• Research
  • About
  • Experts
Carnegie India logoCarnegie lettermark logo
AI
{
  "authors": [
    "Dmitri Trenin"
  ],
  "type": "other",
  "centerAffiliationAll": "",
  "centers": [
    "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
    "Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center"
  ],
  "collections": [],
  "englishNewsletterAll": "",
  "nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
  "primaryCenter": "Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center",
  "programAffiliation": "",
  "programs": [],
  "projects": [],
  "regions": [
    "North America",
    "United States",
    "Caucasus",
    "Russia",
    "Western Europe"
  ],
  "topics": [
    "Political Reform",
    "Domestic Politics",
    "Climate Change",
    "Security",
    "Foreign Policy"
  ]
}

Source: Getty

Other
Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center

“Moscow the Muscular”: The Loneliness of an Aspiring Power Center

Russia must aim for modernization and use its foreign policy to achieve rapprochement with Europe, North America and the economically and politically developed world at large.

Link Copied
By Dmitri Trenin
Published on Jan 1, 2009

Russian-American and Russian-EU relations face a deep crisis. “Never before in contemporary history have Russia’s relations been so tense with Europe, America, and its nearest neighbors (Ukraine, Georgia, Estonia) all at once.” Russia’s current movement away from Western countries, which it perceives as failed partners, may reap dangerous consequences for Russia’s domestic situation and for the international relations at large.

Trenin writes, “The West hoped that Europe could be organized around the NATO-EU pair, which would naturally ‘attract’ other countries and regions that gravitate toward the Atlantic alliance and the EU, while Russia would be satisfied with formal partnerships with both institutions. The latter assumption proved ill-founded. The policy of ‘engaging Russia’ first sputtered, then helplessly spun its wheels, and finally came to a halt.” Yet until Russia becomes a modern state, it will not be able to play the role in the world that it aspires to.

Any further expansion of NATO would be unacceptable. “Had the Membership Action Plan (MAP) been adopted [for Georgia and Ukraine], the process of integrating the former republics of the USSR into the Atlantic alliance would have become irreversible and relations between Russia and the West would have shifted from a diplomatic stand-off to active political and ‘special services’ warfare, which could inevitably lead to open and direct conflict.” Yet Russia should also review its policies, which have reached a dead-end. The tactic of maintaining “frozen conflicts” on the territory of CIS states has collapsed; a state that aspires to a great power role was in fact unable to provide security right on its own borders, and Moscow’s reluctance to follow the principle of respecting the territorial integrity of post-Soviet states received negative reactions from neighboring countries. The gas crisis also heightened tensions between Russia and Ukraine.

In giving priority to the task of national modernization, Russia must proceed along the path of rapprochement with Europe, North America, and the economically and politically developed world at large.

External pressure on Russia and interference in Russian domestic matters is “useless and senseless.” Yet until Russia becomes a modern state, it will not be able to play the role in the world that it aspires to. The main goal should be Russia’s modernization, and its foreign policy should also serve this goal. In giving priority to the task of national modernization, Russia must proceed along the path of rapprochement with Europe, North America, and the economically and politically developed world at large. “In preparing to work with the new U.S. administration,” writes Trenin, “the Kremlin might pose a question, ‘What does Russia want from America?’ – beyond the three well-known points (don't intrude into the CIS, don't expand NATO, and don't deploy troops or weapons near the Russian borders). For example, how can Russian-American relations be ‘steered’ in a direction that would really help the country modernize?”

Aside from ideas of Russian national interests “it would be beneficial for Russia to think about what it could do for the rest of the world and what responsibilities it should shoulder. Russians need to understand in which spheres they would be able to play the role of a global or regional leader.” If Russia puts emphasis on restoring its dominance in Eurasia, it “will rapidly expend its resources in conflicts with the objects of its ambitions and regional players, and will enter a period of intense competition with both America and Europe.” Such a course will bring about destructive double isolation – from inside and outside – and will block the current modernization project. This is in no one’s interest.

About the Author

Dmitri Trenin

Former Director, Carnegie Moscow Center

Trenin was director of the Carnegie Moscow Center from 2008 to early 2022.

    Recent Work

  • Commentary
    Mapping Russia’s New Approach to the Post-Soviet Space

      Dmitri Trenin

  • Commentary
    What a Week of Talks Between Russia and the West Revealed

      Dmitri Trenin

Dmitri Trenin
Former Director, Carnegie Moscow Center
Political ReformDomestic PoliticsClimate ChangeSecurityForeign PolicyNorth AmericaUnited StatesCaucasusRussiaWestern Europe

Carnegie India 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 India

  • Commentary
    AI in Outer Space: Opportunities, Risks, and the Governance Gap

    How is AI reshaping space security, creating governance challenges, and where does international diplomacy stand today?

      Tejas Bharadwaj, Almudena Azcárate Ortega

  • Paper
    Threading the Needle: India’s Path Forward with China

    After the chill in ties between 2020 and 2024 that brought India–China relations to their lowest point in several decades, the two countries have engaged each other afresh. This paper argues that there are predominantly four imperatives guiding India’s approach to China, and they exist in an order of priority.

      Saheb Singh Chadha

  • Article
    Managing Divergence: India’s BRICS Presidency in 2026

    This piece argues that India’s central challenge is not managing a single flashpoint but resolving the underlying tension between expansion and institutional coherency of the BRICS grouping.

      Vrinda Sahai

  • Article
    India–Africa Strategic Partnership: Challenges, Potential, and Possible Pathways

    A partnership between India, a country of subcontinental size, and Africa, a continent of fifty-four countries, may seem asymmetric until one notes that both are home to nearly the same number of people—1.4 billion. This essay spells out the existing challenges to the partnership, its optimal potential, and the possible pathways to realize it over the next quarter-century.

      Rajiv Bhatia

  • Commentary
    The Unresolved Challenges in U.S.–India Semiconductor Cooperation

    The U.S.–India semiconductor cooperation story is well-stocked with top-level strategic intent. What remains unresolved, however, are some underlying challenges that will determine whether the cooperation actually functions. Three such friction points stand out.

      Shruti Mittal

Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie India
Carnegie India logo, white
Unit C-4, 5, 6, EdenparkShaheed Jeet Singh MargNew Delhi – 110016, IndiaPhone: 011-40078687
  • Research
  • About
  • Experts
  • Projects
  • Events
  • Contact
  • Careers
  • Privacy
  • For Media
Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie India
© 2026 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. All rights reserved.