Edinstvo, North and South Ossetia
Political Analysts’ Views
on Obama’s Presidency
and Russia
By Arkady Guriev, based on materials by “Moskovskiy Komsomolets”
Translated By Olga Kerzhner
6 November 2008
Edited by Bridgette Blight
North and South Ossetia - Edinstvo - Original Article (Russian)
1. Why was Obama elected?
Nikolai Zlobin, director of the World Security Institute’s Russia and Eurasia Project (in the U.S.):
In the United States, over the past several years the public had formed a demand for a new liberal policy and a new type of president. For the past three decades, America had been Reagan’s America. All subsequent presidents, regardless of their party affiliation, one way or another continued the same economic and foreign policy approach as Reagan. Reagan's model is: minimal intervention in the economy by the government, low taxes -- but few social programs, and a reliance on a strong foreign policy. At one time this model was very successful. But it exhausted itself, and it became clear that the country had fallen into stagnation. The crisis had only aggravated the situation.
Victor Kremenyuk, deputy director of the Institute of U.S. and Canada Studies:
Obama proposed a program of changes, which appealed to the majority. Americans believed in him, and voted for him.
2. How will Obama’s administration deal with the crisis?
Nikolai Zlobin:
We will find out something about this topic on November 14 and 15 at the economic summit, where Obama will informally participate. There, he will most likely meet Medvedev.
Compared to his predecessors, Obama has a completely different vision of the government’s role in the economy. He has already said that he will increase the tax burden on the middle class. He will initiate a revision of the financial system, and freedom of banking operations. Reagan’s model provided for the most minimal government intervention in the economy: the free market will take care of everything. Obviously, this will not be the case with Obama. Here, it’s important that he doesn’t go overboard.
Staying on the brink and not giving in to the temptation of unnecessarily increasing the government's role in the economy will be difficult, because the Democrats have an overwhelming majority in Congress, which means that the budget will be in Obama’s hands. And he is a young politician.
He will have to decide what to do with the dollar: support it as the main world reserve currency or not. I think he will dig in his heels, and fight for the dollar.
Mikhail Margelov, chairman of the Foreign Affairs Committee of the Federation Council of Russia:
Combating the crisis is a nuanced and difficult economic challenge. The President will have to show political will here, while the specialist will set interest rates and handle other economic matters. Obama has specialists on his team. Soros is one of his advisors. The world knows that he can create crises, but now we’ll find out whether he can fight them.
3. How will U.S. foreign policy change?
Nikolai Zlobin:
I don’t know whose idea it was to make Obama out to be the dove of peace. He already said that he does not exclude a military solution to the Iranian problem. With respect to that country, his position is the same as McCain’s, with the only difference being that Obama is willing to meet with the Iranian government without preconditions. He is not going to abandon everything that was built up by his predecessors. In the Senate, he voted for Bush's proposals 40 percent of the time. There is even a danger that when it comes to using force, he will go further than Bush. He is young, doesn’t remember the era of confrontation, and has no personal or family memory of World War II. It’s easier for a man like that to give orders for the application of military force.
Victor Kremenyuk:
Obama will accomplish the already pressing issue of a transition from a single-pole world, to one with many sides. The U.S. will no longer portray itself as a supreme leader. They will continue to play a leading role, but no longer alone, instead organizing other countries to act collectively. U.S. will no longer take solely upon itself the execution of complex military and economic tasks. The role of NATO will increase, and surely so too will the role of the United Nations.
Mikhail Margelov:
In foreign policy, Obama promised to negotiate with anyone and anywhere. For example, in the Middle East, where incidentally, countries would rather avoid negotiations with the U.S. We can expect an increase in the U.S. activity in Afghanistan and a gradual, slow withdrawal of troops from Iraq. The pre-election battle is a battle of declarations. And declarations have to be primitive, whereas reality is complex. As a result the leaders of all nations, and not only the U.S., are evil or good out of necessity.
4. Will Obama improve the relationship between Russia and the States?
Nikolai Zlobin:
He has a very good team of experts on Russia, although some of them are critical of the "Putin regime" and criticized Obama for his too soft a reaction to the events in South Ossetia. At some point these negative thoughts will have an impact on his policies, but a conflict with Russia is not his forte. This is not his war, it’s McCain’s war.
Obama probably won’t make special efforts to improve the relationship, but also won’t fuel the confrontation. Why would he give himself an unnecessary headache?
Victor Kremenyuk:
Obama did not hide that he is not pleased with many aspects of Russia’s foreign policy. Unlike McCain, he did not call for a “crusade,” but that doesn’t mean much. The problem is that there are private matters in our relations with the U.S., such as the attitude toward Georgia or Kosovo, where we have the opposite points of view and cannot come to an agreement. And we get stuck on exactly these issues. But there are, in fact, issues that unite us. For example, matters like how to handle the financial crisis, and the threat of nuclear terrorism. If we focus on what unites us, the relationship will improve.
Mikhail Margelov:
Too many contradictions have accumulated between our countries. We shouldn’t expect warm feeling, but rather the continuation of a selective cooperation between the U.S. and Russia, particularly in the areas of nonproliferation of weapons of mass destruction and combating terrorism.
Obama’s team has enough people who, to put it mildly, are cold toward Russia. For example, the representatives of Eastern European lobby under the leadership of Brzezinski and Albright. So it’s unlikely that the U.S. will stop its work on the elements of the U.S. missile defense system in Eastern Europe.
CLICK HERE FOR
ORIGINAL VERSION
|
|
CLICK HERE for... 
