[ad_1]
In July 2009, Barack Obama went to Moscow for talks with Dmitry Medvedev, then president of Russia, but included in his program a meeting with Vladimir Putin, who in a short political hibernation duration as Prime Minister, remains the most powerful figure of the country. One morning, Obama and his entourage went to Putin's residence in Novo-Ogaryovo, a wooded estate twenty kilometers from the capital. The broadcast was lavish, like Michael McFaul-Obama's senior adviser on Russian politics, and later, the US ambassador to Moscow – writes in his memoir, "From the cold war to hot peace" , with the weight of several types of caviar and exotic eggs. "A waiter in traditional nineteenth century peasant costume took off his big leather boot, using it to fan the fire in the samovar warming water for our tea," writes McFaul.
Before Obama could say much, Putin embarked on telling America's misdeeds: how did Washington postpone Russia's aid offerings after the September 11 attacks, committed the fatal sin of the war in Iraq and provoked a political upheaval among Russia's neighbors. It was a story of grievance and frustration, with Russia as a victim. Putin, writes McFaul, "knew how to tell a dramatic story.For every vignette or confrontation, he told the president the date, the place and who was at the meeting." The meeting had been scheduled for sixty minutes, and " at the minute fifty-five, the American president had said nothing. "
On July 16, in Helsinki, it will be Trump's turn. Putin is sure to start their bilateral meeting with an equally aggrieved and discursive conference, with Washington in the role of anti-hero, committing the sins of pride, outreach and disrespect. (On some points, Putin may not be so far in the diagnosis of some chronic pathologies of US foreign policy.)
Putin will likely explain how the Obama administration mismanaged and messed up the US-Russian relations in recent years. years, a tense period in which the two countries clashed over everything from Edward Snowden to Ukraine to US election interference. Given Trump's animosity for Obama, and his inclination to favor any policy that represents the opposite of that of his predecessor, such a narrative may find a receptive audience. In fact, on many points dear to Putin, Trump has already shown that he may not need much persuasion: he questioned the relevance of NATO suggested that Crimea be Russian after all. in doubt about the interference of Russia in the presidential election that put it into office.
So what does it mean for Putin's goals in Helsinki? On Wednesday, the day the details of the meeting were formally announced, I met Andrey Klimov, vice chairman of the foreign affairs committee of the Federation Council, the upper chamber of the Russian parliament. His position is not particularly influential, but it makes him a faithful and rather crystalline factotum of Kremlin politics. "Every day, Trump receives reports from the State Department of the CIA, NSC, telling him what Russia has done now, where it has behaved badly: they poisoned someone here. they gave money there, and so he has a certain conception of Russia and Putin, "Klimov said. The meeting in Helsinki is an opportunity for Trump "to hear on the other side, as in court." Putin can explain why he did this or that, why this policy is needed. "Exotic eggs or not, Trump can nod his head.
For months, Russia has not had much policy to deal with the United States other than hoping that things will not degrade, whether in terms of new sanctions or military confrontations in Syria, and meanwhile hold a summit. A large part of the Russian political establishment is invested in the idea that Trump himself might like to improve relations with Russia, but he is constantly surrounded by Congress and a Washington political bureaucracy that does not will not allow him to do it. According to Russian officials, a one-to-one meeting is an opportunity to overcome these groups of influence and appeal directly, an approach that matches the habits and beliefs of the ruling elite Russian: they understand and know how to manage individuals less institutions, with their amorphous power centers and their internal counterpowers.
The recent meeting in Singapore between Trump and Kim Jong Un was certainly instructive. Russian officials have taken note of this, Andrei Kortunov, the director of Russia's International Affairs Council, told me. "Putin looked at the Singapore summit and saw that Kim was able to reduce the threat to himself with minimal cost, and is sure to think, 'Am I worse, or what?' "
Singapore apart, Trump has generally shown that it is both malleable and ignorant – an ideal combination for someone like Putin, who will surely try to dazzle Trump with details like those that he unveiled during his meeting with Obama, as when he told the former president Russia is a piece of antiterrorist intelligence. "Dramatically, he greeted the servers that serve us tea, bent over and told Obama that they had used this information to" liquidate "the terrorists," writes McFaul in his narrative of the scene . "One Can Only Imagine Trump's Joy"
Yet, what makes Trump the most understandable and alluring American interlocutor that Putin ever had is something more fundamental: Trump's zero sum, a totally transactional view of politics.The primacy of interests over values - or rather, a rejection of the idea that the former might have some relevance for the latter – reflects the own Putin's vision of the world, Klimov said earlier US presidents, especially Obama, were motivated by the belief in the "universal virtue of the American system" and by the notion that "the more there is States that accept and follow this system. "This" policy as ideological-philosophical expansion. "But Trump, he said, sees politics as a business. values away, everything is echan
Yet no one in Moscow is expecting to summit; there is little hope that Trump, for example, will lift sanctions against Russia or formally recognize Crimea. This is not the case – at least not yet. Most centrally, Putin is after the symbolism of a bilateral summit, as a clear recognition that the US attempts to isolate and marginalize Russia have failed. The fact that Russia is a world power can not be ignored and must be treated on an equal footing. Klimov called this a "return to common sense", and an achievement in itself: "When you go from abnormal to normal, it's already good."
I heard something similar when I spoke with Fyodor Lukyanov, editor of the newspaper Russia in World Affairs and a prominent foreign policy commentator. "The lack of contact is a bit alarming," he said, noting that even in the most tense days of the cold war, US and Soviet leaders had active channels of communication that they used. to maintain a basic understanding. avoid accidental escalation. Adding to the discomfort with the near-total absence of dialogue is "a situation where the President of the United States is, shall we say, not exactly a very standard figure, it's a little scary. " Russian officials, including Putin, But they are no less confused than the rest of us when, say, he contradicts himself, and his generals, in the space of a few days on the question whether US forces are getting from Syria or, in fact, escalating military operations there. "Putin wants to understand what kind of person is this," said Lukyanov.
With regard to Putin and his entourage, the Trump presidency to date has been full of promising statements but an undesirable action, whether by signing a new sanctions bill, agreeing to provide the Ukraine lethal weapons, or launch missile strikes in Syria. The result of such an imbalance between speech and action is that after a year and a half, the kind of improvised remarks that create such a political storm in the United States are not taken seriously in Moscow . I have not been able to find a competent expert or politician, for example, who has paid serious attention to Trump's reported comments by the G-7 in Canada, when he suggested that Crimea belongs to the United States. to Russia because most speak Russian there. "It is clear now that Trump is a" bone-free language "- a Russian saying for a person likely to say no matter what – Lukyanov told me." There is no need to react "
The content of the Helsinki Summit should focus on negotiations on the war in Syria, Ukraine and possibly on arms control.This last point is where an agreement on the legal and technical levels is possible, which makes it an obvious place for Putin and Trump's advisers.For political reasons, Trump will have to raise the issue of electoral interference, even if Putin and he share an interest in keeping the conversation short and vague, without going into the details of the operation of influence of Russia in 2016.
Several sources in Moscow told me in recent days that Putin might be willing to talk about the l & # 39; 39, electoral interference in extremely narrow terms or in believably broad: on the one hand, Putin could be open to signing a joint declaration in which both parties agree not to hack the voting systems of the other. (This would leave all other forms of interference not taken into account.) On the other hand, Putin would be happy to opt for a statement that speaks of sovereignty and non-interference, more broadly, the elections being only one of the issues addressed. The Russian side would interpret such an agreement as limiting the actions of institutions such as the foreign-funded media and the New Zealand government, which the Kremlin has long believed to be agents of regime change. If Putin could get Trump to accept such a statement, it would be considered a big victory in Moscow.
As sure as Putin is trying to manipulate Trump, he also knows that he has to deliver something that satisfies Trump's ego and that he can sell at home as a great triumph. The Kremlin will spend the next two weeks with what it can be, a trifle that looks good on television but has little risk or cost. "Everyone knows that Trump needs something that he can interpret as a victory," Kortunov said. "But what does Russia have to offer?" He said that the answer was not yet clear. "It will be a personal decision of Putin himself, most likely taken at the meeting itself."
A historical weakness of the system Putin is that he can not back down: he does not have the ability to recognize mistakes or abandon counterproductive policies. It is partly a question of habit and inertia, but also a belief function. As Vladimir Frolov, foreign affairs columnist for Republic, a Russian news and political information website, said, Putin and his advisers are convinced that "any course correction leads to massive capitulation". The result is that it is very difficult for Russia to make even modest, if not rational, adjustments to its policies, whether in Syria or Ukraine or in its relations with the United States. In time, says Frolov, this has led to a kind of "magical thinking": Putin and those around him think in some way that they can "realize a turnaround without bringing in". 39, significant adjustments to their course ". have found an American president who is doing the real magic.
Source link
