Paul
Goble
Staunton, January 16 – Russian
analysts are currently split into three distinct groups on the question of
whether “a strategic alliance” will be formed between Vladimir Putin and
incoming US President Donald Trump and thus define the direction of the world
for at least the next four years, according to Regnum commentator Yury
Baranchik.
According to the first of these, which
is held most commonly among Russian liberals, “Trump’s pre-election rhetoric
was no more than a diversion and that as president he will return to the
Obama-Clinton line” and that the new
president will focus more on domestic matters, leaving Russia to “the students
of Reagan” (regnum.ru/news/polit/2226970.html).
If
this view turns out to be true, Baranchik says, Trump will have little room for
political maneuver. But the Regnum
commentator says that in his view, “Trump will not depart from his own line
since this would mean his rapid political death” not only because it would
betray his followers but because it would violate his psychology.
Consequently,
this first view most likely will not prove to be accurate.
The
second school argues that after becoming president, Trump will “occupy a
position of political realism and enter into a tough trading period with Russia
concerning the entire spectrum of world geopolitics.” Each side will have to
yield something the other wants in order to get or retain what it wants more.
Baranchik
says this scenario is more justified than the first but that it suffers from
two serious problems. On the one hand, “Trump has too complicated a situation
inside his own country to get involved in a war on two fronts.” That is he needs
to get a win quickly on one in order to be in a position to do something on the
other.
Getting
such an agreement with Putin quickly is possible but only if his demands for an
equal trade are not pressed too far, the commentator argues.
And
on the other hand, Baranchik continues, unlike the so-called “Kissinger plan”
which requires Putin to make all the concessions, Trump has to come up with one
that offers some American concessions on things Putin cares about if he is to
get an agreement quickly and easily and that Putin can’t get simply by awaiting
the course of events.
And
then there is the third set of views, one few Russians currently hold although
Baranchik for his part says he is among them.
This third scenario starts from the proposition that “Putin and Trump
have common geopolitical and personal enemies who want to remove both of them
from power.”
“Both
presidents have very similar domestic political and economic problems,
including an intra-power frond and the necessity for boosting the standard of
living” in ways people can feel, the Regnum commentator says. They can’t afford
slow negotiations about the future because that means “to lose time, resources,
public impact and allies.”
“Therefore,”
the commentator argues, “the most optimal variant and especially for Trump
consists not [of a global trade of positions] but a global agreement including the restoration of a Russian zone of
influence on the post-Soviet space except for the Baltic countries.” [Stress
added.]
Trump
won’t get a lot in exchange, and his critics in the mainstream media in the US
will attack him for selling out to Putin and sacrificing all the achievements
of the West “which it got from the collapse of the USSR as part of their
ongoing effort to strip him of legitimacy and weaken his position.
But
in this situation, Baranchik argues, “Trump needs to give his voters another truth.” That alternative version of reality would be
that now American boys won’t have to fight “god knows where for what commercial
interests” and that “global stability is much better than a world war.”
The
main reason this third scenario is the most likely, Baranchik says, is that Trump
doesn’t have much time – only three years until his reelection campaign will
absorb all of his time. And that means
that he needs to “agree with Putin as fast as possible on as many issues as
possible about a new world order.”
In
short, the analyst says, he must conclude “a Putin-Trump pact and then,
presenting his accord with Putin as his first victory as president, take up the
cleansing of the Augean stables in the US. For that, he will need the support
of the people.” Among those who share this view is a Russian blogger whose post
is at cont.ws/@glavbushka/482763.
Under
existing circumstances, Putin doesn’t need to trade anything meaningful to get
Trump’s agreement. Indeed, Baranchik suggests it would not only be undignified
but “simply stupid.” There is no “Kissinger
plan” and the Trump and Putin people have been talking intensively in Moscow.
Summing up, Baranchik says that what
Russia and Putin need from the US and Trump is the same thing the US and Trump
need from them: a joint agreement to end “the legacy of the Saudis and the
Clintons.” That task is “the most
general and important” of those standing before Putin and Trump. Achieving
progress is the best way to avoid a broader war.
Given some of the statements Trump
has made in recent days – his suggestion that NATO is a relic of the past and
that the EU should fall apart – and some of his already demonstrated approaches
to decision making, one can understand why at least some in Moscow share
Baranchik’s views. Just how many do remains to be seen but should become
obvious soon.
No comments:
Post a Comment