RUSSIA MOVES TO REASSERT INFLUENCE IN CENTRAL ASIA, CAUCASUS
Igor Torbakov: 12/16/02

After concentrating in early 2002 on fostering strategic ties with the United States and European Union, Russia is retrenching in Central Eurasia, moving vigorously in recent months to bolster its influence over other CIS countries. Political analysts say the Kremlin is skillfully advancing its agenda by utilizing Bush administration foreign policy rhetoric with its emphasis on the anti-terrorism campaign and the right of preemptive action.

The motivation for Russia’s shift in geopolitical priorities is a desire to develop reliable partners. In the immediate aftermath of the September 11 terrorist attacks, Russian President Vladimir Putin focused on enhancing Moscow’s relationship with Washington. [For background see the Eurasia Insight archives]. But Putin’s strategic initiatives have been hampered by decades of mutual mistrust between the erstwhile Cold War enemies, as well as by economic competition connected with the development of Caspian Basin energy resources.

Over the past year, Russia has concluded strategic partnership agreements with the United States, EU members and other countries. Nevertheless Russia has no real and reliable strategic partners, prompting some to express concern about geopolitical isolation, some analysts say.

"There is no country or even a group of countries or an international institution that can or would want to give Russia some guarantees that its security, territorial integrity or at least its economic interests will be respected," writes the regional analyst Iskander Khisamov in the journal Ekspert.

"Thus, no mater how weak or disintegrated the Commonwealth of Independent States might be," Khisamov continued, "it remains Russia’s main strategic priority – more important than America, Europe or China and India."

As the recent agreement to establish a Russian air base in Kyrgyzstan underscores, Moscow is now keen to demonstrate that it remains a dominate regional power in Central Asia. [For background see the Eurasia Insight archives]. Khisamov, the political analyst, said the Russian base is meant to show that Moscow "is the true master of the post-Soviet space." The basing agreement also is indicative that Putin may be less accommodating in his dealings with the United States in 2003. Putin himself said in November that the era of Russian geopolitical concessions – which began with the 1991 Soviet collapse and continued through the post-September 11 appearance of US military bases in Central Asia – was coming to an end.

"Russia has ceded so much over the last decade that further ‘giving away’ is simply out of the question," Putin said November 27 in comments broadcast by Ekho Moscvy radio. "[Instead of ‘giving away’] we will ‘take’ – but [only] within the framework of agreements and international accords."

Russia’s participation in the US-led anti-terrorism campaign prompted Russian nationalists to severely criticize Putin’s foreign policy. The new policy emphasis has generally mollified Putin’s nationalist critics.

Ironically, it is under the anti-terrorism campaign’s aegis that Moscow is pursuing its current policy goals. Earlier this year, many Russian pundits were critical of what they characterized as US imperial behavior. Now, however, Russia is effectively mimicking the United States in seeking to project influence in Central Asia. "Our elite who only recently was enraged by the American arrogance, is now going out of its way to emulate Washington," writes political scientist Liliya Shevtsova of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in her commentary published in the Moskovskie Novosti weekly.

There is a dramatic difference, however, between Moscow’s moves and Washington’s: while the United States is unquestionably a global force, Russia is struggling to shore up its regional power status. "The actual policy of our country in the post-Soviet space in the outgoing year has become a small replica of America’s behavior in the global arena," political commentator Tatiana Rublyova wrote in the Nezavisimaya Gazeta newspaper.

Being a pragmatist, Putin seems to be fully aware of the difference between US and Russian strategic capabilities, and is content to skillfully play a "weak hand." In addition to the America-led global coalition against terror, of which Russia is an important but far from a leading participant, Putin is diligently building his own mini-coalition on the basis of the Collective Security Treaty (CST), of which Moscow is the indisputable leader. [For background information see the Eurasia Insight archives].

Using the anti-terrorism struggle as a catch phrase, Russia is pushing to create a full-fledged regional military bloc that can help Moscow strengthen its grip over post-Soviet Eurasia. Some analysts suggest that by the next scheduled CIS summit in May 2003, a new regional security organization could take shape.

Viktor Ilyin, philosophy professor at Moscow Technical University, in a commentary posted on the Kreml.org website, called on Russia to develop its own version of the Monroe Doctrine. "The exclusive right of control over the former fragments of the [Russian] empire and support of the friendly regional regimes there is the prerogative of Russia, which strives to reintegrate the [former Soviet] Union space under its leadership," Ilyin wrote.

In the same vein, the post-Soviet countries are now being increasingly portrayed in Moscow as underdeveloped and in need of Russian protection. The historian Vladlen Sirotkin, a specialist in French history, recently compared poorer CIS states to the former French colonies in Africa. He went on to suggest in a recent analysis published in the Literaturnaya Gazeta weekly that Putin should emulate the policy approaches that Paris took in the 1960s towards Africa. "France has completely restored control over its ‘African CIS,’" Sirotkin said. "It has retained its old military bases; it controls the local economy and trade."

There appears to be a growing belief in Moscow that such a neo-imperial policy in the post-Soviet space can succeed. Analysts mention such positive factors as geographic proximity, economic and political dependence of the post-Soviet nations on Russia and Moscow’s potential to exploit the internal political difficulties of some CIS leaders, such as Kyrgyz President Askar Akayev. [For more information see the Eurasia Insight archives]. Also important, Tatiana Rublyova points out, "in contrast to America, Russia possesses the historical experience of keeping these nations within its sphere of influence."

Editor’s Note: Igor Torbakov is a freelance journalist who specializes in CIS political affairs. He has been a Regional Exchange Scholar at the Kennan Institute, Washington DC, and Research Scholar at the Institute of Russian History, Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow.

Email this article | Printer-Friendly Version
Posted December 16, 2002 © Eurasianet
http://www.eurasianet.org

	The Central Eurasia Project aims, through its website, meetings, papers, and grants, to foster a more informed debate about the social, political and economic developments of the Caucasus and Central Asia. It is a program of the Open Society Institute-New York. The Open Society Institute-New York is a private operating and grantmaking foundation that promotes the development of open societies around the world by supporting educational, social, and legal reform, and by encouraging alternative approaches to complex and controversial issues. The views expressed in this publication do not necessarily represent the position of the Open Society Institute and are the sole responsibility of the author or authors.