The Trump-Putin summit cannot save frozen U.S.-Russia relationship: Commentary
In the wake of the meeting between U.S. President Donald Trump and his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin in Helsinki on Monday, a Chinese-language commentary released online points out that if the United States doesn't give up its consistent stance of hegemony and unilateralism, such summits, no matter how many times they are held, cannot thaw the frozen relationship between the two countries.
U.S. President Donald Trump (L) shakes hands with his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin in Helsinki, Finland, on July 16, 2018. [Photo: Xinhua]
The new edition of "Commentaries on International Affairs (国际锐评)" notes that, although the two presidents voiced their satisfaction with the meeting, thorny problems between the two countries remain.
The commentary suggests that the U.S.-Russia relationship is complicated, with a number of contradictions roughly divided into two categories. One is conflict of interest, which can be solved through negotiation and compromise. The other is value conflict that will be difficult to reconcile in the short term. Taking the different viewpoints between the U.S. and Russia on Ukraine as an example, the commentary says this is a historical value conflict. For Russia, the issue of Crimea is the "last line" to defend its own interest. The U.S., on the other hand, takes Russia's action in Crimea as "aggression" which poses a severe threat to the security of Europe as a whole. The commentary says no sign of concessions can be seen from either side on this issue.
It further points out that distrust dominates the U.S.-Russia relationship. It says the distrust originated with the Cold War, but hasn't disappeared since the end of that period. From then until now, squeezing the space Russia considers vital to its strategic survival has been the consistent policy of all U.S. governments. In particular, the eastward enlargement of NATO has led to a gradual change in Putin's attitude towards the U.S. and NATO, from seeking full membership of the G8 and being open to cooperation with NATO to drifting away from the West.
With regard to the international order, the commentary notes that Russia advocates a multipolar world, while the U.S. is reluctant to give up its goal of global hegemony. Economically, Russia favors free trade and multilateralism, while the U.S. is willing to provoke trade wars regardless of its own losses.
The commentary states that besides the hot and difficult issues such as Ukraine, Syria and Iran, the U.S. and Russia, in the hope of warming up their relationship, will have to focus more on the complicated political ecology in the U.S. Just two days before the summit, the U.S. Department of Justice announced that it was charging 12 Russian intelligence officers who were accused of meddling in the 2016 U.S. presidential elections. Many U.S. officials also took the opportunity to strongly oppose the Trump-Putin summit.
Despite the pressure, Trump landed in Finland. As the commentary points out, Trump used the summit as a build-up to the mid-term elections in November, as well as making use of Putin to put pressure on NATO countries in order to increase the bargaining power of the U.S. on issues including military expenditure.