Russia, Ukraine and U.S. Relations After the Cold War

March 17, 2014 | Edited by Lauren Mladenka and Geoff Wilson

Dysfunctional relationship - “The common assumption that the West forced the collapse of the Soviet Union and thus won the Cold War is wrong,” writes Jack F. Matlock Jr. in a piece for The Washington Post. “The fact is that the Cold War ended by negotiation to the advantage of both sides…Even after the U.S.S.R. ceased to exist, Gorbachev maintained that ‘the end of the Cold War is our common victory.’” Yet U.S. actions under the last three presidents have treated Russia as the loser, argues Matlock.

--“I don’t believe that we are witnessing a renewal of the Cold War. The tensions between Russia and the West are based more on misunderstandings, misrepresentations and posturing for domestic audiences than on any real clash of ideologies or national interests. And the issues are far fewer and much less dangerous than those we dealt with during the Cold War. But a failure to appreciate how the Cold War ended has had a profound impact on Russian and Western attitudes — and helps explain what we are seeing now,” writes Matlock.

--”The sad fact is that the cycle of dismissive actions by the United States met by overreactions by Russia has so poisoned the relationship that the sort of quiet diplomacy used to end the Cold War was impossible when the crisis in Ukraine burst upon the world’s consciousness.” Read the full piece here. http://wapo.st/1qIEhdi

US-Russia relations - “A new cold war? Why Crimea should matter to Americans” interview with Steven Pifer for USA Today. http://usat.ly/1d3Zqvc

Tweet - @BenFreemanDC: Obama's sanctions against Russia http://nyti.ms/1ohYqon

Trident getting expensive- “London will spend nearly $500 million readying a shipyard to build a new fleet of strategic submarines, even though the vessels have yet to be formally approved,” Global Security Newswire reports. “After the next U.K. general election, the British government will decide in 2016 whether to go ahead with a "like-for-like" plan for modernizing the nation's sea-based nuclear deterrent force. Despite the lack of "final gate" approval for the plan, the Conservative Party-led government has already spent more than $1 billion on design-related work for the new ballistic-missile submarines.” Read the full report here. http://bit.ly/1ohw0La

Promises - “The Netherlands -- host of this month's biennial Nuclear Security Summit in The Hague -- will likely be unable to meet a commitment it made at the last such meeting of world leaders in South Korea,” Douglas P. Guarino reports for Global Security Newswire. “At the 2012 summit, the United States, France, Belgium and the Netherlands agreed to collaborate towards producing medical isotopes without use of weapons-grade highly enriched uranium by 2015. Under the deal, Dutch producer Mallinckrodt was expected to convert its reactors to low enriched uranium by that time.”

-- However, Mallinckrodt Strategic Alliances Director Roy Brown says that, “Despite our best efforts for conversion, we have run into some technical issues which have delayed the project. These delays will likely require HEU shipments throughout 2015 and 2016 to assure patient needs are met, before full conversion to LEU is attained." Under the 2012 agreement , “the United States, which does not currently produce its own medical isotopes, agreed to collaborate with the European nations on their conversion efforts and to continue to supply them with highly enriched uranium until those conversion efforts are complete.” Full story here. http://bit.ly/1gu59ok

Tweet - @BulletinAtomic: Iranian nuclear talks restart today: Mansour Salsabili advises: Leave Iran’s Missiles out of Nuclear Talks: http://bit.ly/PIAvTn

No interference - “As international frictions over Ukraine have grown, Western officials have worried that the clash could halt collaboration with Russia on the Iran nuclear talks,” reports Paul Richter for the Los Angeles Times. However, “a senior Obama administration official said Friday that U.S. frictions with Russia over Ukraine have not interfered with discussions concerning pending Iran nuclear negotiations, and expressed hope that the deepening conflict ‘will not put these negotiations at risk.’” Read the full story here. http://lat.ms/1ivK0zi

Sabotaging Rouhani - “Negotiations between Iran and the world powers will determine not just the future of Iran's nuclear program, but also whether moderate forces can consolidate their tentative hold on power and shape the country's direction for years to come,” write Ryan Costello and Trita Parsi in Foreign Policy. “If Iranian President Hassan Rouhani secures a nuclear deal that delivers sanctions relief and boosts the economy, he will validate his argument that reconciliation with the outside world benefits Iran and unlock the possibility of far-reaching domestic reform. If the talks fail, however, hard-liners will have the ammunition they need to undercut the new president and shift the political pendulum back in their favor.”

--”With so much at stake, Iran's hard-liners are determined to sabotage Rouhani at every turn,” say Costello and Parsi. “Overcoming their obstruction will likely depend on striking a nuclear deal that strengthens moderate forces and vindicates the new president's leadership. If the threat of war remains, hard-liners will be able to further perpetuate Iran's security-dominated political atmosphere in order to hinder domestic reform. Similarly, if sanctions continue, middle-class Iranians that could form the core of a democratic movement will continue to bear the brunt of the country's economic plight.” Read the full piece here. http://atfp.co/PBmnev

Quick-hit:

--“CIA suspends chief of Iran operations over workplace issues” by Ken Dilanian for the Los Angeles Times. http://lat.ms/1p3zhMM

--“MOX 101: The past, present and uncertain future” by Derrek Asberry for the Aiken Standard. http://bit.ly/1gugDbw

--“Iran Says Sabotage Prevented at Nuclear Facility” by Ali Akbar Dareini for the AP. http://abcn.ws/1d6R31I

Events:

--”Advancing Nuclear Security.” Discussion with Elizabeth Sherwood-Randall. March 17 from 1:00-200. Watch the live webcast here. http://on.cfr.org/1cQo55W

--”Russian Missile Modernization: Developments and Implications for U.S. Security.” Discussion with Paula DeSutter and Mark Schneider. March 19 from 3:00 to 4:00 at 2212 Rayburn House Office Building. RSVP to info@marshall.org

--”Strategic Implications of North Korean Nuclear Missiles.” Discussion with Sugio Takahashi. March 20 from 10:30 to 12:00 at Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 1779 Massachusetts Ave. NW. RSVP here. http://ceip.org/1g2HVeK

--”Is the Indian Nuclear Tiger Changing Its Stripes? Data, Interpretation and Fact.” Discussion with Toby Dalton and Guarev Kampani. March 21 at 9:30 at the Atlantic Council, 12th floor, 1030 15th St. NW. RSVP here. http://bit.ly/1gysF8k

--”Implications on Deterrence Stability and Escalation Control of Tactical Nuclear Weapons in South Asia.” Discussion with Jeffrey McCausland. March 26 from 12:30-2:30 at the Stimson Center, 1111 19th St. NW, 12th floor. RSVP here. http://bit.ly/1kBZQbR

--”Humanitarian Impacts of Nuclear Weapons Initiative and its Relationship to the Non-Proliferation Treaty.” Discussion with Ira Helfand and Guakhar Mukhatzhanova. March 31 from 9:30-11:30 at Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 1779 Massachusetts Ave. NW.

--”Creating a Legacy for the Nuclear Security Summit.” Discussion with Kenneth Luongo and Sharon Squassoni. April 2 from 12:00-1:30 at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, 2nd floor conference room A, 1616 Rhode Island Ave. NW. RSVP by email to PPP@csis.org