On January 22, a discussion titled “Russia’s Policy in the CIS: Is a Reset Needed?” took place at the Moscow venue of the Valdai Club. The moderator, Timofei Bordachev, stressed that the CIS—Russia’s immediate neighbourhood—continues to be the most important direction of Russian foreign policy, as it remains linked to the security of the Russian Federation and the implementation of its long-term development plans. He invited participants to discuss whether a revision of Russia’s foreign policy in this area is needed and which of its elements may require revision.
Nikolai Silaev, Senior Research Fellow at the Institute of International Studies of MGIMO University under the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, raised the question of the geographical scope within which such a foreign policy “reset” might take place. The CIS countries are very diverse and are following different paths of development. The Commonwealth encompasses dozens of agreements on a wide range of issues affecting the lives of citizens in different countries. At the same time, not all of Russia’s neighbours are currently members of the Commonwealth. Accordingly, how the geographical framework is defined will determine both the need for a reset and its possible substance. Speaking about the substantive aspects, Silaev emphasised that the former Soviet republics are experiencing the same shifts as the rest of the world—a turn towards conservatism, a striving for sovereignty (understood in different ways), and a rise in nationalism. Consequently, nationalist trends in the post-Soviet space that concern Russia are likely to persist for a long time. Russia itself also feels differently in its relations with its CIS partners than it did just a few years ago. It is clearly prepared to pursue a much tougher policy in many areas, and its diplomacy, traditionally considered “soft”, is likely to acquire more of a “big stick”. “The experience drawn from the Ukrainian case shows that there are things among one’s neighbours that cannot be left to take their own course,” Silaev concluded.
Vyacheslav Sutyrin, Senior Research Fellow at the Institute of International Studies of MGIMO University and Associate Professor at the Department of International Relations and Foreign Policy of MGIMO, called for clarity on what “reset” refers to—a “return to factory settings”, a shift to “hard realism” with the abandonment of existing institutions, or something more superficial and technical. In his view, what is needed is not so much a reset as a “fine-tuning” of foreign policy at two levels. First, at the level of goal-setting. The established pragmatic foreign policy course focused on economic development and maintenance of the status quo now requires adjustment. It is necessary to recognise that, in a period of transformation of the international system, humanitarian interaction, confidence-building and shared values are no less important than economic issues. Second, fine-tuning is required at the level of instruments. In particular, Sutyrin believes that greater use should be made of a resource for strengthening mutual understanding in the form of students from CIS countries studying in Russia.
“We need to look for what unites us, not what divides us,” said Bulat Sultanov, Director of the Research Institute for International and Regional Cooperation at the Kazakh-German University. He added that relations within the CIS should be grounded in equality and good neighbourliness, pointing to the need to bring down trade barriers and find a fair balance of interests. In his view, the West is currently attempting to drive a wedge between Russia and China, and Western policy towards Kazakhstan is aimed precisely at this. Accordingly, to counter such attempts, it is necessary to build a new, fair regional and global architecture of cooperation and security, based on the linkage between the Greater Eurasian Partnership and China’s Community of a Shared Future for Mankind initiative. Sultanov considers a reset in the approach of CIS member states towards the Commonwealth that would take this into account to be necessary in order to transform it into a mechanism for strengthening mutual trust.
The Valdai Discussion Club was established in 2004. It is named after Lake Valdai, which is located close to Veliky Novgorod, where the Club’s first meeting took place.
Please visit the firm link to site
