Lilia Shevtsova
{
"authors": [
"Lilia Shevtsova"
],
"type": "legacyinthemedia",
"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",
"Russia",
"Eastern Europe",
"Ukraine"
],
"topics": [
"Security",
"Foreign Policy"
]
}Source: Getty
Obama Blinks
Barack Obama’s recent remarks at West Point show that he doesn’t understand the rules of the game he’s playing with Vladimir Putin in Ukraine.
Source: American Interest
It’s been almost a week and I am still puzzled by President Barack Obama’s commencement address at West Point on May 28—and I’m even more puzzled by his interview with Steve Inskeep on NPR. But I’m not going to analyze how Obama views American leadership, nor will I argue what U.S. foreign policy should be. This is not my piece of cake. Besides, being a Russian citizen, I feel that it would be inappropriate to deliberate on what America’s interests are and how Washington should defend them. However, I would like to offer a few comments on what President Obama said on an area that I hail from, and one that I hope I understand: Ukraine and Russia.
The Ukrainian crisis and Russia’s annexation of Crimea have knocked down the post-Cold War order, and we’ve entered this époque of turmoil on President Obama’s watch. Robert Kagan, in his brilliant, breathtaking analysis of our current “Time of Trouble” and the evolution of American foreign policy, wrote that today we may see “a transition into a different world order or into a world disorder of kind not seen since the 1930s.” Meanwhile, President Obama, in his West Point remarks, gives the impression that he believes that America still exercises successful global leadership, and that the world, though irritating at certain points and times, is still quite manageable. Let’s quote several of the things he said about the Ukrainian drama, and I’ll respond to each in turn:Obama: “Our ability to shape world opinion helped isolate Russia right away.”
What I see, rather, is an incredibly successful Kremlin attempt to prevent Russia’s isolation. True, Putin was banned, apparently temporarily, from the G-8, and key Western leaders ignored the Sochi Olympics and a high-level meeting. But there are no signs that Putin suffered from these slights. On the contrary, he continues to keep in touch with Merkel and Hollande, apparently enjoying the German Chancellor’s attempts to persuade him to behave. Moreover, the Kremlin has succeeded in broadening its international support base: It has made its own pivot to China (and even tried to cozy up to Japan, with the latter’s apparent consent); and it has also won applause from the global Left-Right International, which hates America and the European Union. Moreover, soon Putin, on the invitation of French President Hollande, will celebrate D-Day in Normandy in the company of other Western leaders. Is this what isolation looks like? ...
Read the full text of this article in the American Interest.
About the Author
Former Senior Associate, Russian Domestic Politics and Political Institutions Program, Moscow Center
Shevtsova chaired the Russian Domestic Politics and Political Institutions Program at the Carnegie Moscow Center, dividing her time between Carnegie’s offices in Washington, DC, and Moscow. She had been with Carnegie since 1995.
- Putin Has Fought His Way Into a CornerIn The Media
- How Long Russians Will Believe in Fairy Tale?Commentary
Lilia Shevtsova
Recent Work
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
- AI in Outer Space: Opportunities, Risks, and the Governance GapCommentary
How is AI reshaping space security, creating governance challenges, and where does international diplomacy stand today?
Tejas Bharadwaj, Almudena Azcárate Ortega
- Threading the Needle: India’s Path Forward with ChinaPaper
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
- Managing Divergence: India’s BRICS Presidency in 2026Article
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
- 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