Cancellation of the Chicago summit suits Russian, US interests
One hopes that the wise decision of Moscow and Washington to prevent the ballistic missile defense (BMD) issue from hindering the improvement of their relations will ultimately help them to see the unimportance of their BMD deadlock and to focus instead on the issues that really matter. If they do, they will not have to cancel any more summits in the future.
Over the past almost two years, the U.S.-Russia relations have markedly improved. The “reset” of relations proposed by the Barack Obama administration has been a success. The threat of a retreat to a systemic confrontation has almost disappeared. Many of the conflicts between the two countries have been either resolved or, for the most part, reduced to a “smoldering” state. Both Russia and the United States display pragmatism by lowering the importance of persisting conflicts over the benefits of cooperation. For the first time in the post-Soviet period, the U.S. has partially revised its position on Russia-related issues and its interests with regard to Russia for the sake of getting Moscow’s support in matters of interest to Washington. Unlike the previous rounds, the current improvement of the U.S.-Russia relations rests on a more solid foundation – namely, a clear and pragmatic understanding by the parties of their interests and of the importance of constructive mutual relations for their implementation.
In general, the events of this May spoke in favor of increased pragmatism in the Russia’s foreign policy towards the United States. These events as well reflected positively on the future evolution of relations between the two countries. At the same time, Washington’s policy to maintain a positive course of bilateral relations with Russia remained unchanged, while the probability of a new, serious deterioration in US-Russian relations in the near future was low. U.S.-Russian cooperation in areas of national interest (primarily Afghanistan) will be continued. However, the readiness of Moscow to build up a positive agenda in relations with Washington seems to have decreased.
In February 2012, the influence of the presidential elections in Russia, held on March 4, 2012, on Russian-American relations reached its climax. The election campaign of the Prime Minister Vladimir Putin made a special emphasis on the idea of the revival of Russia as a great power, the restoration of its military power and the strengthening of Russia’s foreign policy independence. In the eyes of most of Russia’s political elite, this primarily involves maintaining a strategic balance with the U.S. and a stiff opposition to Washington on issues not coinciding with Russia’s interests, including interference in the affairs of other states, Russia included.
The Stanford US-Russia Forum Research Journal, A Peer-Reviewed Publication
Volume 9 (April 2018)
In March, Russian-American relations began to return to normal after a period of heightened politicization associated with the presidential campaign in Russia, when the level of anti-American rhetoric in Russia (including the rhetoric from the Prime Minister and presidential candidate Vladimir Putin) reached its peak in many years. This rhetoric died down almost immediately after the elections on March 4th, thus confirming its domestic target. At the same time, positive sentiment began to increase between the two countries. Accordingly, the Obama administration reacted to Russian presidential election results and the victory of Putin as constructively as possible in light of the current, domestic, political conditions in the U.S. This political climate has shown a degree of anti-Russian rhetoric from the Republicans through their criticism of the administration over its policy toward Russia which is unprecedented in intensity since the Cold War.
The article deals with the processes of building the information society and security in the CIS in accordance with modern conditions. The main objective is to review existing mechanisms for the formation of a common information space in the Eurasian region, regarded as one of the essential aspects of international integration. The theoretical significance of the work is to determine the main controls of the regional information infrastructure, improved by the development of communication features in a rapid process.The practical component consists in determining the future policies of the region under consideration in building the information society. The study authors used historical-descriptive approach and factual analysis of events having to do with drawing the contours of today's global information society in the regional refraction.
The main result is the fact that the development of information and communication technologies, and network resources leads to increased threats of destabilization of the socio-political situation in view of the emergence of multiple centers that generate the ideological and psychological background. Keeping focused information policy can not be conceived without the collective participation of States in the first place, members of the group leaders of integration - Russia, Belarus and Kazakhstan. Currently, only produced a comprehensive approach to security in the information field in the Eurasian region, but the events in the world, largely thanks to modern technology, make the search for an exit strategy with a much higher speed. The article contributes to the science of international relations, engaging in interdisciplinary thinking that is associated with a transition period in the development of society. A study of current conditions in their relation to the current socio-political patterns of the authors leads to conclusions about the need for cooperation with the network centers of power in the modern information environment, the formation of alternative models of networking, especially in innovation and scientific and technical areas of information policy, and expanding the integration of the field in this region on the information content.