The Pre-Election Ambassador
Published in Nezavisimaya Gazeta
(Russia) on 31 May 2011
by Andrey Terekhov (link to original)
The upcoming departure of John Beyrle is a loss for Russian-American relations.
The announcement about the imminent change of the U.S. ambassador to Russia has caused a great resonance in Moscow. Experts and diplomats interviewed by the Nezavisimaya Gazeta (NG) agree that the current ambassador, John Beyrle, played a positive role in bilateral relations. Predictions as to whether his alleged successor, Michael McFaul, will be able to pick up the baton and build on Beyrle's success are not so clear. The looming elections in both Russia and America are one of the reasons for this.
As NG reported yesterday (citing sources at the White House), Barack Obama has decided to nominate his Special Assistant and Senior Director for Russia and Eurasian Affairs at the National Security Council, Michael McFaul, as the next U.S. ambassador to Moscow. McFaul, a 47-year-old, is considered to be the "architect" of the Russian-American political reset.
It should be noted that the American press almost unanimously welcomed Obama's choice. The New York Times quotes an unnamed official in the Obama administration as saying, “Mike, as the guy who really helped the president establish the reset, is the perfect person to go to Moscow to make sure there’s no lapse in momentum in the relationship.” The Washington Post cites the opinion of the famous American expert on disarmament, Joseph Cirincione, who in 2008, along with McFaul, was one of Obama's advisers on foreign policy. He said that McFaul salvaged Russian-American relations when they had deteriorated “back to Cold War levels.” Cirincione pointed out that the future ambassador could drive the bureaucrats in the direction that Obama considers to be right. McFaul is credited with all of the latest achievements in our bilateral relations: the signing of START-3, agreement on U.S. transit through Russia to Afghanistan and the convergence of views on Iran and Libya.
Meanwhile, in Moscow McFaul received mixed reviews. Recall that McFaul, along with Vladislav Surkov, is a co-chair of the U.S.-Russia Bilateral Presidential Commission's Civil Society Working Group. The Chair of the Moscow Helsinki Group, Lyudmila Alexeyeva, who is a prominent representative of the Russian civil society, told NG yesterday that McFaul is a very competent and friendly person, with excellent knowledge of the Russian language, country and people. She concluded that he’d fit right in. Meanwhile, some Russian experts rated Obama's choice negatively. There's an opinion in expert circles in Moscow that the relationships McFaul has in the Russian capital are a minus: "There has not been such a bad candidate for the post of a Moscow ambassador for the past 25 years. McFaul is politically biased and caught up in Russian intrigues. His nomination reflects the Obama administration's complete lack of understanding of what's going on in Russia. Current Ambassador John Beyrle's departure is a major loss for Russian-American relations." Perhaps one of the reasons for such negative expectations is the fact that McFaul is a Kremlinologist, and people with such education have generally only added tension to bilateral relations by viewing Moscow exclusively through the prism of confrontation between the great powers. Take, for example, former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, who always insisted that Russia's merit is that it is no longer the Soviet Union.
However, counterarguments have been expressed in Moscow's academic circles. For example, Professor Evgeny Bazhanov, the Vice President for Research and International Relations of the Diplomatic Academy, told NG that McFaul is "a good choice for Russia." After all, his expert interest in the country will "warm up the enthusiasm in developing relations." Bazhanov believes that it's easier to deal with an expert who knows Russian culture, politics and economics because they don't have to be explained to him. According Bazhanov, McFaul supports a strong, rather than weak, Russia. He advocates Russia's development in conditions of political democracy and free economy. He also advocates close cooperation with Russia on the international scene to solve the Afghan, Iranian and North Korean issues, non-proliferation of WMDs as a whole and ensuring Europe's stability and security. "In addition, McFaul has strong positions in Washington. He is the head of the National Security Council and is close to Obama. This will enable him to go to the president and influence the state of relations," concluded Bazhanov.
A source in the Russian presidential administration told RIA Novosti that during the official part of the talks between the presidents of Russia and the United States in Deauville, the possible nomination of McFaul as the ambassador to Moscow was not mentioned, but the Kremlin views McFaul positively.
And yet, why did Obama decide to change the ambassador now? Political observers proposed different theories, including the WikiLeaks scandal. WikiLeaks published a dispatch from Beyrle with unpleasant personal descriptions of President Medvedev and Prime Minister Vladimir Putin. For example, such revelations have led to a change of the U.S. ambassador to Mexico. Or, perhaps, Washington hopes that McFaul's connections will affect the outcome of the Russian election campaigns? That's an open question. But it can be assumed that such potential intervention would be destructive.
Chair of the Duma Foreign Affairs Committee Konstantin Kosachev told NG: "Our relations are now at relatively the highest point in the past 20 years of Russia's existence as an independent country. We are only beginning to feel each other out as partners and to reach mutual understanding. I am an optimist, and I believe that now we can do more in these relations than ever before." According to Kosachev, the ambassador's role is fairly significant. Neither the current ambassador nor his predecessor, William Burns, created artificial barriers to the development of relations, which some previous ambassadors had sometimes initiated. Kosachev concluded, "As for a successor, the American side should first officially decide this matter."
The announcement about the imminent change of the U.S. ambassador to Russia has caused a great resonance in Moscow. Experts and diplomats interviewed by the Nezavisimaya Gazeta (NG) agree that the current ambassador, John Beyrle, played a positive role in bilateral relations. Predictions as to whether his alleged successor, Michael McFaul, will be able to pick up the baton and build on Beyrle's success are not so clear. The looming elections in both Russia and America are one of the reasons for this.
As NG reported yesterday (citing sources at the White House), Barack Obama has decided to nominate his Special Assistant and Senior Director for Russia and Eurasian Affairs at the National Security Council, Michael McFaul, as the next U.S. ambassador to Moscow. McFaul, a 47-year-old, is considered to be the "architect" of the Russian-American political reset.
It should be noted that the American press almost unanimously welcomed Obama's choice. The New York Times quotes an unnamed official in the Obama administration as saying, “Mike, as the guy who really helped the president establish the reset, is the perfect person to go to Moscow to make sure there’s no lapse in momentum in the relationship.” The Washington Post cites the opinion of the famous American expert on disarmament, Joseph Cirincione, who in 2008, along with McFaul, was one of Obama's advisers on foreign policy. He said that McFaul salvaged Russian-American relations when they had deteriorated “back to Cold War levels.” Cirincione pointed out that the future ambassador could drive the bureaucrats in the direction that Obama considers to be right. McFaul is credited with all of the latest achievements in our bilateral relations: the signing of START-3, agreement on U.S. transit through Russia to Afghanistan and the convergence of views on Iran and Libya.
Meanwhile, in Moscow McFaul received mixed reviews. Recall that McFaul, along with Vladislav Surkov, is a co-chair of the U.S.-Russia Bilateral Presidential Commission's Civil Society Working Group. The Chair of the Moscow Helsinki Group, Lyudmila Alexeyeva, who is a prominent representative of the Russian civil society, told NG yesterday that McFaul is a very competent and friendly person, with excellent knowledge of the Russian language, country and people. She concluded that he’d fit right in. Meanwhile, some Russian experts rated Obama's choice negatively. There's an opinion in expert circles in Moscow that the relationships McFaul has in the Russian capital are a minus: "There has not been such a bad candidate for the post of a Moscow ambassador for the past 25 years. McFaul is politically biased and caught up in Russian intrigues. His nomination reflects the Obama administration's complete lack of understanding of what's going on in Russia. Current Ambassador John Beyrle's departure is a major loss for Russian-American relations." Perhaps one of the reasons for such negative expectations is the fact that McFaul is a Kremlinologist, and people with such education have generally only added tension to bilateral relations by viewing Moscow exclusively through the prism of confrontation between the great powers. Take, for example, former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, who always insisted that Russia's merit is that it is no longer the Soviet Union.
However, counterarguments have been expressed in Moscow's academic circles. For example, Professor Evgeny Bazhanov, the Vice President for Research and International Relations of the Diplomatic Academy, told NG that McFaul is "a good choice for Russia." After all, his expert interest in the country will "warm up the enthusiasm in developing relations." Bazhanov believes that it's easier to deal with an expert who knows Russian culture, politics and economics because they don't have to be explained to him. According Bazhanov, McFaul supports a strong, rather than weak, Russia. He advocates Russia's development in conditions of political democracy and free economy. He also advocates close cooperation with Russia on the international scene to solve the Afghan, Iranian and North Korean issues, non-proliferation of WMDs as a whole and ensuring Europe's stability and security. "In addition, McFaul has strong positions in Washington. He is the head of the National Security Council and is close to Obama. This will enable him to go to the president and influence the state of relations," concluded Bazhanov.
A source in the Russian presidential administration told RIA Novosti that during the official part of the talks between the presidents of Russia and the United States in Deauville, the possible nomination of McFaul as the ambassador to Moscow was not mentioned, but the Kremlin views McFaul positively.
And yet, why did Obama decide to change the ambassador now? Political observers proposed different theories, including the WikiLeaks scandal. WikiLeaks published a dispatch from Beyrle with unpleasant personal descriptions of President Medvedev and Prime Minister Vladimir Putin. For example, such revelations have led to a change of the U.S. ambassador to Mexico. Or, perhaps, Washington hopes that McFaul's connections will affect the outcome of the Russian election campaigns? That's an open question. But it can be assumed that such potential intervention would be destructive.
Chair of the Duma Foreign Affairs Committee Konstantin Kosachev told NG: "Our relations are now at relatively the highest point in the past 20 years of Russia's existence as an independent country. We are only beginning to feel each other out as partners and to reach mutual understanding. I am an optimist, and I believe that now we can do more in these relations than ever before." According to Kosachev, the ambassador's role is fairly significant. Neither the current ambassador nor his predecessor, William Burns, created artificial barriers to the development of relations, which some previous ambassadors had sometimes initiated. Kosachev concluded, "As for a successor, the American side should first officially decide this matter."
Next article![]( "U.S. Must Change Its S. Asia Policy")