Our disagreements about the war on Iraq clearly showed that we have different strategic visions of the world, and, if we are partners, then only in a tactical, temporary sense designed to deal with current problems. In other words, partnership between Russia and the United States is not strategic. Moreover, now that Iraq is defeated, the American political establishment leans to the idea that Russia's role may be completely ignored. Russia is no longer an enemy, nor will it be able to become one in the foreseeable future, but it has not managed to become a serious partner either. Thus, the discourse in the American halls of power is that we should be friends, and nothing more. And why not - the Americans can certainly afford such a position.

And yet I do not understand why Moscow is not worried about this. Instead of sounding alarms, Russian politicians have once again begun discussing the multipolar world concept, forgetting that Russia, unlike America, has no friends in the world, only provisional partners. Along those lines I am amused by contemplations as to whom Russia should enter into alliance with - the U.S., Europe, or the Asian world. The question should be formulated differently: who would want to enter into an alliance with Russia? Russia has long lost the power of choice in this matter. And as it turned out, no one, except the United States, is offering it friendship. It follows that Russia has no other reasonable alternative.

Q: But in Russia many formulate this problem somewhat differently: either we maintain some distance from the United States, even at the cost of Washington losing interest in Russia, or we dance to the American tune, thus losing ourselves completely. Do you agree with this formulation?

A country can lose itself in different ways - physically or politically. The formulation you offer is a moral-ethical one. In the political sense, the question should be formulated somewhat differently: can Russia - in an alliance with the Unites States or without it - ensure its own security and integrity? I think that this cannot be accomplished without America's assistance. No country in the world, not even the United States, can tackle such a problem on its own. The next question becomes: who is ready to lend a hand?

Q: And is America ready?

At the very least, Russia should take advantage of the favorable factor (cynical though it may sound) of its geographical proximity to the sources of potential threats to the United States. Let's assume that 10-15 years from now the U.S. will have cleansed Eurasia of terrorists and made the region safe. Its interests will then, most likely, turn to Africa, the area of potential threats. But Russia has practically no presence in that region, and its participation will not be needed for solving problems in Africa. Right now Russia has a real chance to become America's number one partner in Eurasia, a partner capable of solving problems that America alone cannot. Presently, Americans are interested in seeing a regional power in Eurasia, one that can guarantee political stability, financial transparency, secure borders, control over narcotrafficking, illegal arms markets, etc. If Russia can deliver, U.S. will start supporting Russia and will become interested in it. If Russia cannot, then America will lose all remaining interest and begin searching for a new strategic partner. That's the alternative.

Q: So, in other words, once a world power, Russia is now to become a regional power at best?

Precisely. And it is not necessary for Russia to lose itself in the process. It will be a regional representative of U.S. interests and of the interests of its allies, while they will in return represent Russia's interests elsewhere. This will be a system of ensuring mutual interests. Globally speaking, Russia will, of course, be a junior partner to the U.S. On the regional scale, however, its role may become dominant.

Q: Yet there exists a very real problem: the guarantee of national security, not to mention the security of the entire region - a task that Russia is clearly not capable of tackling as of yet ...

I agree. And that is precisely why not everybody in the United States is eager to help Russia become a regional superpower. There exists an opinion that Russia's economy will fold in 10-20 years, and that America had better start looking for other partners. Unfortunately, a lot of news from Russia and its steps in international affairs appear to confirm the correctness of this assumption. All the same, I think America is prepared to take the risk and bet that Russia will, in time, become its strategic partner in the region. Partly, this comes as a result of nostalgia for the old enemy, and partly as an admission that other potential partners are even worse. Either way, Russia does not have a lot of time for self-definition.

Nikolai Zlobin is the Director of Russian and Asian Programs at the Center for Defense Information, and editor-in-chief of the international news agency Washington Profile.