Does Russia pose a real threat to U.S. objectives around the globe, or is it an over-hyped power? FPA contributors Sean Goforth and Andrew Swift make the case for each.
Reset for a real challenge with Russia by Sean Goforth
October 22, 2009
Vladimir Putin wanted to hang Georgian President Mikhail Saakashvili �by the balls�.
The Russian Prime Minister's now infamous declaration to French President Nicolas Sarkozy, during last year's Russo-Georgian war, was evidence of a resurgent Russia stepping boldly once again onto the world's stage.
Or was it?
Over the last few years, media pundits have latched onto a �rising Russia' narrative that has been overly simplified, and largely imagined. It is true that as president, Putin presided over a Russia that was more assertive on the world stage than in the 1990s. He ordered bomber flights restored, saber rattled against the Bush Administration, and gathered ever-increasing amounts of domestic political power in the Kremlin. Russia today is clearly a more capable and influential country than it was in 1999. But that's not saying much.
The United States is under no threat from Russia, neither militarily nor economically. The Russian economy�state run, infested with corruption, and dependent on commodity trading�more closely resembles a third-world country than the modern, democratic West. When oil prices were peaking in 2007, Russia was booming. But the onset of the world financial crisis of 2008, and the plummet in oil prices that followed (leading to the eight percent decline in GDP forecasted for 2009), demonstrated that Russia's economy is notoriously volatile and subject to boom-bust cycles.
Russia's armed forces are a shadow of the Cold War-era Red Army, and there is an exponentially greater threat of nuclear material being stolen by or sold to international terrorist groups than of a first strike on Washington. Furthermore, the United States and Russia have plenty of room to cooperate on this issue. Radical Islamist terrorist groups are just as interested in setting off a suitcase nuke in Moscow as in Washington, as Chechnya has long featured a Jihadist struggle. But Presidents Obama and Medvedev have agreed to reductions in both countries nuclear arsenals. Russia has much to gain from working with the U.S. on securing its nuclear facilities and materials, and nothing to gain from intransigence.
Russia does hold one particular card to utilize�its immense oil and natural gas reserves. It has threatened both Belarus and Ukraine over oil pricing disputes in recent years, resulting in transit shortages in parts of Central and Western Europe. New pipeline projects�notably both the Nord and South Stream Gazprom projects�are heightening fears in Eastern Europe that the richer EU countries will throw them under the bus to ensure a constant, low-cost stream of Russian natural gas. But that is unlikely. Furthermore, Russia needs Europe (both West and East) to buy its gas.
The Georgian case documents well Russia's new attitude. Russia did breeze easily through the Georgian Army. But, of course, Georgia spends only $2.5 billion a year on defense, and its active military personnel numbers barely 35,000. Russia has more than a million men currently serving, and almost three million more in reserve. It spends nearly eighty billion dollars a year on its military, and had a much larger existing military industrial complex to begin. But don't let these disparities confuse�the United States spends more than eight times as much as Russia annually on its military. Compared to Georgia, the Russian Army is frightful. Compared to the United States, the Russian Army is no more than a paper tiger.
While Russia may prove antagonistic from time-to-time�cooperating with Iran on its nuclear program and stalling proposed Western action in the UN, meeting with Hamas or funding Hugo Chavez�its influence and power are nowhere close to being threatening to the United States. We should stop treating Russia as the country we imagine�fierce and overpowering�and start treating it as the country it is�surrounded by an economically strong and secure Europe to its west, and a rising, assertive China to its east, and dealing with a faltering economy at home.
Andrew Swift is a graduate of the University of Iowa, with a degree in History and Political Science. He blogs on Transitional States and other issues for the Foreign Policy Association.