PROBLEM OF RUSSIA'S GEO-STRATEGIC CHOICE
Dr.Elman NASIROV
Baku State University
Russia is one of the potential power source bearers in the
configuration of the perspective geopolitics in the world. The
following important statistical indicators may serve for improvement
of the geopolitical status of Russia (1):
Its territory is 17 million kmē. For comparison, the same figure
in the USA is 9,4 million, Canada- 10 million, China- 9,6 million
kmē. Russia's potential of the natural reserves is 21 % out
of the correspondent world potential. Cost of the discovered
mineral resources is 28,6 trillion dollars. Total capacity of
the forecasted reserves is evaluated at the sum of 140 trillion
dollars. Russia owns 10 % of the produced oil in the world,
30 % of gas, 10% of coal, and 10-15 % of the less-common non-ferrous
metals. The country takes 4th place in the world in the cast
iron production (40,1 million tons), 5th place in the steel
production (51,5 million tons) and 5th place in the coal production
(249 million tons).
Russia takes the 2nd place after the USA by its railway length,
the 1st place by their electrification in the world. It takes
the 2nd place by the ship quantity and 4th place by the indicator
of their cargo-loading capacity in the world.
Russia has saved nearly 60% of the military potential of the
USSR. It is in the 1st place by the nuclear potential (55% of
the nuclear potential; 40% is in the USA). 20-25% of the ordinary
weapons of the world is maintained namely in Russia.
As it can be seen, Russia has large opportunities in the view
of economic and military potential to keep its "big power"
status. However, familiarization with the local situation confirms
the existence of the complicated problems that put under the
question the perspectives of realization of this potential.
It is the deputy chairman of the Education and Science Committee
of State Duma of Russia, member of the Agro-industrial deputy
group Oleg Nicolayevich Smolin's opinion that not only reforms
but also revolution has been carried out in Russia. Any attribute
of the social-political revolution is calamity. In his opinion,
in the view of the term, scale and quantity, the calamity Russia
has been facing in the last ten years left behind not only "Great
depression" in the USA, but even fixed an absolute record
for the 20th century in the peaceful period. (2) The author
demonstrates the contemporary situation of Russia with the facts
as follows:
Economic Crisis. According to the scientists
from Siberian department of Academy of Sciences of Russia, agricultural
production in the country in the years of 1985-1995 had decreased
3,6 times, industrial production - 5,3 times, as well as production
of the light industry and defense complex - 10 times. As a result
of this, according to the information of the World Bank, in
2000 Russia took the place among under-developed countries by
the production of goods per capita, as well as was 20-30 % lower
in comparison with such states as Algeria, Syria and Tunis.
Federal budget of Russia was 2 times lower than the budget of
Sweden and 3,5 times - than the budge of Holland. It is the
experts' opinion that Russia has 12-year term discovered oil
and 60-year term gas reserves.
Financial Crisis. Foreign debt of Russia has
increased from 70 billion to 150 billion dollars in ten years.
So, each citizen in Russia is in the state of being a debtor
to the foreign countries at the sum of over 1000 dollars. In
order to reimburse the debt fully, funds of 4 federal budgets
are required. One of the numerous paradoxes of the country policy
is that left opponents of the globalization speak in favor of
removal of debts (including Russia's debts); Russia is against
the globalization opponents.
Demographic Crisis. Country population has decreased
from 148 to 143 million people in ten years (1992-2002). According
to the most optimistic forecasts, Russian population will decrease
by 10-15 million people in the next 25 years. It is forecasted
that this figure will reach the level of 75 million in 2050
and 55 million in 2075. It cannot be ignored that according
to UN forecasts, in 2025 China's population will reach 1,5 billion,
India - 1,6 billion, USA - 325 million people. In such a condition,
Russia might repeat the fate of the antique civilization: the
nation might die out and the culture remains.
Social Crisis. Process of the society criminalization
is proceeding at a high speed. Nearly 3 million criminal acts
are registered in Russia every year. Actually, this figure is
much higher. Significant and dangerous special crimes consist
over 60 % of all the crimes. In the year of 1999 180 thousand
teenagers who are actually potential criminals, were registered.
According to the results of an international survey, Russia
takes 7th - 6th place by the level of criminality among 85 countries.
Russia that has always been adherent to the alcoholic beverages
was in the 1st place by this figure in the 1990s. The most dangerous
is that mass alcoholism has wrapped up the drug addiction. Over
4 million people use narcotic drugs. In the years of 1990-1998,
number of AIDS deceased in Russia had increased 20 times, in
the next years this figure is expected to increase not less
than 2 times each year.
Geopolitical Crisis. The Soviet Union (Great
Russia) has already been removed from the political arena. Russia
that is a bearer of number of the abovementioned crises has
appeared instead of it.
As the President of "Politics" Fund, doctor of the
historical sciences Vyacheslav Alexeyevich Nikonov, stated that
Russia has been in its weakest period since the period of Mongol-Tatars.
(3) In his opinion, as a result of the Soviet and post-Soviet
experiments, Russia has been thrown back to the frontiers of
Ivan Grozny.
So, Russia that has been choosing any of the geo-strategic
options in the course of the history has faced the same problem
repeatedly many times. Correctness of this choice has an impact
on the development of not only Russia, but also neighboring
countries, as well as Azerbaijan. In this case, taking into
account topicality of this problem nowadays, let's get familiar
with Russian public and scientific opinion that is forming around
this issue.
Basically, in the issue of setting a line of the perspective
development of Russia three main approaches should be considered:
(4)
1. Western approach;
2. Eurasian approach;
3. Anti-western approach.
In accordance with these approaches, three models of the geopolitical
choices are offered:
1. Russia is a Western country;
2. Russia has its own and isolated civilization;
3. Russia is the leader of the anti-western world.
First of all, let's start with the Western direction. According
to this approach, Russia's interests should be brought to conformity
with the interests of the West. Membership in NATO and European
Union should be achieved.
Russia should not resist the expansion process of these organizations
and not react the interventions such as bombing of Iraq and
"rogue states". (5) According to the position of the
bearers of this approach, high economical, military and technological
potential of the West should be effective in Russia's decision-making
process. In other words, Russia should be on the side of the
powerful ones.
The supporters of the Eurasian approach think that it is incorrect
to learn two simplified prisms of the world (west and anti-west).
According to them, Asia should not be ignored that contains
half of the world economy and population. In case of an accompaniment
of the adequate step from Russia to this region, the required
result might be achieved. According to the Eurasian approach,
NATO and European Union are unreal choices and in such a condition
unsuccessfulness of the foreign political activity is inevitable.
Representatives of the anti-western approach claim that close
relations with China, India and other perspective Asian countries
should be established and the ties with the Western world should
be terminated, as well as close ties with the powers that are
considered "rogue states" by the USA should be established.
They consider namely Western world as a main culprit of Russia's
weakening. However, in the view of the unreality of this goal,
this approach is non-perspective and perhaps even the most dangerous
one.
Leadership of Russia is an issue far from the reality in the
anti-western camp. Strategic cooperation of Russia and China
does not mean an alliance yet. Though the administration of
Peking that is very cautious is disappointed with some movements
of the US, it does not intend to contradict the USA in the name
of bigger interests. Even after coincide of Chinese embassy
to Belgrade to NATO's rocket attacks, Peking demonstrated its
devotion to the traditional careful behavior. (6)
Russia may suffer from the contradiction to the West even much
more. In particular, contradiction appeared in the background
of the financial dependence on the West; it might be a factor
that would break the stability in the periphery of Russia and
inside the country. As a result of the contradiction to the
West, actually, Russia might be put it in the state of not only
weak economics, but even paralysis.
Eurasian direction provides development of the country at the
expense of its own opportunities; includes maintenance and development
ties with those that want to be in a good friendly relations
with Russia; considers important promotion of the modernization
line at the expense of the mobilization and strengthening of
the government.
In our opinion, it is hard to believe that the hopes for the
development in the background of real lag of Russia (it was
considered above), population's tiredness of the communist experiments
and reforms for decade would be realized. Basing on the development
at the expense of its own opportunities, the gap between Russia
and the West will increase. The reason is that the oil, gas,
metal, wood and others that are considered the main natural
resources of Russia are cheap-sold goods. These goods are much
cheaper than the computer programs and other high technologies.
The variant of mobilization might provide short-term yields
but the problems that might appear later are deepening; Russia
remains beyond the world's financial sources; the most important
is that feeling of the initiative in the part of the population
that leads active life would be ruined (in particular, it will
have a negative impact on the next generation).
The states that intend to establish close relations with Russia
would like to gain more benefits than the others. In other words,
Russia isn't a perspective partner; only the "buyer states"
that watch it with the eyes of the "donor-states"
might benefit from it. For example, the same as "Russia-Belarus
Union", which has been forming up-to-now. Eurasian approach
together with all negative seditions might roll Russia in the
anti-western direction in the end.
Finally, there are enough supporters of this model that would
serve the development perspectives of Russia. According to its
position, Russia cannot become a part of the West, but it should
not be anti-western as well. Russia cannot compete at the expense
of its own resources in the world market. Isolation and confrontation
elements cannot be allowed in the foreign policy. Russia should
integrate into the world economy at the maximum possible level,
achieve attraction of large amounts of the investments and increase
competition coefficient in the world market. Russia has the
potential to implement these obligations.
According to the supporters of this model, the issue of membership
in the European Union and NATO should be set as a goal. As a
whole, unsuccessful activity in the name of the obligations
and goals that do not relate to the reality and pragmatic consideration
should not be admitted.
In the issues, which relate to the interests of both the West
and Russia, the cooperation might be established and actually,
it is necessary. In the issues of contradiction Russia should
not compromise its national interests to the West.
As it can be seen, in spite of the fact that strategic goal
in all considered models is to provide Russia with the exceptional
position in the hierarchy of the leading states of 21st century,
tactical measures to be carried out in this direction vary considerably.
Actually, the problem Russia faces is so complicated because
it embraces the necessity of softening contradictions with the
West as much as possible, which might assist with its abilities,
such as restoration of the economic power of the state and development
of the goals on the one hand, and investment, credit and other
opportunities with the purpose of the achievement of this goal
on the other hand. So, in this condition Russia's relations
with the West are possibly at the level of the cooperation.
The relations between Moscow and Washington cannot be considered
as an equal cooperation, at least because of the fact that one
of the parties (Russia) lost the "Cold War" and another
(USA) won it. The history has not observed and kept any fact
of equal cooperation relations between the winners and losers
yet. (7) If we approach to the issue in this context, we can
only speak about the possibility of establishment of the cooperation
ties between Russia and the USA. Coincidence of the pragmatic
interests for cooperation is enough. For example, in the years
of the "Cold War" the USSR and the USA were cooperating
in such issues as prevention from danger of the nuclear war,
control over the weapon, non-distribution of the weapons of
mass destruction etc. Cooperation is characterized with wider
features. Fundamental principles determining internal and foreign
policy between the parties in order to cooperate should be brought
into agreement. This means coincidence or closeness of the strategic
interests of the geopolitical and economic feature. It means
formation of the general politics with regard to the third party
(parties) by the strategic allies. However, such model of relations
between Russia and the USA has not formed yet.
In the view of it, an attempt of Z. Bjezinsky to answer to
this question is still topical: "Who is Russia - ally,
customer or enemy encountered to the losing?" (8)
The real condition of Russia-US relations is characterized
with non-coincidence of lots of the interests. Already in 1996-1997
(in the period of discussion of the issue of NATO expansion),
in the period of November 1997 - March 1998 (crisis with regard
to Iraq) and spring-summer of 1999 (during Kosovo crisis) Russia's
interests were colliding with US interests but had to admit
the settlement of the problems in the scenario determined by
the US plans. (9) In the next years this approach has continued.
In particular, Washington decree on December 13, 2001 concerning
the unilateral withdrawal from the ABM (Anti-Ballistic Missile)
Treaty dated on 1972 between Russia and the US has increased
tension between the parties.
The relations between these states have not complicated only
due to the ABM Treaty, the American and Russian interests confront
in 6 geopolitical regions:
First of all, Baltic Countries. USA continuously
supports the integration of the former Soviet republics, such
as Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia into NATO and in Prague Summit
of the organization held in November 2002, it played a decisive
role in the provision of the positive answer of their admittance
into this organization. However, Russia considers NATO expansion
(especially at the expense of the former Soviet republics) as
a key threat of its national security.
Near Foreign Countries. Russia is interested
in the maximal closeness with Belarus and neutral Ukraine at
least from the political point of view. The USA is interested
in the independence of Ukraine from Russia. US State Department
also stated its negative attitude towards the perspective of
unification of Russia and Byelorussia. Washington is beware
of the fact that those integration steps would increase the
threat of the reintegration process in the framework of the
former Soviet arena.
Balkans. As a result of bombing of Yugoslavia
by NATO in 1999 and overthrow of Miloshevich regime, Russia
was deprived out of this region as a matter of fact. Russia
that traditionally had its influence opportunities in Balkans,
watches the events taking place in the intensive region as a
passive observer at the present. Settlement of Kosovo crisis
by the use of force created such opinion in some Russian circles
that in definite conditions Russia might face NATO military-political
pressures headed by the USA.
South Caucasus and Caspian Region. Struggle between
the USA and Russia concerned with the oil and gas reserves of
the region and the routes of their transportation to the world
market is obvious. In connection with well-known reasons, Moscow
defends the idea of transportation of oil to the West passing
Russian territory; Washington is interested in realization of
the multi-variant routes. The USA confirmed its interest in
the transportation of the oil from Azerbaijani sector of the
Caspian via Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan Main Export Pipeline (MEP) to
the Mediterranean Sea by the appropriate legal-normative documents.
Russia's "Lukoil" company did not join the sponsor
group realizing the construction of MEP, as well as stated its
intention to sell 10 %-share participation in the "Contract
of the Century" in November 2002 to Azerbaijan International
Operating Company (AIOC).
Middle East. USA and Russia do not just cooperate
here but also act as potential competitors. First of all, Russia's
energy interests were based in Iraq. Baghdad had the debt to
Russia at the sum of 7 billion dollars. USA overthrew the existing
regime in Iraq, while new regime that is being formed is very
far from the payment of old debts. In addition, no special proof
is required to observe the existing contradictions of the USA
and Russia with regard to Iran.
Far East. Russia is trying to establish long-term
cooperation relations with China. China's Taiwan problem is
esteemed as an internal problem by Russia. USA acts from a completely
contradictory position. Military cooperation of Russia with
China is compensated with the appropriate ties of the USA with
Taiwan. Attempts of China to settle Taiwan problem at the expense
of "use of force" might put it in front of the USA.
So, there are a lot of reasons that may increase the existing
contradictions between Russia and the USA. Just collection of
those reasons determines definite limits of Russia's integration
to the West, in particular to the USA. A fully integration seems
impossible. If we approach to the issue from this logic, it
is possible to give a pessimistic forecast to the perspectives
of Russia's entrance to NATO, as well as to the European Union.
Of course, some opinions were sounded with regard to the entrance
of Russia into above-said organizations. In March 2000 after
the statements of President V. Putin with regard to readiness
of Russia to join NATO that led to the bustle, US ex-president
B. Clinton said in US-European Union Summit held in Portugal
that "Doors for Russia's introduction to NATO, as well
as to European Union should not be closed", no real measure
was carried out in this direction. It is not random that in
a while V. Putin had to confess the reality of "Russia
is not waited in NATO".
In May 2000 chairman of the European Union Romano Prodi confirmed
that the issue of introduction of Russia - whose territories
are mostly in Asia and culture is different from theirs, and
has its own traditions - into the Union was a very complicated
issue (actually, impossible).
Limits of Russia's relations with NATO are provided with the
agreements signed in May 1997 in Paris, as well as in May 2000
in Roma. (10) In the first case Joint Permanent Council (JPC)
was established, in the second agreement basis of the "Committee
of 20" was laid. However, in both cases Russia does not
have real opportunities of affecting any of the processes in
NATO. At least, Russia does not have any right to interpose
a veto on any of decisions of this organization.
So, Russia that is the modern heir of the former state of great
importance is much more an Asian state and has parameters that
do not coincide with the interests of number of leader states
of theWestern alliance.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Senchagov V. Economic Security As a Basis of Provision
of the National Security of Russia. Economic Issues, No: 8,
2001.
2. Smolin O.N. Russia in the Global World: Answers to the Challenges
of New Century ("Round table"). International Life,
No: 7, 2001.
3. Nikonov V.A. Political Panorama of 21st Century. International
Life, No: 6, 2001.
4. Ibid, p.12.
5. Ibid, p.12.
6. Pushkov A.K. Russia in the New World Order: Near the West
or With Its Own? International Life, No: 10, 2000.
7. Nasirov E.Kh. USA and the World After September 11. Baku,
2003.
8. Kortunov S.V. Russian-American Partnership and 21. Challenges.
International Life, No: 4, 2002.
9. Pushkov A.K., p. 34.
10. Grushko A.V. Russia-NATO. It seems "Twenty" has
started working. International Life, No: 7, 2002.