Article
Andrew Kuchins
{
"authors": [
"Andrew Kuchins"
],
"type": "legacyinthemedia",
"centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
"centers": [
"Carnegie Endowment for International Peace"
],
"collections": [],
"englishNewsletterAll": "ctw",
"nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
"primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"programAffiliation": "russia",
"programs": [
"Russia and Eurasia"
],
"projects": [],
"regions": [
"Caucasus",
"Russia"
],
"topics": [
"Foreign Policy"
]
}
REQUIRED IMAGE
In The Media
Russia, China, and What's Really on the Table
Published on Aug 3, 2001
Source: Carnegie
The Moscow Times,
Friday, Aug. 3, 2001. Page 8
What a two-week period would-be geopoliticians have had. It began with the Bush
administration's announcement of plans for testing of ballistic missile systems
that will likely "bump up" against the ABM Treaty, followed by the
successful test of the missile defense kill vehicle. Then Chinese President
Jiang Zemin arrived in Moscow to sign a new Chinese-Russian Friendship Treaty.
Finally in Genoa U.S. President George W. Bush had another opportunity to confer
with European allies as well as his new soulmate President Vladimir Putin. The
head of Sir Halford MacKinder, the godfather of geopolitics and originator of
the term "Eurasian heartland," must be pinning in his grave.
Many observers have been quick to resurrect the notion of triangular politics that was popularized by Henry Kissinger during the Nixon administration's efforts to ombine detente with the Soviet Union with the historic opening to China. But with the demise of the Cold War coupled with an increasingly interdependent world, the xplanatory power of triangular politics does not get us very far in understanding what is really going on between Moscow and Beijing. Washington's worst-case scenario artists delight in pointing to anti-American rhetoric and transfers of Russian weapons and technologies to China to conjure up the anti-hegemonic alliance in-waiting that will bring down Pax Americana. The fact is that both China and Russia are too heavily invested or want to be too heavily invested in benefiting from Pax Americana to really want to bring the forces of globalization down.
Russia cannot have a prosperous future without deep integration in the world economy. And an impoverished and consequently unstable Russia will not be an attractive partner for anybody in the long run, be it the European Union, China, Japan, India, or even Iran. Mikhail Gorbachev understood this, and so set forth with perestroika and new thinking in foreign policy. Boris Yeltsin understood this, and so accelerated reform efforts. Putin understands this and will continue to hew to a primarily Western orientation, especially toward Europe, but he needs to be constantly reminded that contemporary European powers respect human rights.
While the Chinese and the Russians oppose some aspects of U.S. policy, most notably missile defense, they share a number of common interests that have little or nothing to do with opposing the United States. The first is to maintain a peaceful border and ensure that Central Asia not be overwhelmed by separatist forces, terrorism, and drug trafficking. These factors
About the Author
Andrew Kuchins
Former Senior Associate and Director, Russian & Eurasian Program
- Russian Spin Job?
- Vladimir the LuckyArticle
Andrew Kuchins
Recent Work
Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.
More Work from Carnegie Europe
- Trump Turns NATO into a Tool of CoercionCommentary
The full list of humiliations Europe has endured since Donald Trump returned to the White House makes for grim reading. But Washington’s adversarial approach to its allies undermines its own power base.
Rym Momtaz
- How the EU Can Become Energy IndependentCommentary
The closure of the Strait of Hormuz has triggered a global energy crisis, but Europe is stuck in reaction mode. Without more strategic foresight, the EU will remain dependent on fossil fuels and will never be truly secure.
Milo McBride, Pauline Gerard
- Deciphering Europe’s Relationship with TurkeyCommentary
Debate is heating up on how Turkey could be integrated into a common European defense framework. Commercial and industrial deals offer a better chance at alignment than sweeping political efforts.
Marc Pierini
- Taking the Pulse: Is it Worth it for Europeans to Placate Trump?Commentary
After spending much of 2025 trying to placate Donald Trump, some European leaders are starting to change posture. But is even a hostile Washington still so important to Europe that the U.S. president’s outbursts are worth putting up with?
Rym Momtaz, ed.
- Europeans Are Quiet Quitting the United StatesCommentary
European leaders have now not only lost faith in Donald Trump’s U.S. presidency, but also in America’s hegemony as a whole. But short-term challenges make an immediate divorce unwise.
Rym Momtaz
