• Research
  • Emissary
  • About
  • Experts
Carnegie Global logoCarnegie lettermark logo
DemocracyIran
  • Donate
{
  "authors": [
    "James F. Collins",
    "Alexander Bessmertnykh",
    "Yuri Dubinin",
    "Arthur Hartman",
    "Jack Matlock",
    "Thomas Pickering"
  ],
  "type": "legacyinthemedia",
  "centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
  "centers": [
    "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
    "Carnegie Europe"
  ],
  "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

REQUIRED IMAGE

In The Media

A Time for Restraint and Reflection

New leadership in Moscow and Washington will soon face decisions that will reshape the U.S.-Russia agenda and set new priorities. The governments both countries should not succumb to the political inertia that has followed the Caucasus conflict. Instead, they must show reflection and restraint.

Link Copied
By James F. Collins, Alexander Bessmertnykh, Yuri Dubinin, Arthur Hartman, Jack Matlock, Thomas Pickering
Published on Sep 29, 2008
Program mobile hero image

Program

Russia and Eurasia

The Russia and Eurasia Program continues Carnegie’s long tradition of independent research on major political, societal, and security trends in and U.S. policy toward a region that has been upended by Russia’s war against Ukraine.  Leaders regularly turn to our work for clear-eyed, relevant analyses on the region to inform their policy decisions.

Learn More

Source: International Herald Tribune

For two days last week we, former ambassadors to Washington and Moscow from Russia and the United States, held an intense and substantive discussion about the present state of U.S.-Russia relations and the immense challenges facing their long-term development.

We concluded that, despite the promise for constructive progress on bilateral matters following the 2008 Sochi Strategic Framework Declaration, the shock waves released by recent hostilities in the Caucasus have brought about an alarming downward spiral in relations.

We are gravely concerned that heated rhetoric today often seems to take the place of a thoughtful analysis of the common interests of the United States and the Russian Federation in the 21st century. Indeed, we believe that without urgent attention, our relations could lead to a protracted period of confrontation and counterproductive activity.

We noted that the present crisis has already had significant costs for our relations, including for the agenda set at Sochi, and that the present action-reaction dynamic risks inflicting more permanent damage, unless it is halted and reversed.

As a result, we urge that every effort be made now to relieve the immediate tensions surrounding the unstable situation in the Caucasus and to be cautious in actions that may exacerbate the present tense atmosphere.

As professionals who were deeply involved in efforts to end the Cold War and build a new cooperative relationship between our two countries, we call for action to avoid the repetition of past mistakes.

We further believe that recent events call for reflection and restraint by all sides. We believe that we are entering a period when new leadership in Moscow and Washington will face decisions that will reshape the U.S.-Russia agenda, set new priorities, and define the machinery we will use to conduct the business of our complex relationship.

We noted that the Caucasus conflict has brought to a head a variety of trends over the past few years that have altered in significant ways the environment within which our relations will develop further. Among these trends are Russia's political and economic recovery, the emergence of several significant new players in the global economy and international system, the evolution and growth of European and Euro-Atlantic institutions, and the continuing existence of unresolved conflicts that may engage the United States and Russia.

We also devoted substantial attention to the elements of our bilateral agenda that clearly reflect mutual interests and that therefore will demand priority attention Among these are:

The need to reach a better understanding about the forces and developments that are shaping the environment for U.S.-Russia relations;

An urgent need to preserve and update the future of strategic and other arms control agreements, as part of a comprehensive strategy to address issues surrounding nuclear energy and the prevention of proliferation of weapons of mass destruction;

Efforts to revitalize cooperation on issues affecting the security of the Euro-Atlantic region;

Agreeing on joint measures to address effectively the challenges of terrorism, regional rivalries and conflicts, financial, commercial and economic issues;

Joint work on global issues where our two nations have the responsibility to lead;

And insofar as possible, development of mutually understood rules of the road to guide our international actions in the future and to improve the prospects for cooperative solutions to international problems.

We agreed, finally, that new administrations in Washington and Moscow must create an improved institutional framework for consultations and negotiations.

That would allow us to sustain the flow of multi-layered negotiations and agreements, consultations and working-level discussions, as well as to support the implementation of programs agreed upon by both sides. U.S.-Russia relations will require that appropriate elements of government and the private sector should be mobilized to achieve success.

We also believe that there is an urgent need for expanded public dialogue, involving former government officials, academic experts, business leaders and other citizens, who want to contribute to the new agenda for our two countries. Russian-American relations should not be left hostage to political inertia.

As diplomats and practitioners who have experience in the management of U.S.-Russia relations over several decades, we believe that we are on the threshold of a time of decisions on the conduct of relations between our two nations in today's rapidly changing world.

Much has happened in the past two decades. Our world has seen transformational changes and the emergence of new and formidable challenges.

But we are one in our conviction that the United States and Russia, in an ever more interdependent world, have special responsibilities for leadership in critical international areas and that our capacity to work effectively together to deal with global, regional and bilateral issues can remain a positive force for global stability and well-being.

Alexander A. Bessmertnykh

James F. Collins

Yuri V. Dubinin

Arthur A. Hartman

Jack F. Matlock, Jr.

Thomas R. Pickering

This commentary originally appeared in the International Herald Tribune

About the Authors

James F. Collins

Nonresident Senior Fellow, Russia and Eurasia Program; Diplomat in Residence

Ambassador Collins was the U.S. ambassador to the Russian Federation from 1997 to 2001 and is an expert on the former Soviet Union, its successor states, and the Middle East.

Alexander Bessmertnykh

Yuri Dubinin

Arthur Hartman

Jack Matlock

Thomas Pickering

Thomas Pickering is a former U.S. undersecretary of state for political affairs and ambassador to Russia, Israel and the UN.

Authors

James F. Collins
Nonresident Senior Fellow, Russia and Eurasia Program; Diplomat in Residence
James F. Collins
Alexander Bessmertnykh
Yuri Dubinin
Arthur Hartman
Jack Matlock
Thomas Pickering

Thomas Pickering is a former U.S. undersecretary of state for political affairs and ambassador to Russia, Israel and the UN.

Foreign PolicyCaucasusRussia

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 Endowment for International Peace

  • Commentary
    Strategic Europe
    France and Germany Need Their Own Situation Room

    The Franco-German relationship is on the rocks again. But unlike previous moments of tension, the epochal changes on the world stage require that both step up investment in their bilateral ties.

      • Rym Momtaz

      Rym Momtaz

  • Commentary
    Carnegie Politika
    What Does Pashinyan’s Parliamentary Victory Mean for Armenia’s Future?

    Pashinyan’s pro-European party has been re-elected with a decisive victory. But the pro-Russian opposition could still slow Armenia’s progress toward peace with Azerbaijan and rapprochement with Europe.

      Mikayel Zolyan

  • Europe trade economy container supply chains
    Paper
    From Trade Dependence to Geopolitical Leverage: The EU in an Era of Weaponized Interdependence

    As geopolitical rivalry weaponizes global supply chains, the EU’s true vulnerability lies in emerging-risk imports. For these goods, suppliers are growing more concentrated, substitution more difficult, and political risk is looming.

      Sinan Ülgen

  • Pashinyan surrounded by supporters while speaking to reporters
    Commentary
    Next Steps Toward Peace After the Armenian Elections

    It’s time to build momentum, and Ankara is the venue of the next opportune diplomatic window to do this.

      • Garo Paylan

      Alper Coşkun, Garo Paylan

  • Commentary
    Strategic Europe
    European Security Strategy: In Search of a New Ambition

    The EU is putting together a new security strategy to meet today’s myriad challenges. But for any proposal to be effective, the union needs to grapple with its identity and ambitions.

      Pierre Vimont

Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Carnegie global logo, stacked
1779 Massachusetts Avenue NWWashington, DC, 20036-2103Phone: 202 483 7600
  • Research
  • Emissary
  • About
  • Experts
  • Donate
  • Programs
  • Events
  • Blogs
  • Podcasts
  • Contact
  • Annual Reports
  • Careers
  • Privacy
  • For Media
  • Government Resources
Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
© 2026 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. All rights reserved.