#32 - JRL 2008-47 - JRL Home
Subject: on US-Russia relations/ re JRL #46
Date: Sun, 2 Mar 2008
From: "Jack Matlock" <matlock@ias.edu>
[DJ: Jack Matlock was the last US ambassador to the Soviet Union]
Dear David,
Your comment is right on, and the Washington Post editorial (like several
earlier ones) is outrageous. There are many things happening in Russia that are
not in Russia's interest in the long run. There have been quite a few things
happening in the U.S., and actions by the U.S., that are not in our interest. We
have to stop sniping at each other and concentrate on our mutual interests, the
most important of which is to continue the course set by Reagan, Gorbachev, and
Bush the 41st to continue reduction of nuclear weapons and to stop acting as if
they are sources of power. We will not constrain proliferation if we continue
our present policies that can only give us another dangerous and costly arms
race.
If most Russians are more comfortable with a more authoritarian government at
home than Americans would be, that is their business. If Russia uses its energy
resources as instruments of national power, it is doing only what any country
would do--and which the U.S. traditionally has done. A rational U.S. would act
promptly to decrease dependence on imported oil and thus reduce the leverage
countries like Saudi Arabia, Iran, and Russia have on world markets. (My guess
is that much more money going to Saudi Arabia is being used to finance radical
Islam, than the money going to Russia.)
In short, it is time to tone down the rhetoric and get back to basics. We
contributed greatly to the surge of nationalism in Russia today by our policies
in the 1990s, and particularly by the unilateral course the current Bush
administration has taken. This doesn't make us responsible for Putin's
unfortunate actions, but our policies certainly harmed the democratic forces in
Russia and contributed to the current mindset in Russia.
|