Summits between France, Russia, and Germany are set to resume after a long hiatus. On Monday and Tuesday (October 18-19), Russian President Dmitry Medvedev will meet with French President Nicolas Sarkozy and German Chancellor Angela Merkel in the French city of Deauville.
This brings back some fond memories from 2003, and some memories we'd sooner forget. At that time, a series of similar trilateral summits were held. The purpose of these summits was clear: their participants wanted to know what could be done in a situation when U.S. President George W. Bush was recklessly steering his country toward a major war in Iraq (and possibly somewhere else) with a deaf ear to any objections, recruiting allies from among the small Eastern European countries and damaging relations with major European states.
Few people know that this group of three (known as the European Troika in Russia) was on the verge of becoming much bigger. Italy and Spain wanted in, and if the situation had continued to develop in this direction, an organization existing parallel to NATO - if not an entirely new NATO - may well have emerged.
An entire era was coming to an end. No one doubted the outcome of the Iraq War, and everyone was counting down the days until Bush left office. But instead of expanding, the European Troika faded away. And while new leaders have come to power in all three states, Moscow still maintains a special relationship with Old Europe, though not with the United Kingdom.
Bush is gone, and yet conservative Republicans in the United States see the upcoming Deauville summit as an anti-U.S. demonstration. Is this view justified? Let's answer this by examining the perspectives of each participant on the summit.
The Russian perspective: In the early 2000s, it was thought that Russia's foreign policy had two wings, namely, this European Troika and an Asian one, involving the leaders of China and India. The latter has evolved into BRIC (Brazil, Russia, India and China). But the European wing all but atrophied. Moscow's relations with the West continued to deteriorate both for concrete reasons, including the August 2008 Russian-Georgian conflict, and, at times, seemingly without reason. Once in office, Dmitry Medvedev proposed a new European security pact. The Obama administration replied that NATO and the Russia-NATO Council, a useless talking shop, are sufficient. Medvedev is now being invited to the November 19-20 NATO summit in Lisbon. Brussels seems to think that if he comes, it will mean all is well and they can safely ignore his proposal.
True, there is also the idea for an innovation alliance between Russia and the West. Some kind of a Russian-U.S. relationship has emerged from the low point three to four years ago; when George W. Bush was in office, Moscow simply ignored the United States and did not suffer any consequences for it. All Russia has to do now is drastically improve its relations with the European Union and NATO, and all will be well. If this is not possible, some other way to improve the atmosphere must be found.
The French perspective: France will hold the rotating presidency in the G20 starting this November, as well as in the largely irrelevant G8 starting in January 2011. In its leadership role, France will be able to do much to prevent the global economy from descending into currency wars and to soften the confrontational tone between China and the United States. Paris is promoting a plan to stabilize exchange rates and commodity prices. Yet Moscow proposed a similar plan long ago.
Unorthodox measures are called for, as the EU is obviously incapable of accomplishing its objectives and has become embroiled in intra-European squabbles. NATO is essentially pointless, and Europe is losing its influence in global politics as a result. It is becoming the periphery. In light of this, it would be a crime for Europe not to expand relations with Moscow and Beijing, even in some unusual formats. France will have to take the lead in this, as Sarkozy has been the only European leader willing to step up while others hesitate.
Paris appears to be signaling that a new economic and security cooperation scheme will be offered to Russia in Deauville. Should Moscow accept it? Medvedev's idea for a new comprehensive security pact is still a long way off from becoming a reality. You can't teach an old dog new tricks, and you can't reform NATO. But Moscow will be given a consolation prize, and it should accept it with an eye toward making further progress in the future.
The German perspective: The French should not be allowed to monopolize the search for new avenues in European politics. Sarkozy's actions are inappropriate but often logical. Germany, which has the largest economy in Europe, should join the process so as not to find itself on the sidelines.
All three countries are losing hope in the prospect of U.S. reforms, including in the realm of foreign policy. The Republicans are poised to take control of the U.S. Congress this November, and they may be able to take back the White House in 2012. All systemic crises - like the one America finds itself in now - have one feature in common: the voters do not want the necessary changes and reforms. They just want to return to the good old days.
Obama is not the man he used to be. According to the U.S. media, Obama spent two year trying to convince everyone he was not Bush, even receiving the Nobel Peace Prize for his effort. But then he started behaving like a traditional U.S. president, promoting U.S. "values" and "interests" and bickering with China.
Given this, it is clear that, even if the United States does not revert to the Bush style of diplomacy, even if it has not reached a dead end in its relations with Europe or Russia, like in 2008 and 2009, it will soon find itself in such a dead end. For Europe, this also means a road back to a dead end, so...
True, the potential of Russian-French-German summits should not be exaggerated. Summit participants do not conclude any agreements or form alliances, nor do they sign any secret protocols. They merely reflect on the course they will pursue. What's perfectly clear is they don't want to find themselves in a dead end.
The views expressed in this article are the author's and do not necessarily represent those of RIA Novosti.
