Time to Abandon ‘Reset’? : Obama’s hope that Russia would change under Medvedev has not worked out

National Review Online

When pressed to name the foreign-policy successes achieved under President Obama’s watch, administration officials routinely cite the president’s “reset” of relations with Russia as one of the most important. With Russian prime minister Vladimir Putin’s announcement on September 24 that he will run next year for the Russian presidency, this may soon change.

Putin’s announcement should not have come as a shock to anyone. Skeptics of the Obama administration’s efforts to “reset” relations have seen this coming since the policy was announced to much fanfare in March 2009.

Russia’s constitution prevented Putin from seeking a third consecutive term in 2008. When current Russian president (and Putin protégé) Dmitry Medvedev assumed office, he was widely regarded as a placeholder. The two publicly confirmed this suspicion when Putin announced his presidential bid before a large rally of the United Russia party on September 24. “I want to say directly,” said Putin, “an agreement over what to do in the future was reached between us several years ago.” Added Medvedev: “It is a deeply thought-out decision. . . . We really discussed this possible turn of events at the time when we formed our comradely union [in 2007].”

In all likelihood, it will be easy for Putin, the former Soviet KGB officer who rose to dominate Russian politics, to reclaim the country’s highest office. Putin’s United Russia party has aggressively prevented the emergence of any viable opposition. Indeed, Russia’s current ruling elites have little regard for basic democratic principles, including the impartial rule of law, free and fair elections, an independent judiciary, and an open media. As the Pew Research Center noted in analysis, “Putin has proven to be a master at mixing what his harshest critics see as old-style Soviet repressiveness with the trappings and techniques of 21st Century populism.”

Putin’s return should serve as a wakeup call for President Obama and his advisers. The “reset” policy profoundly misreads not only why U.S.-Russia relations chilled in the first place, but also what is truly required to improve them. The problem was not U.S. rhetoric or actions, but the nature of the Russian regime. U.S.-Russian relations will not be on a firm footing until Moscow changes its strategic outlook and the Russian people are truly free to choose their own leaders.

Rather than coddle the Kremlin, the Obama administration should embrace the strategic goal of helping Russia move toward a truly representative democracy. Unfortunately, the administration’s focus on questionable efforts to obtain Russian acquiescence on certain issues — such as the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty, limited cooperation on Iran, and the Northern Distribution Network into Afghanistan — has prevented administration officials from speaking frankly and repeatedly about the true nature of the Russian regime.

Instead, administration officials tried to argue that the iPad-toting, tweeting President Medvedev represented a more moderate face of the new Russia, and that administration priorities with Russia were aimed at bolstering Medvedev vis-à-vis Putin. In November 2010, Vice President Biden outlined the administration’s thinking, telling journalists: “I do believe that there is a play here.” Biden added: “Medvedev has rested everything on this notion of a reset. Who knows what Putin would do? My guess is he would not have gone there [in terms of committing to the reset], but maybe.”

The administration’s investment in Medvedev came even as opposition parties were harassed and blocked from competing in elections, peaceful protesters jailed, journalists beaten and killed, and routine legal norms repeatedly violated under Medvedev’s leadership. Russia’s rhetoric and threatening actions toward its neighbors also changed little under Medvedev, and the U.S. “reset” had the unfortunate affect of implying to U.S. allies in the region that Washington was all too willing to overlook their interests in the pursuit of cooperation with Moscow.

Moving forward, the Obama administration should recognize that there are few areas in which genuine U.S.-Russian cooperation is both possible and mutually advantageous. Combating the spread of nuclear weapons may seem like such an area, but experience has shown that Russia has little desire to deal seriously with proliferators like Iran and North Korea. Indeed, Russia has repeatedly rebuffed and watered down Obama’s attempt to address Iran’s, Syria’s, and North Korea’s nuclear misbehavior in the U.N. Security Council.

Russia has also blocked U.S. and European efforts to condemn the brutal crackdown underway in Syria by the regime of Bashar al-Assad, and dragged its feet as the Security Council debated the emerging crisis in Libya earlier this year.

The United States will continue to need Russia’s permission to fly over its territory to supply NATO forces in Afghanistan via the Northern Distribution Network — even more so as U.S.-Pakistani ties deteriorate — but this alone is not a reason to gloss over Russia’s record. The Obama administration should instead take this opportunity to advance a democracy-centered approach to Moscow.

The United States must make clear that Russia’s authoritarianism is unacceptable. Every beating and killing of a journalist, every mass arrest at an opposition rally, every rigged election, and every thuggish public statement made by a member of the regime must be roundly and repeatedly condemned by the U.S. government at the highest levels.

Recent legislative sanctions sponsored by Sen. Ben Cardin (D., Md.) in response to the murder of Russian tax lawyer Sergei Magnitsky are a worthy and notable example of this approach. In addition, the United States should use Russia’s interest in accession to the World Trade Organization to raise the profile of these human-rights concerns.

The administration must also do more to assist our ally Georgia, including through weapons sales, which have not occurred since Russia’s 2008 invasion.

With the return of Vladimir Putin, U.S.-Russian relations are headed for even more turbulent times. Unfortunately, the White House seems oblivious to that reality. In response to Putin’s announcement, Biden’s November 2010 caution was thrown to the wind as White House spokesman Tommy Vietor declared: “While we have had a very strong working relationship with President Medvedev, it’s worth noting that Vladimir Putin was prime minister through the reset. . . . We will continue to build on the progress of the reset whoever serves as the next president of Russia.”

It will be a shame if instead of using this opportunity to stand up for the interests of the United States, its allies, and democratic norms, the Obama administration continues to double down on “reset” in an effort to curry favor with the new Putin regime.

It’s time to admit the obvious. “Reset” has failed. микрозаймы онлайн payday loan https://zp-pdl.com/how-to-get-fast-payday-loan-online.php https://zp-pdl.com/emergency-payday-loans.php займ онлайн