'This is a time for dealing with particular problems as best we may, not to succumb to the destabilising myth of defined spheres of special interest, and inherent contradiction between rival poles of power.''It sometimes appears hard for Russian observers to understand that NATO is not and never has been Washington's to command, in the way that the Soviet Union was able to direct the Warsaw Pact. But a reasonable grasp of history ought to be enough to prove the point that there were then independent strains of policy within the West - as there still are.
It is perhaps even more to the point that the collapse of the Warsaw Pact, and the disintegration of the Soviet Union which followed it, stemmed from the internal decay of the USSR and the eventual defeat of military force used by Moscow to ensure the subservience of its own ostensible allies. East Germany, Hungary and Czechoslovakia were invaded in 1953, 1956 and 1968. Poland was threatened with military intervention at different times. Yugoslavia defied Stalin in 1948 to secure its independence as a Communist state governed by its own interpretation of what that meant. Romania later achieved a degree of Chechnya like autonomy before its eventual collapse. Neither the West in general nor the United States in particular played an initial or decisive part in any of these events. Nor can it seriously be maintained that Washington or any outside European power were responsible for the eventual disintegration of the USSR.
..
The question of who is to blame between Washington and Moscow for the estrangement between them, or rather between Moscow and the West, seems to me to be the wrong question.
Dmitri Trenin suggested that the blame rested with Washington, the United States being the stronger power. Others might point their fingers at the Kremlin, with cogent examples to support them. But the pursuit of a bilateral US/Russia relationship as the decisive factor in achieving a healthier relationship between Russia and the West is a chimera stemming from assumptions derived from the Cold War era. Neither Washington, which in any case has other preoccupations than dealing with Russia, nor Moscow, which may be more focused, can command the obedience of other countries, in Europe and for that matter outside it too. These countries have their own concerns to nurture.
..
This is a time for dealing with particular problems as best we may, not to succumb to the destabilising myth of defined spheres of special interest, and inherent contradiction between rival poles of power.'
- Sir Andrew Wood (
Source, August 16, 2018)
'I think dialogue is very important, but I don’t think we should expect too much from dialogue. What we can and should expect is understanding, not in the sense of Russlandversteher, but in seeing where each party is coming from. Getting a better knowledge of each other.
..
..In this new world Russia hopefully will be able to build new neighbourly relationships. Neighbours who live side by side, have a lot to offer, have a lot to respect and have to acknowledge a lot of differences.'
- Dmitri Trenin (
Source, May 18, 2018)
Context..a Future of Peace and Love'..initiatives to reduce their impact on the planet..' - Task Force on Climate-Related Financial Disclosures