With the US and Russia re-engaging in bilateral negotiations, the terminal phase of the Russia-Ukraine war begins. On 18 February, the Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Russian Foreign Minister Sergey V Lavrov met in Saudi Arabia for the first high-level diplomatic engagement between the two global powers since the start of Ukraine War in February, 2022. This meeting is clearly a radical shift in the US policy and narrative which under Biden administration was aimed at a strategic defeat of Russia, according to Russian Foreign Minister Sergey V Lavrov.
The Trump administration’s engagement with Russia is based on the opportunity cost of a strategy to isolate Russia, which according to Kirill Dmitriev, the head of Russia’s sovereign wealth fund, also present at the meeting, was $300 billion. The US strategy is now preferring economic engagement and partnership with Russia over geo-political interests that has now relocated to the Western Pacific. Clearly, the victim of the US-Russia rapprochement will be Ukraine which will, most certainly, stand to make permanent territorial concessions. From the start, this conflict was between the US and Russia, and Ukraine’s desire to join the Atlantic alliance a catalyst and means of strategic communication between the two. Historical grievances of Russia, erstwhile Soviet Union, in not being recognized as a great power after the break-up of Soviet Union was the seed of conflict.
The Euro-Atlantic security architecture put in place during the cold-war was systematically dismantled alongside the eastward expansion of the Atlantic alliance which has now come to include the Indo-Pacific since the 1990’s. This constitutes the center of gravity of the power struggle between great powers and inextricably linked with power struggles elsewhere – Middle East, East Asia and the Arctic. Territory and military security guarantee, will be the two key areas of focus during the negotiation process and this will be a complex undertaking given the range of conflicting and competing interests. For example, if the US works towards an agreement with Russia which will guarantee Russia’s military security from a strategic perspective, this will constitute a military threat to western Europe at the tactical level. On the other hand, if the US continues to play the role of security provider in Europe, it will force Russia to threaten the US at the strategic level. If the US withdraws from its security commitments, it will force the European nations into arms build up and constitute a military threat to Russia. This phenomenon is now in full play in the Western Pacific, where Indo-Pacific nations are building their military power from the perspective of self-help doubting the US role as a security provider. Japan, for instance, has demonstrated its willingness to break-free from its role as an unequal partner in the US-Japan military alliance and head in the direction of acquiring a status of nuclear weapon state to mitigate the nuclear threat from China and North Korea.
The contradiction inherent in the strategic logic derived from an economic and geo-political perspective will dominate the terminal phase of this conflict and will be shaped by events unfolding outside this region. While Russia and the US are the key players, extra-regional powers such as China will remain important in the final outcome. Russia’s economic partnership with the US, will pose a direct challenge to the strategic partnership and cooperation between Russia and China in Eurasia. The US strategy to re-engage Russia is deeply informed by the geo-political necessity for the US to discourage any nation from dominating the Eurasian landmass. The quasi-alliance between Russia and China, and the strategic necessity for the US to create a wedge in between them in pursuance of its role as the sole global military power will be a conflicting target during the negotiations.
With business instincts of the new administration in Washington in full play, the sad fate of thousands of Ukrainian soldiers who sacrificed their lives in defense of an idea called motherland calls into question the strength of western alliance structure. Non-inclusion of Ukraine’s territorial integrity as an objective of negotiations will have deep implications for the US credibility as security provider in the European and Western Pacific theater. In the past, the US has compromised the interests of its allies in pursuit of its own national interest. During the cold-War, the US went out of its way to form a conditional relationship with China in order to deal with the Soviet Union at the cost of risking Japan’s national security. This decision has now come full circle and forcing history to repeat itself. The US, which according to Professor John Mearsheimer is solely responsible for the Russia-Ukraine war, must pay attention to contradiction inherent in the logic derived from an economic and geo-political rational. No matter how the negotiations proceed and conclude, this contradiction will manifest itself in space and time.
