• The Heritage Network
    • Resize:
    • A
    • A
    • A
  • Donate
  • Kremlin Sending Contradictory Signals

    Last week President Dmitry Medvedev met with American foreign policy veterans including former U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger who champion better U.S.-Russian relations, and positively assessed the Obama Administration’s latest moves. Medvedev said resetting the U.S.-Russian relationship should not be limited to words but should extend to practical deeds.

    Clearly, Moscow cannot help but enjoy the proposals initiated by the former and present-day U.S. opportunists to revisit the missile defense plans for the Czech Republic and Poland, to freeze the process of the NATO accession for Ukraine and Georgia, and to develop new European security architecture with Russia’s suggestions factored in. Moscow finds appealing other recommendations to Washington initiated by former senators Hart and Hagel – to show maximum restraint in criticizing Russia’s domestic policy and human rights record and actually recognize the former Soviet space as an area of Russia’s special interest.

    The Kremlin, however, has yet to meet Washington halfway. Furthermore, as President Medvedev’s speech at the Defense Ministry Collegium implies, Russia is sending America a signal of having every intention to solidify its military potential, primarily its strategic component. In the framework of the massive military rearmament scheduled for 2011 there are plans to adopt for service new ground-based ICBMs Topol-M and make operational new nuclear submarines armed with Bulava ballistic missiles.

    At the backdrop of the Obama Administration’s broadly discussed plans to freeze missile defenses in Europe Russia’s strategic buildup could be interpreted as a direct challenge to the United States.

    However, Moscow’s expert community are inclined to think that Medvedev’s latest military rearmament statements are designed to target domestic rather than foreign audience. The Russian military are deeply concerned over the present-day military reform that would bring about dramatic cuts in officer strength and eliminate the institution of warrant officers and ensigns. Amid the economic downturn, these cuts could have a negative effect on most servicemen’s social standing, since problems with providing housing and jobs for them are bound to emerge.

    As for the defense-industrial complex, it is deeply concerned that crisis-induced appropriations cuts could undermine the funding of state defense orders and bring about the closures of a number of large defense enterprises – also with serious socio-political fallout in terms of unemployment and a dramatic slide in household incomes.

    Thus, Medvedev’s Defense Ministry speech was clearly called to assuage both the military and the defense-industrial complex and reiterate the incumbent regime’s allegiance to the all-round support of the state’s military component.

    At the same time, it arouses certain doubts that Medvedev will meet his far-reaching pledges to the armed forces and the defense-industrial complex. The plans he has advanced are ill-adjusted to the government’s earlier military programs, including the current one slated to run until 2015. Some parts of Medvedev’s statement are raising questions even now. For example, the status of the Bulava submarine-based strategic missiles Moscow has pinned such huge hopes on, is yet unclear. Only five out of its ten tests have been successful. It has yet to be clarified whether it was accidental or proof of significant technological defects.

    Bitter debate is raging in the Russian government over the inevitable budget cuts on account of a painful economic meltdown. So far, the Russian government has been adamantly against cutting social spending owning to a possible souring of the socio-political conditions in the country. Meanwhile, it is focusing on lower non-social spending. The Finance Ministry’s project submitted to the government envisages cuts in military spending (by $2,3 billion), as well as in appropriations to other ministries representing the state might – the Interior Ministry, Federal Security Service and Emergency Situations Ministry. Also, there are plans to completely discontinue the funding of law enforcement and Interior Ministry troop modernization.

    At the same time, the government will not necessarily approve the Finance Ministry’s proposals. Should the situation get sour, the Kremlin needs the support of the power guys more than ever before, but cuts in the appropriations for them would drive the siloviki back and in an emergency could even question their loyalty to the regime. Thus, possible budget cuts facing the ministries and agencies representing the state might will likely be symbolic, while the social sector will once again bear the chief burden of the budget vicissitudes.

    Posted in International [slideshow_deploy]

    6 Responses to Kremlin Sending Contradictory Signals

    1. hhrrick Md. says:

      I think some of the recent statements by our new administration are at the least reckless and make us look weak in the eyes of the Russians. It is stupid for us to give away anything.

    2. Guy Valentine says:

      This will be a blatant and outright shame if we Americans walk out on the Checks now. These (Checks) folks have bent over backwards while subjecting their country to severe consequences at the hands of the Russians if America abandons the Missile Defense Program for the Checks. I can't imagine how the average Check is feeling now as their protector is considering walking out on them.

    3. NEAL RASMUSSEN says:

      WEAPONS ARE THE BIGGEST EXPORT FOR RUSSIA'S ECONOMY.IT BRINGS IN HARD MONEY AND TIES OTHER MILITARY FORCES TO RUSSIA.IT ALSO REDUCES THEIR INFLATION WHILE INCREASING THE DEFICITS OF THE BUYERS AND OURS IF WE LOSE THE SALES OF OUR PRODUCTION.IT DOESN'T MATTER WHAT THEY SAY TO OUR STATE DEPT.

    4. Lynn B. DeSpain says:

      The old saying is just as true today; "The friends of my enemy, aremy enemy. The enemy of my enemy, are my friends." This is the same in business and in war.

      As Americans, we never kow tow to no man, no even our President.

      Hozro

    5. Marshall Hill MI. says:

      Begging is not an Option!

    6. Guy Irene says:

      Guy Valentine, the name is Czech. And the people of the Czech Republic do not bend backward to the Bush crowd desire to make Europe its war zone. Three days ago the Czech government was shown the door by the Parliament (Czechs are ruled BY THE PEOPLE FOR THE PEOPLE},

      "The vast majority of people in the Czech Republic continue to oppose their country’s participation in the construction of a defense shield for the United States, according to a poll by CVVM. 70 per cent of respondents disagree with the plan, and 72 per cent want the government to call a referendum on the issue."

    Comments are subject to approval and moderation. We remind everyone that The Heritage Foundation promotes a civil society where ideas and debate flourish. Please be respectful of each other and the subjects of any criticism. While we may not always agree on policy, we should all agree that being appropriately informed is everyone's intention visiting this site. Profanity, lewdness, personal attacks, and other forms of incivility will not be tolerated. Please keep your thoughts brief and avoid ALL CAPS. While we respect your first amendment rights, we are obligated to our readers to maintain these standards. Thanks for joining the conversation.

    Big Government Is NOT the Answer

    Your tax dollars are being spent on programs that we really don't need.

    I Agree I Disagree ×

    Get Heritage In Your Inbox — FREE!

    Heritage Foundation e-mails keep you updated on the ongoing policy battles in Washington and around the country.

    ×