President Dmitry Medvedev is changing the vector of Russian foreign policy with the START Treaty (Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty) in the hope that the United States and Europe will invest in Russia.
Golden chandeliers, hundreds of cameras, and a military orchestra playing a bravura march. Presidents Barack Obama and Dmitry Medvedev entered the hall with such an air of importance as if they were about to enter their names in world history. Since the times of Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev, not a single Russian leader has signed treaties with America with such pomp. "A historic event has taken place in this hall," Medvedev started after the treaty was signed. Obama nodded. Then a Czech journalist asked Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov: "Is Russia a world leader again?" Ryabkov felt ill at ease. After a pause he replied: "Russia has always been a world leader."
When Obama talked with Medvedev about the signing of a new START Treaty, he believed that this is a step to meet Moscow halfway. After 20 years of unequal relations, the United States was again conspicuously suave with Russia as with a great power and will sign with it such an important treaty. Washington hoped that Moscow will be flattered or will at least appreciate Obama's generosity and will not be difficult in discussing the new treaty.
The sides decided to accommodate its provisions by December 2009, when the old treaty expired but eventually the signing was delayed. Then Prime Minister Vladimir Putin directly linked the treaty with anti-missile defence. This meant that the treaty will not be signed because Washington was not going to accept this link. "Just several months ago this [the singing of the treaty] seemed unlikely even to some members of the delegations," Medvedev acknowledged in Prague.
Even seasoned foreign ministry officials were surprised at the sudden change in the talks. Needless to say, it was very important for Obama to sign a treaty because he was beset with domestic problems. But it was Moscow rather than Washington that made concessions. This was a big success for Medvedev, too, and the number of warheads does not matter here. "A new, modernist approach has suddenly prevailed in our foreign policy," said a high-ranking Russian diplomat. First, an agreement with Americans at such level is a breakthrough in bilateral relations after so many years of open hostility. Second, Moscow has improved its relations with Europe that is closely following the development of US-Russian relations.
Obama's tough position
In late March the New York Times received a printed list of the telephone conversation between Obama and Medvedev. It turned out that the Russian president continued to insist on the treaty's link with missile defence and that Obama was very angry: "'Dmitri, we agreed," Obama told Medvedev with a tone of exasperation, according to advisers. "We can't do this. If it means we're going to walk away from this treaty and not get it done, so be it. But we're not going to go down this path." Obama hung up and vented frustration. His advisers had never seen him so mad.
Experts in Moscow and Washington said that since last December Russia was trying hard to compel Obama change the US position on missile defence. Moscow believed that America needed the new treaty more than Russia. First, Obama had problems on all fronts and needed success. Second, he was awarded with the Nobel Peace Prize and, hence, he should wish to speed up the singing of such a symbolic document.
However, much to Moscow's surprise, Obama occupied a tough position - no, he won't sign a treaty in a rush. One of the explanations was pragmatic. If he made serious concessions to Moscow, the Senate would not ratify the treaty. The Republicans would accuse the president of surrendering national interests.
Obama's unexpected firmness impressed the Kremlin. Obama's success in the Senate with his reform of healthcare surprised officials in the Kremlin and the government. They concluded that Obama was not such a failure as they were starting to think.
Sources in the Foreign Ministry say that it was Putin's idea to exert pressure on Obama. Putin believed that it was not worth rushing to sign the treaty and slowed down the talks in December although officially he did not take part in them - they were held by the Kremlin and the Foreign Ministry. Last December American diplomats began to get nervous - nobody understood what Putin was really thinking and there was no way to find out - there was no contact with him.
It was only in March that Putin officially joined the talks by meeting US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. Several days later Moscow stopped fighting for the technical details of the treaty and even for its link with missile defence. Washington is convinced that Putin was involved in decision-making on the treaty since the very beginning and it seems that his opinion came first.
Extraordinary events
As a result, a reference to the link with missile defense was introduced only into the preamble to the treaty, and this was Moscow's key concession. In the preamble, the sides recognise that current strategic defensive arms should not undermine the viability and effectiveness of their strategic offensive weapons.
Konstantin Kosachyov, head of the Duma Committee on International Affairs, said on this score: "Yes, we have met the Americans halfway to facilitate ratification for them. They have reciprocated by mentioning missile defence in the preamble. When the George W. Bush administration withdrew from the ABM Treaty (Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty) in 2001, there was no mention of missile defense in any international documents but now it is there."
Kosachyov believes that the treaty's 14th chapter also has a reference to missile defence - it reads that each side can withdraw from the treaty in case of "extraordinary events." It follows from the statement disseminated by the Kremlin before the signing of the treaty in Prague that "extraordinary events" are buildup of missile defence by the Americans.
In Prague Obama promised to start a serious dialogue with Russia on missile defence. Several weeks ago NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen voiced an idea that was bound to please Moscow. He suggested creating an all-European missile shield. The Foreign Ministry met this initiative with enthusiasm. Ryabkov even told Newsweek that it was Putin rather than Rasmussen who was the real author of this idea. Putin expressed it during talks with Bush two years ago, and it is all the more pleasing to hear it from the head of NATO. Dmitry Rogozin, Russian envoy in NATO, said that Rasmussen was marching ahead the most radical advocates of rapprochement with Russia.
An example for Europe
The START treaty will not affect the future of the Russian strategic nuclear arsenal. Its reduction is inevitable in any event. Vladimir Yevseyev from the Institute of World Economy and International Relations (IMEMO) of the Russian Academy of Sciences said on this score: "Russia has done everything it could. The domestic defence industry is unable to replenish the obsolescent carriers. It has achieved a rather equitable treaty from a weaker negotiating position."
A source from the Foreign Ministry said that the most important consequences of the treaty's conclusion are not military. Russia has managed to come to terms with America about something and this opens up great prospects. Mikhail Margelov, head of the Foreign Affairs Committee of the Federation Council, shares this opinion. Now the main thing is to make a second step, he said.
After the signing of the treaty, Medvedev announced that he and Obama discussed primarily economic issues in Prague. "The economy is the most neglected aspect of our relations," he complained and called the signing of the treaty "a great start." Our source in the Foreign Ministry explained: Moscow is counting on American investment in Russia's modernisation. During the crisis, the Russian government became disappointed in China, he said. A partner that was always considered to be a better alternative to the West chose a tough line and demonstrated that it had no intention to meet Russia halfway. Today, Moscow can only attract investment from the United States and Europe and this is the reason for Moscow making concessions to Washington.
Margelov said that the signing of the treaty "revived the institutional memory." Russian government officials are learning anew to conduct talks with the Americans and the Americans are not lagging behind. Rogozin noted that not so long ago Washington appointed an envoy for the Treaty on the Conventional Forces in Europe (CFE). Russia withdrew from it during the last months of Putin's presidency. Our source in the Foreign Ministry agreed - apparently, Washington will now try to come to terms with Moscow on that issue as well.
Rogozin added that the Americans may even suggest a new treaty although they have not made any proposals yet. Victoria Nuland, the new US special envoy on CFE, is fluent in Russian. She learned the language when she was an intern in the Far East. "She worked on a Russian fishing schooner but she is silent as a fish so far," Rogozin joked.
Rapprochement with the United States is bound to improve Russia's relations with the European Union (EU), another source from the Foreign Ministry said. In his view, the start of talks on a visa-free travel between Russia and the Schengen countries may be announced at the next Russia-EU summit in Rostov. This high ranking diplomat added that in the last few months Moscow approached the European countries, with which it has particularly good relations, with the proposals to invest in Russian modernization projects. It has not yet received a positive response but the US example is bound to inspire Europeans, the diplomat assumed.
Finally, the signing of the START Treaty is bound to result in Russia's support for the American sanctions against Iran. "Sanctions as such very seldom produce results although sometimes they are unavoidable," Medvedev said in Prague.
Margelov believes that recently Iran has been doing everything to compel Russia to support the sanctions: "What should we think about Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's recent statement to the effect that Russia and the United Kingdom must pay compensation to Iran for its occupation during World War II?" A source from the Foreign Ministry believes that after the signing of the treaty Russia's relations with the West have reached the highest point in the last ten years: "Only one aspect is alarming. We think that the West still owes us and must make concessions. In the meantime, economically we are much more interested in the West than vice versa."
Mikhail Fishman and Yelena Chernenko contributed to the writing of this article