president (notably, convening in Russia was their own idea) signal the West`s serious interest in the partnership with Moscow. The "old Europe" countries tend to be particularly courteous with Russia, and there must be profound reasons behind the approach.
First, the EU failed to evolve into a tightly knit organization over the years of its existence and remains a conglomerate of heterogeneous elements with widely varying potentials, diverging interests, and unharmonized value systems.
Secondly, Europe lacks a vision of the future of NATO, the most centralized and hierarchic organization of the epoch, and, consequently, is unsure what role the US as the global leader is to take.As a result, debates over an integrated European security architecture in the run-up to the November 19-20 Lisbon summit echo with concerns in Washington. At the same time, it may be true that the trilateral discussions of the European security were initiated to probe into Russia`s unannounced agenda.
Thirdly, Russia as a Eurasian giant remains an important player in the struggle over global dominance which will breed - and is already breeding - a conflict between the West (the EU and the US) and the East (China and generally the Asia Pacific region). Anyway you look at it, it still holds true these days that, as H. Mackinder wrote: "Who rules East Europe commands the Heartland; Who rules the Heartland commands the World Island; Who rules the World Island commands the World".
Russia, the Heartland country, was dealt a severe blow in 1991 but survived it, and its very existence denies other global politics players chances to gain full control over the post-Soviet space. Prevailing in the struggle over Eurasia takes either integrating Russia into Europe (economically, for the most part) or dissolving Russia in NATO (by political and military means). Both scenarios are materializing as parallel processes.
It also factors into the situation that the crisis which initially erupted in the US had a shattering impact on the EU. The protests and strikes which are paralyzing France are symptoms of unsustainability of the economy based on neoliberal models. The development of capitalism which owed the initial accumulation of wealth to ruthless colonial policies is contingent on the exploitation of the periphery. The second half of the XX century saw the rise of a neocolonial system which continues to exist in the form of a myriad of protectorates and quasi-states. The West continues to regard Russia, the country with huge territory, vast natural resources, and a population receptive to manipulations as a periphery. Rivalries over the right to exploit the periphery and over the corresponding instruments of control notwithstanding, the approach is uniformly adopted in the ranks of the Western countries.
The West`s interest in access to Russia`s natural resources is of course an open secret. The EU dependence on Russia for energy and various other commodities is a recurrent theme in the Western media, but the situation may have additional dimensions. Well-known French commentator Jean-Pierre Thomas said more than Western politicians normally do when he expressed the view that France and Germany are also interested in Russia`s financial resources. At least, the current deficits are eating considerably into France`s reserves, while those owned by Russia already count several hundred billion dollars and could catalyze economic growth across the continent. Europe hopes to benefit from the funds and therefore assists Russia in becoming a major financial center that would fit perfectly into the space between Hong Kong, Shanghai, London, and Paris and - as many in Europe expect - balance the influence of the US and Asian stock markets.
This must be the reason why European experts are so enthusiastic about the Deauville summit which, as they believe, can become the starting point of a financial alliance between the EU and Russia, mobilize financial resources, and even open a new era for the Old World. In fact, this is Europe`s new model of economic growth. In the light of the above, Moscow should be careful to avoid the situation whereby Russia`s financial resources are diverted to nourish the economic recovery in Europe while its own modernization plans lack the necessary financial backing.
In my view, the widespread perception of the Deauville summit attended by A. Merkel, N. Sarkozy, and D. Medvedev as an attempt to deepen Europe`s efforts aimed at creating a center of influence rivaling the US represents an overstatement. There is an impression that the alternative center would be powerless without Russia and that Russia would gladly join in, but I recall an excerpt from Through the Looking Glass: "How I wish I was one of them! I wouldn`t mind being a Pawn, if only I might join -- though of course I should like to be a Queen, best".
Personally, I deem the creation of such a center unlikely due to the following reasons.
First, the US and the EU interests are interwoven in the NATO framework and, moreover, the European countries depend economically and militarily on the US. Consequently they should not be expected to steer an overly independent political course, least to be ready to shoulder the economic burden associated with it.
Secondly, since 2008 Europe stubbornly ignores Russian president D. Medvedev`s proposal for a new European security architecture but is involved in the common European missile defense program which is fully attributable to NATO and can in the long run erode Russia`s control over its own air space.
Thirdly, the intensifying activity around the Russia-NATO council shows that in this regard the intentions are serious. Symptomatically, as soon as Russian president D. Medvedev said he would partake in the coming NATO summit in Lisbon, the Institute of Contemporary Development, a well-connected Russian thinktank, promptly posted the notorious Yurgens report on its web site calling Russia to maximize the partnership with NATO or even seek membership in it.
The truth, though, is that Russia does have a choice and that Moscow`s decision is going to define the future - for us and for the rest of the world. By the way, the visa requirements reveal Europe`s actual attitude towards Russia and Russians which references to various technicalities cannot disguise. As the shadow in E. Schwartz`s fairytale, we are told to remember where we belong and not to trespass the limitations.
23.10.2010 ` 19:21
Elena PONOMAREVA
Strategic-Culture.org (http://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2010/10/23/europes-center-drifting-east.html)
