On Monday, January 10, consultations between Russia and the United States on security guarantees were held in Geneva. The discussion between the officials of the two countries lasted for about 7.5 hours. According to Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov, the negotiations were difficult, and no progress was made on NATO’s non-expansion. The head of the American delegation, Wendy Sherman, noted that Washington “will not allow anyone to close the door to the alliance for another country.” The results of the meeting were assessed by experts.
“The main issues are suspended, and we do not see that the American side understands the imperativeness of their solution in a way that suits us,” said Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov, adding that other results of the consultations will become clear later this week.
According to Ryabkov, progress on the issue of NATO’s non-expansion has not been achieved.
“The conversation was difficult, long, very professional, deep, specific, without attempts to embellish anything, to avoid any sharp corners,” the diplomat emphasized. “We got the impression that the American side took the Russian proposals very seriously and carried out their in-depth study.”
According to the Deputy Foreign Minister of the Russian Federation, the non-entry of Ukraine and Georgia into the North Atlantic Alliance is a matter of national security for Russia: “It is absolutely necessary for us to make sure that Ukraine will never become a NATO member. We would like that at the NATO Madrid summit the formula adopted by the 2008 Bucharest summit would be withdrawn and replaced with the following:
“Ukraine and Georgia will never become members of the North Atlantic Alliance. We are tired of conducting empty conversations from half-promises, from misinterpretation, which often happened in negotiations behind closed doors … We need reinforced concrete, legally significant guarantees, not promises, but guarantees, with the words “must”, “must”, never become members NATO”.
In turn, the head of the American delegation, Wendy Sherman, said that Washington “will not allow anyone to close the door to NATO for another country” and will not discuss issues concerning other countries without their participation. At the same time, she noted that the United States is ready to discuss with Russia on the deployment of missiles and the establishment of mutual restrictions on the scale of military exercises with an increase in their transparency. In addition, Sherman clarified that the parties exchanged ideas on medium and shorter-range missiles, but reaching agreements will require a lot of work.
“We will see the end result of the Russian-American meeting only after the completion of the“ double marathon, ”German political analyst Alexander Rahr comments on MK. – Now there are long negotiations in Geneva, a meeting of the Russia-NATO Council will take place in Brussels on January 12, and the next day – consultations at the Vienna platform of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE). Then at the end of the week, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov will give a big press conference, which will sum up all the necessary results.
The Americans will also give their comments at the end of all three meetings. Then we will find out how successfully or unsuccessfully they passed, and whether Moscow’s demands were met.
At the same time, it is good that this marathon has begun at all. The parties listen to each other’s arguments, there is no so-called “slamming the doors” policy, as it has been over the past years. Both Washington and Moscow are aware of the seriousness of the situation. There is a lot at stake. “
According to the expert, the question of peace or war in Europe came up squarely. Russia will no longer recognize NATO’s expansion into the post-Soviet space. By the way, President Putin spoke about this back in 2007 at the Munich Security Conference. Then he was not heard. Now the West cannot but listen to Russia.
“But at the same time, America does not want to give up its positions and lose its geopolitical gain after the collapse of the USSR, after which virtually all of Europe, except Russia and Belarus, is oriented toward cooperation with Washington,” continues Alexander Rahr. – Therefore, the situation is really daunting, but there are ways out of it. And just about them it will be possible to thoroughly discuss at the upcoming meetings in Brussels and Geneva.
The minimum success of consultations between the Russian Federation and the United States can be said if the parties begin serious negotiations on nuclear disarmament and mutual non-deployment of intermediate and shorter-range missiles in each other’s reach. That would be, from my point of view, a tremendous success. Then the ice would certainly be broken.
By detente, the countries could come to interpenetration and adjust the framework conditions for European security. The maximum idea is as follows: the parties will decide that it is necessary to seriously change the security architecture of Europe, include there Russia, which has long felt isolated, and start working on the concept of a common space “from Lisbon to Vladivostok”, which already took place in early 2000 -X.
There are forces in the West that understand the rationale behind the need for the parties to meet halfway. Meanwhile, today the forces of “triumphalism” of the end of the Cold War, the younger generation of politicians who no longer remember the horrors of the “hot” and “cold” wars, dominate. From their point of view, Russia is a weak state that needs to be punished from time to time, which cannot do anything on its own, so it needs to accept the conditions of the West.
Russia, in turn, believes that the West is weaker. Therefore, a negative outcome should be expected in the event that in the Russian Federation and the United States will prevail forces that are ready to go to confrontation whenever possible. If the parties are determined to reach compromises, it will be good for everyone. “
For his part, Sergei Kislitsyn , head of the Center for the Study of Strategic Planning at the IMEMO RAN, is confident that if there is no progress after the Russian-American consultations, the negotiations with NATO, in principle, will not make much sense. It is much more difficult to talk to the West European members of the North Atlantic Alliance if there is no agreement with Washington.
“I would not expect that at the end of the negotiations any important agreements will be reached,” says the MK expert. – However, even the fact that there is a discussion of the problem is already a good indicator in the current conditions of Russian-American relations. Meanwhile, the United States will definitely not be able to fulfill the Russian Federation’s demand not to expand NATO into the post-Soviet space. It will certainly hurt their prestige.
This will mean that Washington, having given some guarantees, made concessions. Moreover, for about 30 years more, the United States said that the Russian Federation has no right and will not influence the policy of the alliance, so its opinion on these issues will be taken into account in the last place.
However, some measures may be taken to control arms, to regulate the number of incidents in the air and at sea in Eastern Europe. They are not so painful for both sides. However, something fundamental, strategic and long-term is unlikely to be discussed.
It should be understood that the most important meaning of such negotiations is the opportunity for an exchange of views, a direct dialogue between countries. When the parties communicate directly, they develop a perception of the opponent, a sense of trust in each other arises. This has happened repeatedly in relations between the Russian Federation and the United States, in particular, during the period of Soviet-American relations.
Therefore, it is always necessary to communicate, even if it seems that the problems cannot be solved. The presence of direct contact and some kind of minimal disposition can play into the hands at any time. “
Read Also : The scandal with vandals in the military unit provokes the outrage of the intelligence general of the GRU
