NATO and Russia resumed talks in Brussels on Wednesday 20 April. A lot of high hopes were placed on these talks, the first since the annexation of Crimea in February 2014. It was hoped that with a renewed dialogue NATO and Russia could find common ground to work out their difference and find a base of understanding and possible cooperation in certain domains. For all their worth, these talks turned out to be a failure.
Since the annexation of Crimea the NATO-Russia council (NRC) suspended their activities, cutting the only direct link for military and political affairs between the alliance and Russia. This proved to be a disastrous move since it no longer left a direct channel open for Russia and NATO to keep each other informed about their military and geopolitical intensions. This was something that NATO could use to reassure Russia that NATO is only a defensive organisation and is not out to isolate or contest Russia in an offensive manner, contrary to what Russia tends to believe.
During this period the only political dialogue was on the ambassadorial level and above in order to exchange views. As such, the only way of communication happened on the political level of the NATO members but never between the alliance and Russia itself. It was known that restarting the NRC would be problematic given the different political views between Russia and western countries on topics such as Ukraine and Syria.
The failure in restarting the NRC is found in the facts that Russia sees no need for the NRC while NATO is the demanding partner, thus operating from a position of weakness. NATO realizes that it needs Russia in several topics, not just for finding a military and political solution to the wars in Ukraine and Syria but also in the field of global terrorism, the war on drug and organized crime and stabilisation of regions.
Especially in the field of global terrorism there is a need to cooperate with Russia. Recent terrorist attacks in Western Europe, notably in Paris and Brussels, has brought the threat of global terrorism by radical Islamic groups back to the attention of NATO members in Western Europe. Russia has been dealing with such terrorist groups in the Caucasus, notably in Chechnya where Islamic resistance groups have pledged allegiance to the Islamic State, there is a need to exchange information.
The fall out of NATO withdrawing from Afghanistan and the return of the Taliban in this country also creates the need for Russia and NATO to cooperate together. It is feared that with the return of the Taliban that the entire Central Asian region could be destabilized. While NATO worries that Afghanistan could once again become a base of operation for terrorist it is Russia that has key interests both political and economic in Central Asia.
Also the recent tensions between Turkey, an important NATO member, and Russia could become problematic and not only in Syria. Turkish support for Ukraine and Azerbaijan aggravates Russia thus making it more difficult to come to an agreement with Russia to solve the situation in eastern Ukraine politically and to keep the Caucasus stabilized. It is indeed reported that NATO needs Russia in these topics that on occasions NATO was more pleading then negotiation, according to a news report by VICE news.
Russia from it side feels that it does not need the NRC to communicate. Talks at the ambassadorial level and communications using the international media seem to be sufficient for Russia to spread its message. Russia remains distrusted when it comes to NATO, citing the alliance as the main threat to Russia’s security in the last years. For Russia, NATO is an offensive organisation seeking to undermine Russia and isolated it on the international level. Russia remains sceptical that NATO’s presence in Eastern Europe is pure defensive.
Russia did use the latest NRC talks to further intimidate NATO. Especially the recent incident in the Baltic Sea where Russian aircraft were performing attack runs on the US Navy destroyer USS Donald Cook was mentioned. Russia claims that US Navy and NATO warships operating in the Baltic Sea pose a threat to its military base at Kaliningrad and that Russia will take actions accordingly to defend its enclave in Kaliningrad.
In conclusion we can state that NATO and Russia are still a long way off from establishing the NATO-Russia council as a functional instrument of mutual communication. NATO’s weakness in the fact that it needs Russia in order to come to a solution in several topics convinces Russia that NATO is the demanding partner and that Russia has the option to choose if it will talk with NATO or not. At the same time Russia remains convinced that NATO is a threat to the national security of Russia and seeks no closer cooperation with the alliance. Even the NRC as tool of communication is not in Russia’s interest as diplomatic talks on the ambassadorial level and the use of international media are deemed sufficient for Russia to spread its message.
Find us on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/BalticDefenseBlog/
