The Obama administration stepped up its overtures to Russia, signaling possible flexibility on missile defense as part of a broad push to repair Washington's strained relationship with Moscow.
In addition, one day after calling for pressing the "reset button" on the U.S.-Russia relationship, Vice President Joe Biden made comments on the sidelines of a high-profile security conference here that were widely interpreted by the Russians and some European diplomats as the beginnings of a U.S. policy shift on Georgia. ...
In advance of Mr. Biden's speech, White House aides had said the vice president would announce that the U.S. was prepared to reconsider plans for a missile-defense system in Eastern Europe. Moscow has long opposed such plans. Mr. Biden's actual remarks appeared vaguer. The vice president said the U.S. would "continue to develop missile defenses to counter a growing Iranian capability," but he also promised to do so "in consultation with our NATO allies and Russia."
You might forgive our new NATO allies in the east if this does not sit well. After looking to NATO and America for protection against the Russians, we are signaling a weakened commitment to their defense.
Why might Russia be seen as a threat? Strategypage highlights the problem:
The government has again warned neighboring countries (like Estonia and Ukraine) to stop being ungrateful for what Russia did for them during World War II. This is a long standing sore point. The Baltic Countries and Ukraine consider themselves forcibly made a part of the Soviet Union. All four nations contributed troops to the Nazi war effort against the Soviet Union. Although reviled in Russia and the West, these troops are local heroes, for having fought against the hated Russians (not for supporting the Nazis.) The Russians don't get it, ignoring the fact that Russian secret police and death camps killed millions of people from the Baltic States and Ukraine. Russia considers these dead to be criminals, while the countrymen of the victims consider Russians homicidal maniacs, with delusions of grandeur and selective memories.
Lest you think Russia is perfectly reasonable in expecting gratitude, that really isn't the point. The point is Russia's reaction to the lack of gratitude. I certainly think these former Russian provinces have no reason to be grateful to Russia, but for argument's sake, what if Russia is justified in being annoyed? We can certainly by miffed that France and, to name a country at random, Belgium, don't seem to appreciate our World War II sacrifice to liberate them from the Nazis. But being miffed doesn't then lead to American threats to invade or wage cyber-war against the ingrates in Paris and Brussels.
A small difference, no?
And we've signaled to Russia that our commitment to defending Eastern Europe is less than what it had been assumed to be just a short month ago. Hard to see anything bad coming from this, eh?
It isn't as if Russia is willing to use force to restore their empire, right?
Oh well, I'm sure the administration will do better at the next meeting with the Russians. Just tell me that Ukraine won't host it at Yalta.
UPDATE: Stratfor (from email update) sees more continuity than I do:
Officially, the Russians were delighted to hear that the United States was prepared to hit the “reset button” on U.S.-Russian relations. But Moscow cannot have been pleased when it turned out that hitting the reset button did not involve ruling out NATO expansion, ending American missile defense system efforts in Central Europe or publicly acknowledging the existence of a Russian sphere of influence. Biden said, “It will remain our view that sovereign states have the right to make their own decisions and choose their own alliances.” In translation, this means the United States has the right to enter any relationship it wants with independent states, and that independent states have the right to enter any relationship they want. In other words, the Bush administratio n’s commitment to the principle of NATO expansion has not changed.
Nor could the Russians have been pleased with the announcement just prior to the conference that the United States would continue developing a ballistic missile defense (BMD) system in Poland and the Czech Republic. The BMD program has been an issue of tremendous importance for Russians, and it is something Obama indicated he would end, or change in some way that might please the Russians. But not only was there no commitment to end the program, there also was no backing away from long-standing U.S. interest in it, or even any indication of the terms under which it might end.
I'm not as reassured. No commitment to backing away from BMD and new NATO allies is not the same as embracing them. Lord knows what the administration will consider relevant in that decision.
