ZHOU LI

Vice President, Chinese People’s Association for Peace and Disarmament (CPAPD)

The continuously stiffening and deteriorating Russia-US relationship has become a hot point and focus of today’s international situation.People want to know what the root cause is.

The US attributes that to the destroying of Ukraine’s territory integrity and the violating of basic principles of international relations caused by Russia’s recovering of Crimea. Unable to tolerate that, the US has imposed political condemnation, economic sanctions and military threat on Russia. However, Russia believes the US, sticking chronically to the cold-war mentality and having regarded Russia as a thorn in its flesh, has messed up Ukraine, Russia’s neighboring country, with color revolution and pushed NATO to speed up its expansion eastward. All those actions have together tightened the encirclement of Russia,blocked its economic development and worsened its external environment.

One most popular academic explanation is that there exists irreconcilable structural contradiction. But what exactly is this contradiction? This article attempts to make some analysis from three dimensions, namely ideologies,geopolitics and national interests.

TOTALLY CONTRARY VIEW TOWARD WORLD ORDER

Reflected in social practice, ideologies refer to different ideas and practices held by different societies and states about ideological system, social system and governing system as well as the interaction and interrelation among them, which constitute ideologies at the fundamental level.

Upon Russia’s independence at the end of 1991 after Soviet Union’s disintegration, the rulers completely dismissed the most distinctive communist system adopted in Soviet Union and claimed the abandoning of communist ideal and socialist practice. A new constitution was adopted in Russia in 1993, identifying the country as a democratic federal republic ruled by law. A national leadership system based on presidency was also established. The political system was changed from the past one-party one to the division of powers and a multi-party one. Atheism based on materialism was discarded and the Eastern Orthodox Church was defined as the major state religion, supplemented with Islamism, Catholicism, Judaism and Buddhism. State-owned enterprises were battered down and smashed in massive privatization and the economy drew close to capitalist market system. It is fair to say that no essential difference could be found between Russia and the US in terms of ideology, religious belief or social system, in other words, the ideology at the fundamental level.

However, people have different ideas and proposals concerning safeguarding world peace, security and development,which constitute the secondary level of ideology. It has been a long-lasting key topic faced by governments and peoples of all countries as what kind of world order we should build, what kind of international norms we should adopt and what kind of state-to-state cooperation we should facilitate in order to realize lasting peace and development of human society.

While the world has entered into the 21stcentury with multi-polarization,economic globalization, application of information technology and diversified cultures, all those problems become more acute and prominent, resulting in many fierce contradictions and conflicts, some of which are even irreconcilable. When the world entered an era of “one super power and several great powers” in the mid 1990s, Russia put forward a proposal of building a multipolar world, calling for all countries in particular major powers to pursue the principle of “democratic international relations”, which refers to an equal and trustful partnership based on mutual respect. One country shall not interfere in another country’s internal affairs,nor threat another country with armed forces or sanctions, let alone boosting countries that bow to it and suppressing countries that oppose it. All countries shall show respect and support the leading and authoritative role played by UN in dealing major international and regional affairs, and conflicts and problems should be resolved through negotiations and consultations among relevant parties. In short, the international community should abide by multilateralism. The world affairs should be decided by consultation among countries instead of by one single country.However, the US holds a totally different view. After the Cold War, the US has continued with the implementation of hegemony and power politics in the entire world in the name of democracy and freedom. By fair means or foul, it has made efforts to overthrow the legitimate regimes elected in other countries.Quite a number of US presidents uninhibitedly made unstopping declaration that the US is the “l(fā)eader” of this world,and other countries could do nothing but obey the US will. Those who dare to “take another way” will surely be severely punished.

At this level of ideology, Russia and the US are totally contrary to each other from ideas to actions. That is the basic reflection of the structural contradiction existed in the bilateral relationship.

ZERO-SUM GAME IN GEOPOLITICS

As far as we know, geopolitics refers to the strategic planning and measures adopted by a country based on its geographic elements and in the interests of its security and development. Countries and nations in different geographic locations with different concepts of geopolitics differ from one another in actions.

At the beginning of the 20thcentury,the British geographer and politician Halford Mackinder made a classical conclusion: “Who rules Eastern Europe commands the Heartland; Who rules the Heartland commands the World Island; Who rules the World Island commands the world.” An American geopolitical thinker Mahan thought it is not enough and added that who rules the ocean commands the world. The ideas of these two people dominated the foreign strategy of the UK and the US during the Cold War period. Both the UK and the US believe that it was Soviet Union instead of UK or France that WWII helped expand sphere of influence. Therefore, effective methods and means must be found to contain and destroy Soviet Union and even the later Russia. After the disintegration of Soviet Union, geopolitical struggle and disputes between the US and Russia have not stopped, but have shown an even more fierce trend.

The US-led NATO has continuously expanded eastward in Europe, admitting 13 countries in succession, namely Poland, Hungary, Czech, Slovakia, Slovenia, Albania, Croatia and Montenegro in Central Europe, three Baltic states in Northeastern Europe as well as Bulgaria and Romania in Southern Europe. At the same time, NATO stretched its hand to Georgia which is located to the east of the Black Sea so as to tighten the strategic encirclement against Russia.NATO is also intended to push forward its anti-missile system to Central and Eastern European countries. In recent years, NATO has increased its military input in these countries and even speeded up the establishment of the rapid response force as well as constantly carried out military maneuver in various names. During the 26 years since Soviet Union’s disintegration, Russia has always been under the US aggressive offense. Ukraine as the last screen between Russia and NATO has become an arena at which Russia and the US tear each other.

In Middle East, the Bush Jr. Administration, regardless of the strong opposition by Russia, Germany, France as well as the international community, forged a lie about massive destructive weapons in Iraq in 2003, and together with the UK, Australia and Poland started a war toward Iraq. This war helped with the building of a strategic corridor safeguarding the US interest in Islamic world, and the US also realized its strategic containment with Russia, Europe,China, India and other major countries through controlling the core area of Eurasia Continent. Concerning the Libya issue, the Obama Administration in 2011 cheated Russia and UN Security Council with a no-fly order, and worked together with several countries including the US and France to launch an air raid to Libya. Later on, the US action on Syria and Iran put itself on a direct faceto-face confrontation with Russia which is still unsolved.

In Central Asia after the 9/11 attacks,the Bush Jr. Administration attacked Afghanistan in the name of antiterrorism, requesting cooperation from Russia and five Central Asia countries.The US claimed that it would withdraw from Afghanistan right after the collapse of Taliban. The US stationing in Afghanistan, renting military bases in Kyrgyzstan and supplying provisions to NATO army there through Uzbekistan have all weakened Russia’s traditional influence in this region, and resulted in subtle changes in the relations between Central Asian countries and Russia.It has been over a decade since then and the US still maintains its military presence in Afghanistan, provoking all types of internal conflicts and letting go the overflow of local drugs to other countries. Right after Trump took power, the US adopted a new strategy toward Afghanistan that aimed to contain South Asia, Central Asia, Russia and China in the name of clearing up remaining forces of “Islamic State”.

The geopolitical zero-sum game between Russia and the US from Europe to Middle East and South Asia as well as from regional organizations to UN Security Council has constituted irreconcilable structural contradictions between the two countries.

UNCOMPROMISABLE NATIONAL INTERESTS

Based on history and being principal,national interests are also very concrete and always developing. It is fundamentally the integrity of national sovereignty and territory, national security,economic development and national dignity. The top elements of national interests are safeguarding national sovereignty and territorial integrity. However,splitting Russia has always been the goal of all US administrations. The most well-known saying was put forward by former US National Security Advisor Brzezinski, which split Russia into three countries located in Europe, Siberia and Far East respectively, which, according to Brzezinski, would disable Russia to pose any threat to the US. Brzezinski’s theory about Russia remains effective and continues developing no matter how the world changes and no matter who rules the US.

Defending the regime has been upgraded to the supreme one among several key priorities to safeguard national interests. Overthrowing the regime is a prelude of splitting a state.Dispraising, discrediting, defaming and fabricating rumors to vilify the legally elected supreme leader of a country are all necessary means to overthrow its regime. In recent years, the US has attempted to enhance its direct influence in Russian society in an organizational and planned way by making use of the development of internet and copying its successful experience of carrying out color revolution in various parts of the world. It tried to cultivate anti-Putin forces in all parts of Russia through sending its personnel into many NGOs.

To constantly appreciate practical wealth serves as the material basis of safeguarding national interests. The US has taken great pains to force out its opponents in this regard. In as early as 1974, in order to restrict trade with Soviet Union, the US issued Jackson-Vanik Amendment, which prohibited the offering of the most-favored-nationtreatment and government loan guarantee for trade to Soviet Union and Eastern European countries. Several decades have passed and Soviet Union and Eastern Europe camp are no more,yet the bill is still there. Russia and the US have never enjoyed bilateral trade in real sense. In 2011, bilateral trade between Russia and US totaled US$31.206 billion, nearly doubled that of 2005 and was the highest in history. The year 2014 saw a decline to US$29.2 billion due to US sanction on Russia. Both sides have never had substantial cooperation in key areas such as energy, material,precision instrument manufacturing or high-tech research and development.

A more significant area for struggle is energy. Both Russia and US, one as the world largest oil producer and the other with rather mature shale gas production technology, need long-lasting and even higher income from oil. Subjected to US sanctions in 2014, Russia has worked hard for a higher world oil price. Russialed non-OPEC oil producers and Saudi Arabia-led OPEC countries, after rounds of consultations, reached an agreement at the end of 2016, according to which,oil output would be reduced by 1.8 million barrels day by day since 2017. The crude oil price picked up significantly since then. Later on both sides extended duration of output reduction for twice,making the due time to the end of 2018.In the first ten months of 2017, Russia exported 214 million tons of crude oil,increasing by 0.5% over the previous year, and achieved an export income of US$76.93 billion, 30% more than US$59.66 billion in the same period of the previous year. The Brent oil price rose to US$68 per barrel on January 3,2018, the highest since May 2015. That means a continuous bright future for countries like Russia. However, the US also worked very hard, achieving a daily output of 9.919 million barrels in the last ten days of January 2018, almost the same of Saudi Arabia’s output. Its shale gas output reached more than 5 million barrels per day with a cost price of around US$40. Predicted by International Energy Agency, US gas industry is on the threshold of a leap-forward prosperity, and will account 80% of the global oil supply growth between 2018 and 2025.

Since the outbreak of “Arab Spring”,Saudi Arabia and Iran have encountered constant conflicts and bilateral relationship has worsened. Russia as a firm supporter of Iran has stopped contacts with Saudi Arabia for many years. Yet against the general background of global economic crisis, Saudi Arabia and Russia work together in energy cooperation now and then. King Salman of Saudi Arabia paid an unusual visit to Moscow in October 2017 and signed a high-value bill of advanced weapons. It was only several months before that Saudi Arabia received President Trump who chose Riyadh for his first foreign visit. Both sides signed an ammunition contract valued as high as US$110 billion. The handshake of Saudi Arabia and Russia was the last thing that the US wished to see. It seems Russia won this round of contest.

Russia and the US also hold contradictory security concept. Concerning strategic stability, the INF Treaty and Treaty on Reducing and Limiting Strategic Offensive Nuclear Arms which directly demonstrate both countries’interests are on the brink of imbalance.Both countries have blamed each other for violating the INF Treaty. Negotiations on the other Treaty are also difficult to move forward. Russia strongly opposes the US exporting its values by making use of cooperation on antiterrorism. Meanwhile, the US has been condemning the Russia for “hacking”on cyber security, claiming that Russia interfered in US presidential election through cyber-attack in 2016.

Pentagon issued the new edition of Nuclear Posture Review on February 2,2018, stressing that the nuclear threat faced by the US is more diversified and advanced than ever before and hoping to see the upgrading of America’s nuclear arsenal as well as developing newtype low-yield tactical nuclear arms. It also expresses expectation to restart strategic dialogue with Russia when everything is ready. Russian foreign ministry made a quick response with a statement saying that the announcement of the Review to allow use of low-yield tactical nuclear warheads may escalate smallscale conflicts to a nuclear war. The Review is full of confrontational tones and anti-Russia mood. It once again regards Russia as an imaginary enemy, aiming to look for excuses for increasing military expenditure and developing nuclear capacity. Russia will carry on serious study and get ready to adopt necessary action. The contradictions and conflicts existed between the US and Russia concerning direct national interests including politics, economy and security are also vitally important demonstration of the structural contradictions between the two countries.

Ideology, geopolitics and national interests are interlinked and intersupportive among one another which usually serve as prerequisites as well as outcomes to one another. The contradiction and collision between Russia and the US around these three dimensions determine that both sides are impossible to get close to each other. Unless the US gives up its unilateral hegemony strategy, no longer squeezes the space for Russia’s existence and development and no more holds a confronting policy for national interests, US “tossing” of Russia will never stop no matter who serves as the president. Even though there might be ease-up for some time,that will be unsubstantial and short.