In light of the dramatic events sweeping Eastern Europe since the Ukrainian president was ousted in Kiev, it seems that Moscow is prepared to do everything it can to defend its interests. Meanwhile, it appears that the constraints on Washington and the West’s response confine it to remain quite far from Crimea, yet very close to the Black Sea.
The White House did not rule out including Russian President Vladimir Putin on the U.S. sanctions list, following the crisis in Ukraine and Moscow’s role in it. So far, however, U.S. President Barack Obama is playing his cards in a way that leaves a broad margin for diplomatic compromises.
But after the muscle-flexing and the summoning of the Soviet spirit in Putin’s speech on Tuesday, what do the American-European sanctions, so far targeting 11 individuals, actually mean? And what leeway do White House officials have in the future?
Perhaps the most significant Russian reaction to the sanctions announced by Obama was that of Russian Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin. Mocking the sanctions on Twitter, hewrote, “Comrade @BarackObama, what should do those who have neither accounts nor property abroad? Or U didn't think about it? [Sic]”
The sanctions are specific and targeted. They involve asset freezes and a travel ban on 11 Russian and Ukrainian figures, including Vladimir Putin’s close advisor Vladislav Surkov, and Russia's Upper House Speaker Valentina Matvienko.
But the Russian response to the sanctions is not limited to mockery and defiance. It seems the Russians intend to adopt tit-for-tat measures.
According to press reports, quoting sources in Moscow, sanctions will be approved against officials in the U.S. administration and high-ranking members of the U.S. Senate. Most probably, Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin will be at the top of this list. Remember that Durbin was behind the bill calling for action following the Russian takeover of Crimea.
True, the sanctions represent the latest stage of the West’s pushback against Russian actions following the events in Kiev, and had been preceded by verbal warnings and the cancellation of the G8 summit, which would have taken place in Sochi. However, there seems to be an implicit agreement that satisfies all sides, whereby Moscow would regain its historical territory, while the other side agrees that the battle would only be fought with sanctions and democratic means, Brussels and the West’s signature method.
At any rate, there is no viable option for a real war, as Ukraine stands no chance of withstanding a Russian offensive, while the West is not prepared to start a war in Eastern Europe. The only thing the White House is able to do is issue more statements condemning the Kremlin.
Relations between the two countries are so perplexing that some are calling it a Cool War, in a play on the Cold War, the term for the conflict that lasted for more than half a century.
Russian businessmen and women in the United States must have breathed a sigh of relief, given that the U.S. economic sanctions single out specific people and do not threaten any prospect for future cooperation. Still, many overlook the fact that the sanctions are not a one-way street. According to The New York Times, nearly $105 billion have been transferred out of holdings that the U.S. Treasury has custody of during the week that ended last Wednesday, the largest tumble of its kind in the last couple of years.
There is evidence that the Russians are warily transferring tens of billions of dollars from U.S. accounts too. Some U.S. officials see this as a shot across the bow in the event Washington goes ahead with additional sanctions, as the NYT explained.
At any rate, relative to the magnitude of what has happened in Crimea, reactions appear somewhat calm. In many instances, this calm appears like a skillfully choreographed diplomatic strategy – from exploiting developments in Syria to the reactions to the “invasion” of Crimea.
While there have been increasing calls for a new U.S. approach to managing the differences with Russia, the U.S. president, ever since he set out to “reset” the relations with the Kremlin at the beginning of his first term, has been determined to find an ideal configuration for Western-Russian relations. Or perhaps Obama has realized that Russia must not be dealt with as a rusty old world inhabited by cavemen as suggested by Francis Fukuyama – despite calls by warmongers and other hawkish voices urging Obama to consider more belligerent options.
After all, democracy, for those who have not been paying attention to all the dramatic events that have taken place since the turn of the century, is no longer a glitzy catchword. It can no longer be printed on banners and towels to wipe the blood of the victims who died where there have been attempts to impose democracy by force.
Rather, democracy is a concept being reconsidered almost every day. Russia has its own system of government. While it is most definitely not ideal, the same can be said about the American political system.
Regarding the emerging crisis between the two countries, which many believe is the most serious since the end of the Cold War, Washington is not in a position to do anything beyond imposing limited sanctions that cost little at the strategic level.
Perhaps the U.S. will eventually designate Putin as a violator of international law, just like his actions in Crimea have been called - cynically - by the U.S. and European powers. But if this had been easy, then it would have been done the moment the first Russian soldier set foot on Ukrainian territory.
Follow Hassan Chakrani on Twitter | @HassanChakrani
This article is an edited translation from the Arabic Edition.