:: Nihal Singh

Can Nato open a new page in US-Russia ties?

S. Nihal Singh

April.9 : Despite the contrived air of self-congratulation participants in the 60th anniversary summit of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (Nato) cultivated, an organisation formed in the Cold War to contain the Soviet threat is still searching for a mission. In terms of its long-term rationale, Afghanistan, the focus of the summit, was a diversion, not a fulfilling objective.

President Barack Obama, on his first overseas visit after assuming office, did extract some more troops and money from the Europeans, but much of the increased troop strength will be temporary, to provide security for the Afghan presidential election, and to train Afghan security forces.

The fact that the European heart is not in the Afghan war is clear from the noisy and sometimes violent demonstrations punctuating the summit, divided between the French city of Strasbourg and Kehl in Germany. Sending troops to Afghanistan is unpopular in European capitals and this first out-of-area commitment for Nato has found few enthusiasts.

President Obama tried to meet European scepticism by limiting the goals of the Nato mission to tackling the Al Qaeda menace and there were no paeans of spreading democracy around the world. The European agreement to make token contributions of troops and more money for Afghanistan was its way of welcoming the new US President’s new ways and rhetoric in pursuing American objectives.

Turkey finally agreed to the appointment of the Danish Prime Minister, Anders Fogh Rasmussen, as the next secretary-general, after extracting concessions on additional Nato posts and in negotiations for its eventual entry into the European Union. Denmark has a pro-Kurdish television channel and, in Turkish eyes, mishandled the cartoon controversy perceived to be denigrating to Muslims.

And Nato added another two members, Albania and Croatia, but the question of membership of Georgia and Ukraine so eagerly pushed by President George W. Bush at the last summit over Russian objections, remained unspoken. Now that President Obama has pressed the "reset" button on relations with Russia and had his first meeting with President Dmitry Medvedev in London, reviving this contentious question would have been a provocation. In any event, the gloss has worn off the façade of democracy erected in the two countries.

Russia remains at the heart of Nato’s quest for a new mission after the end of the Cold War because it is central to defining the kind of world Washington wants to build. Essentially, the United States acted as the victor in the Cold War, with the Berlin Wall having fallen and the Soviet Union going up in smoke. Strategically, Washington wished to contain the diminished Russian Federation and increased its area of influence in Europe by absorbing as many former communist countries as possible into Nato.

This was possible as long as Russia was licking its wounds, with the luckless and eccentric Boris Yeltsin serving as a proxy for American interests. But American-prescribed economic remedies proved disastrous, and with Vladimir Putin in office reasserting Russian interests after putting his house in order, helped by windfall profits from the energy sector, it was a new ball game.

Significantly, it was agreed at the summit to re-launch talks with Russia under the Nato-Russia Council, suspended after Russian incursions into the two breakaway Georgian regions of South Ossetia and Abkhazia, now recognised by Moscow. After the disintegration of the Soviet Union, Moscow had been conceding more and more space to Nato while making token protests as one country after another in its neighbourhood, including the Baltic states, swelled Nato ranks. Finally, Russia drew a red line on Georgia and Ukraine and Nato balked at the previous summit as the two continental heavyweights, France and Germany, refused to toe the American line.

Nostalgia for the pre-Putin days of a rampaging Nato survives in some capitals, notably London. A BBC commentator gushed: "The new US President has enthused, galvanised and reinvigorated Nato at one and the same time". Others will have a more sober take on the summit as Europeans, if not Americans, are seeking a way out of Afghanistan. And, like Banquo’s ghost, Russia remained the uninvited guest at the summit.

Notably, the East European countries’ march into Nato preceded their entry into the European Union, a practice that is continuing to be followed in relation to Albania and Croatia, the newest members bringing the score to 28. There is the promise to energise the Nato-Russia Council, formed in 2002, a channel of discussion and communication that has been unable to bear the burden of placating Moscow even while treating it as an adversary, if not an enemy.

Unlike the Iraq war, President Obama owned Afghanistan as his war even while greatly narrowing American objectives. But there is no indication that he is considering a review of the European post-Cold War architecture. Nato remains an important element of US power and influence in Europe and its aim is to contain Russia. The contest between Russia and the West has reached the Russian periphery and Central Asia, what Russians call their "near abroad".

Moscow won a hand recently by aiding Kyrghyzstan, which has given marching orders to Washington to close its important air base at Manas, a hub for American military supplies to Afghanistan. And President Medvedev has proclaimed that his country enjoyed a "privileged relationship" with its near abroad. Moscow has also been successfully asserting its interests in securing energy supplies from Central Asia as it competes with the United States in tying up supplies and pipelines.

A feather in Nato’s cap is the formal French integration into the military structure, but President Nicolas Sarkozy’s attempt is to stoop to conquer to serve his country’s interests. There is little appetite in Europe for making Nato the world’s policeman and the crucial question remains: to what extent will it be used to intimidate Moscow even as the main continental powers seek to placate the Russian leadership?