Re-Booting NATO-Russia Relations
MOSCOW – The crisis in Georgia last August tested Europe’s security system, and the system failed to fulfill its core task of ensuring common security for the continent as a whole. As a result, Europe must re-examine its current security arrangements, analyze what happened, and take this analysis into account in reforming those arrangements.
Even before the Georgia crisis, Russia already saw a need to revisit the mechanisms of European security, including its international and regional institutions and their functions. We suggested a new, legally binding treaty system of mutual security guarantees to ensure equal security throughout Europe.
The European Union believes that the Russian initiative is well grounded and has shown interest in launching such a project. There are leaders in the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) who are also willing to take part. NATO, however, has stood aside. I was supposed to put forward Russian proposals on the new security concept to the NATO-Russia Council (NRC) last September. But the Alliance refused to hold the scheduled meeting following the Georgia crisis.
When the NRC was created in 2002, it was devised as a mechanism for dialogue, cooperation, and joint decision-making on issues of mutual interest, including non-proliferation and arms control, the fight against terrorism, civil emergency planning, and military-to-military cooperation. The NRC also was supposed to act as a forum for “holding prompt consultations” in crisis situations and to prevent such crises by “early identification of emerging problems.”
Unfortunately, the Georgian crisis demonstrated that Russia’s dialogue with NATO was less substantial than it should have been. Yet NATO-Russia cooperation is of the outmost importance to global security. We need NATO and NATO needs us in order to face common threats and challenges. On the other hand, Russia will not go cap in hand to NATO. We are not interested in the illusion of partnership. Indeed, Russia’s foremost foreign-policy goal is a real, strategic partnership with the West in which we work together to solve the multitude of modern security problems.
I don’t have a crystal ball, but I’m certain that several years from now we should be able to look back at the Georgian crisis as a turning point. Already we can name three “growth factors” that will help the new security system to mature – the development of the European Security and Defense Policy, the transformation of NATO, and Russia’s return to its rightful position on the world stage.
Russia is not becoming assertive, aggressive, or imperial, as many observers claim. We are only claiming what is rightfully ours – a place in the front row of international relations. The world will have to get used to the fact that Russia is no longer a feeble country. Is it so incomprehensible that we have strategic interests and national security concerns?
Russia has tried for years to get away from Cold War thinking and to persuade our partners to drop their stereotypes. After the terror attacks of September 11, 2001, Russia quickly extended a helping hand to the Americans. But the West did not appreciate this gesture. Military bases have been impetuously established along Russia’s perimeter. The United States plans to establish part of its global missile defense system in the Czech Republic and Poland. The Warsaw Pact ceased to exist 20 years ago, but NATO still proceeds eastward, adding new member states for reasons other than enhancing security and democracy.
Russia is not interested in confrontation; we want to focus on our own development, prosperity, and stability. But successful development is possible only in the context of transparent and equal international relations, together with stability and security in our neighborhood. Thus, we are interested in a strong and independent Europe. And the development of EU military capacities and EU security policy is an important factor in European and global security.
It is time for Europe to stop acting like an occupied continent and start displaying its own political will. The action taken by the EU in the course of the Georgian crisis proved that Europeans have such an aspiration and are willing to fulfill their role as a global player, which will become increasingly apparent in the coming years.
As for NATO, we in Russia think it should adapt and transform itself to suit the new environment. During this transformation, NATO must keep in mind that the primary responsibility for global peace and security lies with the United Nations. For the moment, though, NATO and its leaders have no clear answer to the question: where do we go from here? The Alliance’s strategic concept is outdated, yet it cannot even agree on when to start preparing a new one. Its forces are overstretched in Afghanistan, and its members are using it to advance their own goals.
A real, working NATO-Russia relationship could provide the Alliance with solutions to problems that it cannot tackle on its own. It would also give new impetus to the European security system. This is what we want to see in the future – and it is a future that is not possible without Russia. To see why, simply compare the importance of combating international terrorism with the value of nurturing Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili’s personal ambitions; things soon fall into place.
Europe needs an integrated, solid, and indivisible system of comprehensive security. We are not calling for abolishing everything and starting from scratch. On the contrary, we must build on existing institutions. In short, we need to retain the hardware, but update the software. Russia’s initiative for a pan-European security treaty should be the new operating system.
