A Layer Cake

Ivan Timofeev, program director of the Valdai Discussion Club,* on how the Putin-Biden summit will change relations between Russia and the U.S.

The upcoming summit between Vladimir Putin and Joe Biden raises many traditional hopes for improving Russian-American relations. Most of these meetings have raised such hopes for the past 25 years. However, history shows that excessive optimism is hardly appropriate. There have been many positive negotiations, but they failed to resolve fundamental conflicts between the two countries. Moreover, over time, such conflicts have only worsened. We need to make a sober assessment of the specific current political situation and the foreign policy tasks both countries face.

The very fact that the meeting is being held is a positive development. The Geneva summit has every chance of being more successful than the talks between Putin and Donald Trump in Helsinki in 2018. Unlike his predecessor, the current U.S. president is much less distracted by domestic political restraints. He is not waging war with the establishment; he is not overburdened by an election scandal or accusations of colluding with Russia. There are possible areas of agreement between the two presidents, albeit modest, which they may build on further. Nevertheless, the presidents of Russia and the U.S. are attending the summit at a time of strategic confrontation between their countries, with an impressive set of fundamental conflicts, key among which are Euro-Atlantic security, relations in post-Soviet space, the Ukrainian question, the situation in Syria, cybersecurity, sovereignty and interference in domestic affairs, democracy and human rights.

For Washington, Moscow is an uncompromising and assertive adversary which, although limited in resources, may well pose a severe threat in several areas and prevent America from pursuing its interests in certain parts of the world. The U.S. attributes many problems to the Russian political system, implicitly denying it legitimacy, and presenting it as an authoritarian and corrupt regime. At the same time, the U.S. is forced to deal with Russia. It is difficult to ignore Russia when facing all the issues listed above. The policy of containment by itself does not resolve these conflicts, although no one is going to give that policy up.

In addition, some issues are simply necessary to discuss. Chief among them is arms control. We can think of the New START extension as a step forward. Still, it only provides a five-year grace period for the conclusion of new agreements. This is a ridiculous time frame, given the collapse of the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty and other accords and the emergence of new modern weapons and technology. Moreover, in several areas, Moscow is ahead of the curve and will definitely not be a beggar at the negotiating table. There is no doubt that the U.S. will be able to match Russia’s potential with its resources. Ultimately, both sides will be interested in at least some minimal amount of predictability, so a proposal for new treaties may well take shape. The summit in Geneva is capable of starting a dialogue which is already at the working level.

The growing confrontation between the U.S. and China is an important background aspect of the meeting. Washington thinks of Beijing as an enemy which is more dangerous and difficult than Russia. In arms control negotiations, China’s growing military capabilities are becoming an important variable. The Trump administration tried to persuade Moscow to engage in trilateral arms control discussions involving Beijing. Both China and Russia rejected the idea. Biden’s approach is more careful, but China’s containment will remain a part of the American vision.

The Americans also have other concerns about China. For a long time, Washington turned a blind eye to the rapprochement between Moscow and Beijing. It was believed that such a partnership would only be for show and would not pose a significant threat; Russia and China could be dealt with separately, but they would not collaborate against the U.S. Apparently, Washington’s point of view is now changing. It seems that the close partnership between Russia and China is beginning to be thought of as a threat. As such, the prevention or breakdown of rapprochement is becoming a matter for American diplomacy. However, the U.S. can hardly offer Moscow any serious alternative. The level of trust is extremely low, and recent history is somewhat ambivalent on the issue.

In the end, one can analogize U.S. dealings with Russia to a cake of many layers. With some of the layers, interaction is possible. With others, containment and resistance prevail. Any progress on arms control will not resolve other issues. The layers of the cake run perpendicular to each other in many ways. The extension of the New START agreement did not prevent the imposition of new sanctions. This paradigm will continue for the long term.

For Russia, the U.S. is a long-term adversary for two reasons. The first is an explicit or latent threat of the use of force, given America’s military strength and that of its allies. The second is the ideological pressure on Moscow and the subtle threat of dismantling Russia’s political system. To a certain extent, the fears and perceptions of the two sides are similar. The U.S., too, fears Russian power, not to mention the hyped-up theme of “election interference.” However, objectively, the potential outcome for America is significantly higher than for Russia. The cost of any mistake for Russia will be higher, which requires a more sophisticated and intelligent domestic and foreign policy.

It is also important for Russia to factor in relations with China. The level of partnership that has been reached with Beijing is a great achievement for Russian diplomacy. The big question for all players is how exactly that model of relations will shape the future. A bipolar system with strict allied obligations between Russia and China is one thing. A more flexible multipolar system, with fragile guarantees, but broader room for maneuvering, is another.

The upcoming summit is unlikely to lead to any breakthroughs or major accomplishments in Russian-American relations. However, the meeting may well put an end to a chapter that has not been their greatest. The confrontation between Moscow and Washington will continue on many fronts. However, this does not preclude the need for establishing reliable levels of support in the event of another collapse.

The author’s opinion may not reflect the views of Izvestia’s editorial board.

*Translator’s note: The Valdai Discussion Club is a Moscow-based think-tank established in 2004, named after Lake Valdai.