Russia
After Russia’s Elections
December 8, 2011
U.S.-Russia relations have reached a tight spot on several central issues: discord over plans for European missile defense, disappointment with Russia’s flawed elections, disagreement on how to end the regime crackdown in Syria and pressure Iran on its nuclear program. Led by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, the administration has taken strong stances on the elections and missile defense, while continuing partnership in other vital areas, including U.S. overflight rights to Afghanistan and New START treaty implementation. The ability to “walk and chew gum at the same time” – to stand strong on issues of principle, maintain communication and make pragmatic progress elsewhere – shows the success of the “reset” policy. In fact, the reset’s critics are now getting what they said they wanted on missile defense and human rights – while in Afghanistan our military gets what it needs.
Good Cop, Bad Cop, Consistent US Interests
September 26, 2011
This weekend Russian Prime Minister and former President Vladimir Putin announced that he will once again seek the presidency, essentially guaranteeing him the position. He pledged, once president, to appoint the current president Dmitri Medvedev as prime minister. This is disappointing for Russian democracy but not unexpected, and should not necessarily entail a downturn in U.S.-Russian relations.
Liberal Apathy, the National Security Story
August 3, 2010
By Heather Hurlburt, The New Republic, August 3rd 2010
A 21st Century U.S.-Russian Relationship
July 12, 2010
U.S.-Russian relations will always be complex, at any given time demanding both collaboration on shared priorities and firm stands where our security interests and values diverge. The ‘reset’ back to a stabilized diplomatic partnership allows the U.S. to seize opportunities to advance its interests – as the recent arrest of Russian spies in the U.S. and the subsequent “spy-swap” demonstrates. Since taking office, Obama has worked to improve the relationship and utilized that improvement to advance U.S. interests, obtaining concrete progress on important issues ranging from Iran to Eastern Europe to Afghanistan. The foundation of the relationship has been the new START accord that increases U.S. and global security by securing nuclear stockpiles and building a stable and transparent nuclear relationship between the world’s two largest nuclear powers. All of this occurs in parallel with the realities of espionage and competition – and is a reminder of why the U.S. needs to use diplomacy to stay in the game, not remain on the sidelines. This is the type of relationship that best serves America’s interests.
The Cold War is Over: Ratify New START
June 25, 2010
The New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty facilitates reductions in the strategic nuclear arsenals of the world’s two largest nuclear powers and has earned overwhelming support from the military, national security experts and, just yesterday, thirty bipartisan national security leaders including Colin Powell. These same experts have also warned that a rejection of this treaty would put our national security at risk. Failure to ratify the agreement would, in the words of George H.W. Bush’s National Security Advisor General Brent Scowcroft, throw our efforts to control nuclear threats into a “state of chaos.”
Heather Hurlburt Quoted in The Washington Times on Obama Visiting Russia
June 23, 2010
Heather Hurlburt, executive director of the National Security Network, said, “The major success here 18 months in is that the relaitonship is back to a place where you can have a productive back-and-forth exchange, as opposed to where it was at the end of 2008, when basic diplomacy was not really possible.”
As START Set to Expire, Conservatives Reverse Selves on Key Provisions
December 4, 2009
Tomorrow, December 5, the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START) is set to expire. START, the largest arms control agreement in history, was spearheaded by Ronald Reagan and signed by George H.W. Bush in 1991 after a decade of negotiations. The agreement was key to reducing Cold War nuclear tensions and set the precedent for intrusive inspection and verification measures that give each side confidence about the other’s arsenal – and which for that reason the US intelligence community highly values. A START follow-on that maintains such monitoring while further reducing arsenals is critical to U.S. national security. A new treaty enjoys tremendous bipartisan support, led by the “four horsemen” former Secretaries of State Kissinger and Shultz, former Secretary of Defense Perry and former Senator Nunn. A Council on Foreign Relations task force chaired by Perry and former National Security Adviser Brent Scowcroft also recommended a follow-on agreement.
Mr. Obama Goes to Moscow
July 9, 2009
By Spencer P. Boyer and James D. Lamond, The Root, July 6, 2009
This is What Diplomacy Looks Like
July 7, 2009
After eight years of the U.S. leaving international summits empty handed with no deliverables to speak of, the U.S.-Russian summit that wrapped up in Moscow today stands in stark contrast. President Obama, determined to reset U.S.-Russian relations and place them on a more productive and business-like track, focused on a number of core issues – arms control, Afghanistan, military cooperation, and proliferation threats. On each he achieved important deliverables. After eight years of inept diplomacy, it is refreshing that an American administration is finally able to use diplomacy as a tool to enhance American security. Yet many extreme conservatives seem to be fighting the Cold War all over again. Some have even attacked Obama for having breakfast with Prime Minister Putin – saying that this bestows legitimacy upon him. Yet the President they served left his first Russian summit emphasizing the goodness of Putin’s soul. Others have attacked Obama for his arms control efforts, seemingly believing that the U.S. still needs a Cold War nuclear arsenal capable of destroying the Soviets – and the planet – many times over. The United States and Russia are neither close allies nor enemies. Treating Russia with unremitting hostility, as some suggest, would greatly harm our ability to make progress on a whole host of global security challenges, from Afghanistan, to climate change, to Iran and North Korea. The many deliverables produced by the summit demonstrate that we can reset the relationship and return to a more pragmatic business-like interaction that seeks to cooperate on areas of mutual interest even as the Administration looks to promote American interests and values where Russia’s diverge.
Obama Seeks New START – While NeoConservatives Betray Reagan’s Legacy
July 1, 2009
Next week President Obama will travel to Moscow to meet with Russian President Dmitry Medvedev. From the outset of his Administration, President Obama has sought to reset U.S.-Russian relations. Over the last eight years, U.S. policy rested on maintaining the superficial personal relationship between Bush and Putin, which failed to result in any tangible achievements and led to growing estrangement in U.S.-Russian relations. The Obama administration has sought to eliminate this superficiality and develop a more business-like relationship that is focused on core issues of mutual interest and concern that produces verifiable results. Chief among these issues is non-proliferation and arms control – issues that former President Reagan also prioritized in his dealings with Russia. US-Russian negotiations for the replacement of the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START), which is due to expire December 5th, resumed last week – marking the first time in eighteen years the world’s two largest nuclear powers have negotiated a binding and verifiable agreement to reduce their arsenals. At their July 6th summit, Obama and Medvedev will review progress – and both have suggested that the new treaty will mark the foundation for better relations, possibly laying the groundwork for further cooperation on other issues of tremendous importance to the United States, such as Afghanistan, the Middle East, international climate change negotiations, and Iran and North Korea’s nuclear programs.
