Tweet
What Shared Interests Might Putin and Obama Have?
Igor Muradyan, Political Analyst
Comments - Monday, 28 April 2014, 13:00
George Friedman, the head of Stratfor in Texas which was established
in 1996 and aspires to the role of a global intelligence center is a
great imaginer but also a shrewd analyst. He has published an article
on developments expected in neighbor countries of Russia and Eastern
Europe (From Estonia to Azerbaijan: American Strategy After Ukraine,
by George Friedman Tuesday, 25 March
2014).[http://www.stratfor.com/weekly/estonia-azerbaijan-american-strategy-after-ukraine]
The author observes the prospects of geopolitical blockade of Russia
as NATO member states cut military expenditure and the alliance faces
certain disagreement when it is necessary to revise the role of some
states which surround Russia to contain the latter's expansion.
These thoughts do not seem to be new but the article is interesting in
the context of Obama's policy and Ukraine developments. We will not
retell the content of the article because it is available to readers
and we would like to share our point of view on this prospect.
During Obama's presidency the United States has revised its policy on
Russia twice. The ex-U.S. ambassador to Russia Michael McFaul's
concept was aimed at moderate containment of Russian foreign political
aspirations that did not suffer much from Secretary Condoleezza Rice's
concept worked out during Bush administration on ignoring Russia,
viewing Russia as a secondary state and a secondary issue.
It's been 14 years Russia has been confronting different expressions
of this concept. NATO is not ready and willing to make similar efforts
to contain Russia in Eastern Europe and other regions, which would
require boosting military expenses. Currently the United States and
NATO do not have another medium-term approach except for building the
`blockade capacity' of Poland, Ukraine, Romania, Turkey, Georgia and
Azerbaijan.
In addition, the current relationship between Turkey and Russia is
rather tense and far from the solution of pending issues. Hence, with
minimum foreign initiative, Turkey will volunteer to support the
policy of isolation of Russia. Turkey is more than ever interested in
this policy and, furthermore, it is forcing concessions from Russia in
the Black Sea and Caucasian region. Besides, Turkey's involvement in
this policy increases its role and claims in the region and the in the
world.
Of the two sovereign states of the South Caucasus, Georgia and
Azerbaijan, the latter will have the greater value in the policy of
isolation of Russia and the bid is on Azerbaijan, which is the news
that occurred after the Eastern Partnership summit in Vilnius where
the Eastern Partnership project was thwarted, and Georgia alone is not
able to achieve its task.
Azerbaijan is not a suitable option for the West, and not a long time
ago it was listed among Central Asian states. However, the West now
sees no alternative in the South Caucasus as Azerbaijan's style is
well known in the world. It will claim its `rights' in return for
these services, especially when shattering the positions of Russia's
vassals is concerned.
In the result of the failure of the Western Partnership Azerbaijan and
Turkey received an unexpected and expensive gift, and will accept it
readily.
NATO carries out versatile activities in the South Caucasus which are
divided according to two styles and content. The first is real
integration of sovereign states, the second involves irritating Russia
by sending delegations to its vassal states. In addition, now the
relationship between Russia and its vassals is considered not as
temporary or tactical but hostile, and the policy of isolation of
Russia and collapse of its economy is applied to its vassals as well.
Despite the crisis of the genre (it has, after all, existed for 18
years, people might be tired), Stratfor, nevertheless, is always ahead
of the developments, giving the analytical community a boost.
Apparently, the concept of isolation of Russia is acquiring a new
content.
Currently the issue of Russia, not Ukraine, serves as an important
direction and lever in the domestic scramble in the United States. The
Republicans will not miss the `Russian factor'. Putin understands that
Democrats need help in this stage and tries to use this opportunity.
Obama had a telephone conversation with Putin during his visit to
Saudi Arabia. Apparently, there are mutual interests. Putin seemed to
take interest in oil and gas prices and prevention of geopolitical and
economic isolation. Obama is interested in successful election of his
successor of the Democratic Party, as well as prevention of a
fundamental change of his foreign policy.
On whose side is George Friedman now?
- See more at: http://www.lragir.am/index/eng/0/comments/view/32350#sthash.KONtCd8I.dpuf
Igor Muradyan, Political Analyst
Comments - Monday, 28 April 2014, 13:00
George Friedman, the head of Stratfor in Texas which was established
in 1996 and aspires to the role of a global intelligence center is a
great imaginer but also a shrewd analyst. He has published an article
on developments expected in neighbor countries of Russia and Eastern
Europe (From Estonia to Azerbaijan: American Strategy After Ukraine,
by George Friedman Tuesday, 25 March
2014).[http://www.stratfor.com/weekly/estonia-azerbaijan-american-strategy-after-ukraine]
The author observes the prospects of geopolitical blockade of Russia
as NATO member states cut military expenditure and the alliance faces
certain disagreement when it is necessary to revise the role of some
states which surround Russia to contain the latter's expansion.
These thoughts do not seem to be new but the article is interesting in
the context of Obama's policy and Ukraine developments. We will not
retell the content of the article because it is available to readers
and we would like to share our point of view on this prospect.
During Obama's presidency the United States has revised its policy on
Russia twice. The ex-U.S. ambassador to Russia Michael McFaul's
concept was aimed at moderate containment of Russian foreign political
aspirations that did not suffer much from Secretary Condoleezza Rice's
concept worked out during Bush administration on ignoring Russia,
viewing Russia as a secondary state and a secondary issue.
It's been 14 years Russia has been confronting different expressions
of this concept. NATO is not ready and willing to make similar efforts
to contain Russia in Eastern Europe and other regions, which would
require boosting military expenses. Currently the United States and
NATO do not have another medium-term approach except for building the
`blockade capacity' of Poland, Ukraine, Romania, Turkey, Georgia and
Azerbaijan.
In addition, the current relationship between Turkey and Russia is
rather tense and far from the solution of pending issues. Hence, with
minimum foreign initiative, Turkey will volunteer to support the
policy of isolation of Russia. Turkey is more than ever interested in
this policy and, furthermore, it is forcing concessions from Russia in
the Black Sea and Caucasian region. Besides, Turkey's involvement in
this policy increases its role and claims in the region and the in the
world.
Of the two sovereign states of the South Caucasus, Georgia and
Azerbaijan, the latter will have the greater value in the policy of
isolation of Russia and the bid is on Azerbaijan, which is the news
that occurred after the Eastern Partnership summit in Vilnius where
the Eastern Partnership project was thwarted, and Georgia alone is not
able to achieve its task.
Azerbaijan is not a suitable option for the West, and not a long time
ago it was listed among Central Asian states. However, the West now
sees no alternative in the South Caucasus as Azerbaijan's style is
well known in the world. It will claim its `rights' in return for
these services, especially when shattering the positions of Russia's
vassals is concerned.
In the result of the failure of the Western Partnership Azerbaijan and
Turkey received an unexpected and expensive gift, and will accept it
readily.
NATO carries out versatile activities in the South Caucasus which are
divided according to two styles and content. The first is real
integration of sovereign states, the second involves irritating Russia
by sending delegations to its vassal states. In addition, now the
relationship between Russia and its vassals is considered not as
temporary or tactical but hostile, and the policy of isolation of
Russia and collapse of its economy is applied to its vassals as well.
Despite the crisis of the genre (it has, after all, existed for 18
years, people might be tired), Stratfor, nevertheless, is always ahead
of the developments, giving the analytical community a boost.
Apparently, the concept of isolation of Russia is acquiring a new
content.
Currently the issue of Russia, not Ukraine, serves as an important
direction and lever in the domestic scramble in the United States. The
Republicans will not miss the `Russian factor'. Putin understands that
Democrats need help in this stage and tries to use this opportunity.
Obama had a telephone conversation with Putin during his visit to
Saudi Arabia. Apparently, there are mutual interests. Putin seemed to
take interest in oil and gas prices and prevention of geopolitical and
economic isolation. Obama is interested in successful election of his
successor of the Democratic Party, as well as prevention of a
fundamental change of his foreign policy.
On whose side is George Friedman now?
- See more at: http://www.lragir.am/index/eng/0/comments/view/32350#sthash.KONtCd8I.dpuf