Symposium: Advice to President Trump on U.S.-Russia Policy
New content added daily.
Editor’s Note: The following is a multi-part symposium commissioned by the National Interest and Carnegie Corporation of New York. Check daily (Monday-Friday) for new entries. Below you will find a brief introduction to the series by Jacob Heilbrunn, editor of the National Interest.
Monday, November 28: Graham Allison, Steven Pifer, Paul Saunders, Ian Bremmer, Joseph Nye, Angela Stent
Tuesday, November 29: Jack Matlock Jr., Barry Posen
Wednesday, November 30: Michael Kofman, Matthew Rojansky
Thursday, December 1: Timothy J. Colton, Nikolas K. Gvosdev
Friday, December 2: Andrew Kuchins, J. Andrew Spindler
Monday, December 5: Paul Pillar, Thomas F. Remington
Tuesday, December 6: Kevin Ryan, Daniel Treisman
Wednesday, December 7: Julie Newton, Thomas Pickering
Thursday, December 8: Arthur Martirosyan, Alexandra Vacroux
Friday, December 9: Mathew Burrows, Jeffrey Mankoff
Monday, December 12: Thomas Graham, Siegfried S. Hecker
Tuesday, December 13: Robert Hunter, Olga Oliker
With the election of Donald Trump to the presidency, the issue of U.S.-Russia relations is acquiring a new importance. Russia figured prominently in the discussion of the U.S. elections and in debates about the direction of American foreign policy. Now the central question is whether or not the possibility of warmer relations between the two sides—or even a new détente—exists? What would it take to adopt a fresh approach?
To answer such questions, Carnegie Corporation and the National Interest created a symposium on Russia and the United States. The essays contained in this collection are particularly pertinent now that the possibility is being discussed, both at home and abroad, of reassessing the frosty relations between Moscow and Washington. These stimulating and enlightening essays, written by an impressive array of leading experts, offer a possible roadmap forward for a new U.S. administration. They consist of analysis and recommendations from policymakers, think tank members and academics. The precise answers may vary, but the authors are receptive to the idea that change is imperative.
For example, Graham Allison, the director of Harvard University’s Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, argues that the stakes could not be higher. According to him, “the next U.S. President must do everything possible to prevent an accidental U.S.-Russian war, now the likeliest it’s been since the end of the Cold War.” Allison suggests that overturning President Obama’s interdiction on communication “at every level from President-to-President to Secretaries of Defense and regional commanders” can lessen the risk. He also cautions that a Trump administration must build a “credible deterrent” to deter Russia from aggression against U.S. allies but also “bear in mind the potential consequences of further alienating Russia—like a closer military-political alignment between Moscow and Beijing.”
Barry R. Posen, director of the Security Studies Program at MIT, maintains that Russia is best viewed as a great power in decline that is seeking to preserve a modicum of security and prestige. In his view, Russian President Vladimir Putin has not managed to reverse Russia’s slide, but he has been able to retard it. In his view, “because the West is strong, and relative to Russia likely to get stronger, it is in a position to accommodate some Russian concerns.” There should be no surprise, Posen writes, in Russia’s attempt to push back against its decline as a great power. When Russia history is taken into account, the surprising thing would have been if Moscow did not react allergically to the expansion of NATO.
Whether an improvement in relations will actually take place remains an open question. Ian Bremmer, the president of Eurasia Group, says that there is no point in calling it a “reset” but “U.S.-Russia relations will benefit if President Trump adopts a different approach to Moscow than the one we’ve seen from President Obama.” The diverse essays contained in this symposium offer a potentially valuable path forward for policymakers in the Trump administration.