28 January 2009: Times
By Richard Beeston, Foreign Editor
The Kremlin has finally caught on to the radical global changes triggered by President Obama’s victory and the crisis gripping the world’s economies, particularly Russia’s.
It was President Medvedev who clumsily rained on Mr Obama’s victory in November by announcing that he had ordered the deployment of Iskander missiles to Kaliningrad, the Russian enclave on the Baltic.
The move, in retaliation for former President Bush’s plans to base interceptor missiles in Poland and a radar station in the Czech Republic, threatened to plunge relations between the two Cold War rivals back 20 years and re-establish a military fault line in the heart of Europe.
The Obama Administration is reviewing the policy – intended to counter the threat of Iranian ballistic missiles – and the Russians have clearly calculated that now is the time to tender an olive branch.
Russia is ripe for a deal. Last year’s war in Georgia, its dispatch of warships to Cuba and Venezuela, and its general bluster were supposed to put the world on notice that it is once again a great power and ready to project force abroad.
Instead, as yesterday’s report by the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) highlighted, Russia is more rattle than sabre. Its military is outdated. Its economy is reeling. It faces huge social problems. As Vladimir Putin, the Prime Minister, will no doubt make clear this evening at the World Economic Forum in Davos, the Kremlin needs all the friends it can get.
This could offer huge opportunities to Mr Obama, who is due to meet President Medvedev in London in April, as he attempts to untangle the mess he has inherited from his predecessor. Better relations with Russia could help American attempts to limit Iran’s nuclear programme. The
Russians provide most of the civilian nuclear technology as well as conventional arms supplies to Tehran.
Improved ties with the Kremlin could come in handy in Afghanistan. Nato supply lines have been badly disrupted by attacks in Pakistan. The only viable alternative is through Russia.
On the diplomatic stage Russia’s permanent seat at the United Nations Security Council, and its veto power over resolutions, has hindered progress on a number of issues, such as Zimbabwe. A more accommodating Kremlin might be persuaded to sacrifice its support for Robert Mugabe in exchange for warmer ties with Washington.
Certainly the Russians seem to have finally grasped the implications of Mr Obama’s whirlwind foreign policy review, launched the moment he set foot in the Oval Office last week.
Some leaders are taking rather longer to catch on. Mr Obama’s gesture of friendship to Iran in an interview this week on an Arab satellite news channel has clearly unsettled the regime Tehran. President Ahmadinejad reacted to the offer by demanding America apologise for “dark records” and “crimes” against Iran. He also wants Washington to withdraw all US forces from around the world and halt its support for Israel.
Even America’s strongest ally in the region is proving troublesome. When George Mitchell, Mr Obama’s special envoy to the Middle East, arrived in Israel today he was greeted with reports of fresh violence in Gaza and the likelihood that Israelis will elect a hard-right government when the country goes to the polls on February 10.
Mr Obama may be able to work his magic in many corners of the globe, neglected, offended and bruised during the Bush era. But he will also learn that even with the best will, the Middle East will cling stubbornly to its well-earned reputation as the world’s problem child.
Go to Military Balance Homepage
