Article
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
{
"authors": [],
"type": "pressRelease",
"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": [
"United States",
"Caucasus",
"Russia",
"Eastern Europe",
"Western Europe"
],
"topics": [
"Foreign Policy"
]
}
REQUIRED IMAGE
Press Release
U.S., European, Russian security relationship must adapt to realities of a new century
Given the reset in U.S.–Russian relations, the time is ripe for the United States, Europe, and Russia to devise a security architecture for a new century, one capable of maintaining peace and stability on the European continent throughout the years to come.
Published on Mar 17, 2010
WASHINGTON, Mar 17—Twenty years after the fall of the Berlin Wall, the United States, Europe, and Russia have still yet to devise a stable, long-term security arrangement. In testimony today before the Foreign Affairs Committee of the U.S. House of Representatives, Dmitri Trenin argued that given the reset in U.S.–Russian relations, the time is ripe for these three major powers to devise a security architecture for a new century—one capable of maintaining peace and stability on the European continent throughout the years to come.
U.S. Policy Recommendations:
- Sign and ratify the START follow-on treaty: The Obama administration has so far exercised care, tact, and patience in its dealings with Russia, which has done much to allay longstanding Russian fears. The United States should build on this promising foundation by signing and eventually ratifying a new START treaty. While not a cure-all for the U.S.-Russia relationship, such an agreement would represent an enormous step in the right direction.
- Contemplate a joint U.S.–Russian–European missile defense system: By itself, no amount of strategic arms reduction is capable of altering the nature of the U.S.–Russian relationship. A possible game-changer, though, would be cooperation on missile defense. The United States should therefore seriously consider developing a joint U.S.–Russian–European missile defense system. Were such a system to be realized, it would tightly bind the United States, Russia, and Europe together and dramatically improve security cooperation.
- Welcome and encourage Moscow’s moves to re-engage with its neighbors: In order to have better relations with the European Union as a whole, Moscow must first reassure the countries of Central and Eastern Europe about its intentions. Toward that end, Russia would do well to develop a habit of regular consultations with the Poles, just as they have already done with the Germans and the French. As an additional confidence-building measure, Russia should abstain from deploying additional armaments or engaging in military exercises near its borders with Poland, Belarus, and the Baltic states.
Trenin concludes, “The time to act is now, while U.S.–Russian relations are on the mend. As we know from experience, windows of opportunity do not remain open forever.”
###
NOTES
- Trenin’s testimony coincides with work already underway at the Euro-Atlantic Security Initiative (EASI), a high-level international commission recently launched by the Carnegie Endowment, to spell out what exactly a new transatlantic security arrangement ought to look like.
- The Carnegie Moscow Center was established in 1993 and accommodates foreign and Russian researchers collaborating with Carnegie’s global network of scholars on a broad range of contemporary policy issues relevant to Russia—military, political, and economic.
- The Carnegie Russia and Eurasia Program has, since the end of the Cold War, led the field on Eurasian security, including strategic nuclear weapons and nonproliferation, development, economic and social issues, governance, and the rule of law.
- Press Contact: David Kampf, 202/939-2233, dkampf@ceip.org
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
- Managing Divergence: India’s BRICS Presidency in 2026
- India–Africa Strategic Partnership: Challenges, Potential, and Possible PathwaysArticle
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
- The Unresolved Challenges in U.S.–India Semiconductor CooperationCommentary
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
- Emerging From the “Zombie State” of Trade Agreements: The India-EU FTACommentary
The India–EU Free Trade Agreement (FTA) is shaping up to be one of the most consequential trade negotiations, both economically and strategically. But, what’s in the agreement, what’s missing, and what will determine its success in the years ahead
Vrinda Sahai, Nicolas Köhler-Suzuki
- India and a Changing Global Order: Foreign Policy in the Trump 2.0 EraResearch
Trump 2.0 has unsettled India’s external environment—but has not overturned its foreign policy strategy, which continues to rely on diversification, hedging, and calibrated partnerships across a fractured order.
- +6
Milan Vaishnav, ed., Sameer Lalwani, Tanvi Madan, …
