Tuesday, April 14, 2015

What Would A Clinton Presidency Mean for Relations With Russia?




After a long buildup, Hillary Clinton finally announced the start of her campaign for the 2016 presidential race on Sunday. But what does the early frontrunner have in store for US relations with Russia? If the past is any indicator of things to come, nothing good.
Discussing the possibility of a Clinton presidency in a recent article for PolitRussia.com, analyst Ivan Proshkin noted that Russian hopes to 'wait Obama out' and negotiate with whomever comes after him would be a moot point, should Clinton be his successor. "There's nothing wrong with dreaming," the analyst notes, "but an analysis of the likely outcome of the 2016 presidential campaign does not inspire any confidence in [such negotiations] occurring."
Analyzing Clinton's chances, Russian America watchers, like their US counterparts, point to the dynastic politician's experience, her substantial political clout and powerful political and financial backers, as well as the absence of a dynamic Republican contender. The economy's signs of recovery, following nearly a decade of recession, certainly doesn't harm the Democrats, either.
So, if the 'Iron Lady of American politics' already has pundits crowning her the 45th president, what is it that Russian analysts find so depressing about her possible reign?
Well, for one thing, there's Clinton's sharply antagonistic rhetoric toward Russia, its "behavior" and its plans for partnership and cooperation with its former Soviet neighbors. Amidst the Maidan coup and Crimea's organization of a referendum to rejoin Russia last year, Clinton compared Vladimir Putin to Hitler, stating that the Russian leader's actions amidst the growing conflict in post-coup Ukraine was something akin to "what Hitler did back in the '30s."
Stubbornly defending her Putin-Hitler commentary as a call for "a little historical perspective," Clinton would go on to call the president "a tough guy with thin skin," and a "cold-blooded, calculating former KGB agent," comments receiving the acclaim of Congress Republicans and Republican pundits alike. At a fundraising speech last October, Clinton would state that the Russian president was "a bully" the US must "stand up to, encircle and…try to choke off his ability to be so aggressive." The former Secretary of State added in no uncertain terms that the Russian leadership's agenda "threatens American interests," noting that it was "a mistake" for European powers to seek to avoid the expansion of the sanctions war against Russia.With Republican big fish, think tanks and independent analysts frequently commenting on Clinton's famous 'Russia Reset' initiative as an example of the kind of 'poor leadership' she would show on Russia, the former Secretary of State has repeatedly responded that she has always been skeptical about the possibility for a real improvement in ties. Last July, Clinton noted that she was "among the most skeptical of Putin during the time that I was [in the State Department], in part because I thought he had never given up his vision of bringing 'Mother Russia' back to the forefront."

And while the long undeclared presidential frontrunner has had to jump through hoops for potential 'tough on Russia' sponsors and voters at home, the proof that Clinton was serious about the reset isn't actually that hard to find. As far back as 2012, when the chaos of post-Maidan Ukraine was nothing more than a nightmare scenario for Russian security analysts, Clinton gave a speech in Dublin, where she warned against what she called Russian moves "to re-Sovietize the region." Clinton admitted that "it's not going to be called that," stating that "it's going to be called a customs union…a Eurasian Union and all of that. But let's make no mistake about it. We know what the goal is and we are trying to figure out effective ways to slow down or prevent it."
And Clinton backed her words with actions. As Russia Insider pointed out in an article last October, Clinton's State Department "steadily increased its anti-Russia line, and pushed for Ukraine to choose between Europe and Russia, plowing $5 billion into anti-Russian civil society groups in Ukraine." The independent analysis portal pointed out that the 2011-2012 protest-supporting ambassador Michael McFaul was "Clinton's man in Moscow," while then-State Department Spokesperson Victoria Nuland and US ambassador to Ukraine Geoffrey Pyatt also served as Clinton's close Russia advisors. The pair ended up coordinating policy in Ukraine during the events of Maidan, handing out cookies and serving as kingmakers to post-coup Kiev.

Hence, while conservative commentators and their affiliated PACs and think tanks may be giving Clinton the evil eye, as far as Russia policy is concerned, the two political groups actually see eye-to-eye.

In his PolitRussia piece, Proshkin notes that Clinton's policy stance of isolating Russia, formulated during her tenure as Secretary of State, at least a year prior to the official cooling of relations over Ukraine, "denies Russia the right to carry out any sort of sovereign policy in the former Soviet Union, an area which, for a number of reasons (including historical and cultural) Russia considers as its area of interest." In this way, "any integration processes between the countries of the former Soviet Union under Russian leadership is termed 'Sovietization', 'anti-democraticization,' and by other terrifying words."

Proshkin argues that by "narrowing the field of Russia's sovereign policy to the limits of its frontiers," Clinton seeks to refuse Russia "the right to an independent foreign policy as such." The independent analyst believes that "this means that following her possible victory in 2016, Mrs. Clinton will not only attempt to squeeze Russia from Ukraine and the Crimea, but also from the Caucasus and Central Asia, where through Orange Revolutions new [pro-US] regimes can be set up, serving to "lock" Russia in a cordon sanitaire."
Ultimately, Proskin notes that Russian America watchers are nearly unanimous in their verdict that should Clinton be elected, Russian-American relations will see a "further deterioration and a slide into an even 'warmer' phase of the new Cold War." With Clinton seeking to "put Russia in its place" and Russia continuing its attempts to break out of the US-led world order, the analyst believes that a Clinton victory will ensure at least four more years of frozen relations between the two countries.

In 2009, amidst the much touted and heavily publicized 'Reset' of relations between Russia and the US, featuring Clinton laughing it up with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, Russian journalists noticed a minor error on the little red reset button rolled out as a symbol for the new era of improved ties. The famous red button on a yellow and black box included a minor translation error. Instead of reading 'Perezagruzka' (reset), the button actually read 'Peregruzka' (overload). Written off as a minor flub at the time, the significance of the error has grown from a minor blip into an ever-widening chasm. In hindsight, an aide's translation error may have turned into a harbinger of things to come. If Clinton clinches the nomination, defeats her opponents and becomes the next US president, the 'peregruzka' in Russian relations seems likely to reach new heights.


Read more: http://sputniknews.com/analysis/20150412/1020801922.html#ixzz3XKp6C3xg

No comments: