Russia Faces Europe Dov Lynch 60-Outside Cover-ENG.Qxd 14/05/2003 15:03 Page 2 Chaillot Papers N° 60
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Chaillot Papers May 2003 n°60 Russia faces Europe Dov Lynch 60-outside cover-ENG.qxd 14/05/2003 15:03 Page 2 Chaillot Papers Papers Chaillot n° 60 In January 2002 the Institute for Security Studies (ISS) beca- me an autonomous Paris-based agency of the European Union. Following an EU Council Joint Action of 20 July Russia faces Europe 2001, it is now an integral part of the new structures that will support the further development of the CFSP/ESDP. The Institute’s core mission is to provide analyses and recommendations that can be of use and relevance to the formulation of the European security and defence policy. In carrying out that mission, it also acts as an interface between European experts and decision-makers at all levels. Chaillot Papers are monographs on topical questions written either by a member of the ISS research team or by outside authors chosen and commissioned by the Institute. Early drafts are normally discussed at a semi- nar or study group of experts convened by the Institute and publication indicates that the paper is considered by the ISS as a useful and authoritative contribution to the debate on CFSP/ESDP. Responsibility for the views Dov Lynch expressed in them lies exclusively with authors. Chaillot Papers are also accessible via the Institute’s Website: www.iss-eu.org 60-English-Text.qxd 14/05/2003 14:21 Page 1 Chaillot Papers May 2003 n°60 A French version is also available Russia faces Europe Dov Lynch Institute for Security Studies European Union Paris 60-English-Text.qxd 14/05/2003 14:21 Page 2 The author Dov Lynch is a Research Fellow at the EU Institute. He received a Doctorate in International Relations from St Antony’s College, Oxford and was Lecturer in War Studies at King’s College London prior to joining the Institute. A former Research Fellow at the Royal Institute of International Affairs, his past publications include Russian Peacekeeping Strategies towards the CIS (2000), and Energy in the Caspian Region (2002). Institute for Security Studies European Union Paris Director: Nicole Gnesotto © EU Institute for Security Studies 2003. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise without the prior permission of the EU Institute for Security Studies. ISSN 1017-7566 Published by the EU Institute for Security Studies and printed in Alençon (France) by l’Alençonnaise d’Impressions. Graphic design by Claire Mabille (Paris). 60-English-Text.qxd 14/05/2003 14:21 Page 3 Contents n°60 May 2003 Preface Nicole Gnesotto 5 Introduction 7 • Anchoring in troubled seas 8 • Russia and the European Union 16 • Structure of argument 19 1 Drivers of Russian foreign policy 21 • Decision-making concentration 21 • Conceptual consensus: weakness, change and engagement 24 2 Strategic directions of alignment 32 • A new quality in Russia-NATO relations 33 • The demise of the OSCE in Russia’s eyes 39 • The primacy of the UN Security Council 42 • Bilateral links 44 • The Moscow hostage crisis and the Prague summit 52 3 Russia and CFSP 54 • Putin’s shift towards the EU 54 • Wide-ranging relations: the Energy Dialogue 63 • The political and security dialogue 65 • Russian views on ESDP: from enthusiasm to realism 72 • The limits of the partnership 76 4 Proposals for the political and security dialogue 82 • Focus on peace support operations 86 • Joint EU-Russian peace support in Moldova 87 • High-Level Group on Wider Security 90 60-English-Text.qxd 14/05/2003 14:21 Page 4 Contents Conclusions: changing the logic of Euro-Atlantic relations? 94 Annexes 96 • Case study of a joint approach to the Moldovan conflict 96 — The status quo 96 — A joint catalyst operation 100 • Abbreviations 104 • Regional maps 105 — Commonwealth of Independent States - European States 105 — Moldova 106 — Russia 107 60-English-Text.qxd 14/05/2003 14:21 Page 5 Preface Nicole Gnesotto osovo, 11 September and Iraq: it is in relation to these three crises that Russia’s foreign policy, and in particular its attitude towards K what is referred to as the ‘Euro-Atlantic community’, has continu- ously been redefined. Thus, after a period of fairly glacial relations due to the combined effects of NATO’s enlargement and its intervention in Kosovo, the 11 September attacks against America were to lead to a spectacular rap- prochement between the Russian and American presidents’ rhetoric, if not their policies. For Vladimir Putin, the fight against international terrorism became the priority that justified a new, pragmatic US-Russian coalition. Former resent- ment against America - over NATO, the ABM Treaty and National Missile Defence - was put on hold, while the Russian president reckoned on achieving substantial benefits regarding Chechnya or Russian entry into the WTO from his new entente cordiale with America. As for the EU, for Putin it remained a major economic and trading partner. However, the Europeans’ strategic weakness, their internal divisions and their haughty attitude towards human rights and the crisis in Chechnya hardly made serious dia- logue with the Union on international security issues an attractive proposi- tion in Moscow’s eyes. In a little over a year, Vladimir Putin therefore deliberately led his coun- try along a westward path towards cooperation with America. Moreover, he was the first leader to see 11 September as an historic event that sounded the death-knell of the Cold War. That strategy of anchoring Russia in the West is the subject of this Chaillot Paperby Dov Lynch, a new research fellow at the Institute, who for three years was responsible for Russian studies at King’s College, London. In addition to analysing the main trends that have changed the direction of Russian foreign policy under Putin, the author in particular suggests a number of practical issues - crisis management, Moldova, prolifer- ation — on which a serious relaunch of strategic cooperation between the Union and Russia might be based. Yet might not the war in Iraq confuse the issues once again? How will Vladimir Putin be able to stick to his strategy of cooperation with the West when the Euro-Atlantic community has just split into opposing camps over the handling of proliferation, America’s role in the world and the rules that the world order should follow? It is not at all certain that Putin’s Russia has 5 60-English-Text.qxd 14/05/2003 14:21 Page 6 Preface reason to congratulate itself on a division between Europe and America that was the main object of all Soviet leaders. Indeed, it closes off more avenues than it opens up. How is US-Russia alignment on the fight against terrorism to be reconciled with the cooling of relations over America’s handling of the Iraq crisis? How is Russia to be consolidated at home against a background of growing instability abroad and noticeable divisions within Russia’s big European neighbour? What is absolutely non-negotiable in Vladimir Putin’s strategy of anchoring in the West? These are all open questions. Whatever happens, for the European Union Russia will remain a partner that is as necessary as it is difficult to apprehend, so that a renewed security dialogue between the Union and Russia is all the more urgent. One thing is, however, out of the question for Europe: an EU-Russian alliance in opposi- tion to American strategy would be as mistaken as it would be absurd. Paris, April 2003 6 60-English-Text.qxd 14/05/2003 14:21 Page 7 Introduction Russia faces Europe Developing the partnership with Russia is the most important, the most urgent and most challenging task that the EU faces at the beginning of the 21st century. Javier Solana, Stockholm, 13 October 1999 The crisis on Iraq has challenged key features of international rela- tions. The United States and Britain intervened in Iraq without the specific support of the United Nations, avoiding a second resolu- tion in February 2003 precisely because they feared coercive action would be vetoed. The UN has taken a serious blow and the parame- ters of international law on self-defence and the use of force are being redefined by US and British actions. The crisis has also left the transatlantic relationship in tatters, with the appearance of serious divisions in Europe and inside the European Union. France, Germany and Russia coordinated their positions against coercive actions within the UN Security Council, adopting a num- ber of joint declarations in 2003 on how to strengthen the inspec- tion regime. With all this, the very notion of the West as it existed in the Cold War seems under question. The divisions between the United States and Europe, and within Europe, raise two vital questions for Russia. Is the West fin- ished as a concept? If so, with which West should Russia seek to align? First, the divisions are understood in Moscow. They reflect a confluence of unique, some might say unfortunate, circum- stances: a vulnerable and powerful America led by neo-conserva- tive thinkers, the presence of France and Britain in the Security Council as well as Germany and Spain, a French president no longer constrained by cohabitation and a populist German leader. Moreover, the EU faces the double revolution of enlargement and the Convention on the Future of Europe, both of which give rise to as much anxiety as excitement in European capitals. Divisions are to be expected in heady times. Yet these divisions have also objec- tive foundations that reflect profound changes that have occurred in the world since the end of the Cold War and after 11 September.