Continuing to question "reset"—New cold war?
Bruce Clarke
Defense Dept. Examiner
In past articles I have questioned both the desirability and utility of the "reset" policy towards Russia. The Obama administration adopted the reset policy in attempt to gain Russian support for some of the thorny issues being confronted by the world community. Two of those issues are the current concern about Iran's nuclear enrichment efforts and Syria's ongoing brutal attacks on its dissenters. Recently Russia has opposed US and the world community's efforts on both issues. Is this the beginning of a new cold war?
Support for Iran: In a recent meeting in Peking Russian President Putin said that: "Russia supports Tehran's atomic program as long as it is "peaceful."On the sidelines of the regional security meeting in Peking Putin went on to say that: "We have always supported the right of the Iranian people to modern technologies, including the peaceful use of atomic energy,"
In a statement signed at the end of the meeting the participants said: "Any attempts to solve the Iranian problem with force are unacceptable and could lead to unpredictable circumstances that threaten stability and security in the region and the entire world."
Clearly, the Russians and also the Chinese are seeking to undermine efforts to reign in Iranian nuclear ambitions. The same can be said for the severe sanctions that are due to go into effect next month. Russia seeks to exploit the Iranian arms market while China continues to seek oil sources around the world.
For his part Iranian president Ahmadinejad called for "serious and broader cooperation between Iran and Russia" due to developments "in the region and the world". He told Putin that: "Iran and Russia are now on the same side of the barricades." "There are people who stand against the progress and development of both Russia and Iran. Especially considering that now, NATO has set its sights on the east," he said. He was most likely referring to a NATO defense system that is being deployed to protect Europeans from the threat of ballistic missiles from countries such as Iran.
Support for Syria: Russia's foreign minister recently defended his country's sale of arms to Syria and accused the United States of supplying rebels with weapons to fight against the government. The most recent sale includes attack helicopters which will greatly increase the mobility and rapid reaction firepower for use against the dissenter—actual and potential.
In response Secretary of State Hillary Clinton described as "patently untrue" Moscow's argument that its arms transfers to Syria are unrelated to the conflict there.
The Russian foreign minister said: "We are not violating any international law in performing these contracts. They are providing arms and weapons to the Syrian opposition that can be used in fighting against the Damascus government." Interestingly these remarks were made in Tehran—another of Syria's major supporters. (Iran is reported to have provided arms using civilian airliners and some elite forces.)
Russia is also a principal defender of Syria on the diplomatic front and, as a permanent member of the UN Security Council with veto power, has stymied efforts by Western powers to pressure Syrian President Bashar al-Assad into stepping down.
Conclusion: It is obvious that Russia's policy is to keep the US and its allies tied down in the middle-east so as to allow it freedom of action in the Caucasus and elsewhere. The Chinese probably have the same rationale, especially in light of the Obama administration's tilt to the Pacific. If the "reset" policy was being effective one would not expect to see such adamant opposition to US and global community efforts with respect to Iran and Syria as the Russians have shown recently. Is it time to rethink "reset'? Are we entering a new cold war? Will "reset" become a foreign policy issue in US politics this fall? Time will tell, but candidate Mitt Romney's several statements suggest that he is opposed to reset Noted centrists like General (ret) Colin Powell have opposed Romney on this, however in the current run up to the G20 summit many are pressing the President to be tougher on Putin. Potentially, as goes Powell so goes the majority.