Commentary
Dmitri Trenin
{
"authors": [
"Dmitri Trenin"
],
"type": "commentary",
"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"
],
"topics": [
"Foreign Policy"
]
}
Source: Getty
Commentary
U.S.-Russian Diplomatic Normalcy: One Small Step Nearer?
This week the U.S. government has presented to Moscow the candidacy of its future envoy for customary prior approval by the host country. Then, at some point, the Russian government not objecting and the U.S. Senate willing, a small but important element of U.S.-Russian diplomatic normalcy will be restored.
Published on Jul 1, 2014
The absence of a U.S. ambassador in Moscow ever since the beginning of the Ukraine crisis has been striking. This never happened during the Cold War, when ambassadors were the prime conduits of dialogue between the superpowers. Not so these days. Sergey Lavrov and John Kerry have met many times during the past four months, and have spoken even more often. Occasionally, the two presidents also engage in telephone diplomacy. What the absence of a resident ambassador means today is that the government responsible for such a vacancy deprives itself of day-to-day contact with senior figures in the other country, and this limits its understanding of the host nation's policies.
Initially, the lack of replacement for Michael McFaul, who left Moscow on February 21, 2014, could have been seen as a sign of Washington's disapproval of Russia's actions in Crimea and with regard to Ukraine, an unspoken addition to the sanctions package. Yet, the longer the Spaso House, the U.S. ambassador's residence in Moscow's historical Arbat district, stays unoccupied, the more punishing the situation becomes for the United States: the Russian ambassador in Washington, Sergey Kislyak, has, of course, continued working in Washington. Now, the U.S. government has taken the usual step of presenting to Moscow the candidacy of its future envoy for customary prior approval by the host country.
At least since April, there has been no mystery about the name of McFaul's possible successor. John Tefft is a career diplomat who served as a deputy chief of mission in Moscow, and as ambassador to Lithuania, Georgia, and Ukraine. Most recently, after his retirement last year, he headed a RAND project which brings U.S. and Russian business people together. Last night, Russian TV was scathingly critical of Tefft's past record, blaming him for too close relations with Georgia's Mikheil Saakashvili and for scheming in Ukraine ahead of the Maidan. It also mentioned that some elements in Russia looked forward to his arrival in the hope of getting support in their campaign against the Kremlin.
Yet, this does not mean that Moscow will necessarily turn Tefft down. He would be coming to Moscow under starkly different circumstances than McFaul in January 2012. President Putin's popularity has never been stronger. Anti-government protests in Moscow have long died down. The Russian public attitude toward the United States has hardened. Also, John Tefft is a traditional career diplomat. He would do what diplomats are supposed to be doing under difficult circumstances: reaching out to key figures, listening to what they have to say, and seeking to explain his own government's intentions. He will be an interlocutor par excellence, not a negotiator.
On the Fourth of July, there will still be no U.S. ambassador to greet guests at Spaso. Then, at some point, the Russian government not objecting and the U.S. Senate willing, a small but important element of U.S.-Russian diplomatic normalcy will be restored.
About the Author
Dmitri Trenin
Former Director, Carnegie Moscow Center
Trenin was director of the Carnegie Moscow Center from 2008 to early 2022.
- Mapping Russia’s New Approach to the Post-Soviet Space
- What a Week of Talks Between Russia and the West RevealedCommentary
Dmitri Trenin
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
- 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, …
- What Could a Reciprocal Defense Procurement Agreement Do for U.S.-India Ties?Article
India and the United States are close to concluding a Reciprocal Defense Procurement Agreement (RDPA) that will allow firms from the two countries to sell to each other’s defense establishments more easily. While this may not remedy the specific grievances both sides may have regarding larger bilateral issues, an RDPA could restore some momentum, following the trade deal announcement.
Konark Bhandari
