History Says Don’t Trust Russia: But We Stupidly Ignore It’s Track Record
By Tom Rakusan, Contributing Author/ May 18, 2022
Mr. Rakusan recently retired from the Federal Government after 39 years with various elements of the U.S. national security community. Mr. Rakusan’s focus has been on Eastern and Western Europe, the former Soviet states, and across the Middle East. He has served in a multitude of locations in these regions, as well as in Washington, working these issues in the national security community within various national security settings over several Administrations.
Mr. Rakusan has also led several large organizations. In these and other senior national security leadership positions, Mr. Rakusan led innovation and created multi-disciplinary teams to tackle the Nation’s most pressing national security challenges.
Mr. Rakusan is currently employed with a U.S. private equity firm, focusing on investments in companies developing tools needed by the U.S. national security community.
Russia’s Sociopathy Has an Ugly History
The Great October Socialist Revolution. World War II. Poland in 1953. Hungary in 1956. Czechoslovakia in 1969. Afghanistan in 1979. Chechnya, twice in the 1990s. Moldova in 1992. Nagorno-Karabakh from the early 1990s to the present day. Ukraine from 2014 to the present. Syria in 2013. The Skripal and Litvinenko poisoning, using weapons of mass destruction on NATO soil. The assassinations of Chechen opposition figures in Germany. The meddling in U.S. elections and in other Western social issues. The list goes on and on and on…
These are just a few examples of Soviet/Russian aggression.
Other nations have conducted wars of aggression against their neighbors, or against countries far away mostly in the colonial era and, yes, even more recently. What makes the Russians different is the brutality by which they carry out their aggression. Many other countries and regimes involved in such a “foreign policy” have been much more benevolent. This is not to justify others’ wars of occupation and subjugation. Far from it. However, the Russian modus operandi has always been marked by brutality and violence aimed against civilians.
Ukraine of 2022 is just another example of this Behavior of State.
It’s Not Just Putin, It’s Russia
One could assign the blame to Russia’s current dictator, Vladimir Putin and his inner circle of cronies, some of whom are on the grift and stealing from the Russian people. History offers that brutality, especially against civilians, has been a trademark of all Russian and Soviet regimes, carried out by its senior political, military, and security officials. Russian flavor of such brutality is especially pungent because of the violent and inhumane behavior of Russian military forces. Their leaders and the rank-and-file of Moscow’s military are indictable, having taken brutality to new levels, as evidenced in each new act of aggression.
The West’s Quest to See Past Russia’s Evil
The West is aware of this. But hasn’t and isn’t taking this into account when formulating its posture toward Russia. Western ethos is to engage adversaries to align into the “fold.” We want a global community of responsible state actors, driven by a desire to neutralize aggression before it manifests and or realizes economic costs.
Euro-American posture toward Russia in the post-Soviet context has been exactly this.
No Good Deed Goes Unpunished
As the former USSR dissolved, the West was optimistic that Russia would now be one of the responsible members of the international community. The West offered Moscow the olive branch via trade, investment, economic reform support, defense conversion programs, and genuine cultural and scientific interaction.
In the context of the post-Cold War early 1990s, this was understandable. There was genuine hope in the future and relief concerning the end of the Cold War, a conflict that had the potential to be the end of us all.
Where we erred was when Vladimir manipulated his way into a shadow dictatorship, taking the reins in Moscow and showing his Russian nationalist “stripes,” most notably at the annual Munich Security Conference on February 10, 2007. The West was shocked, amazed, and surprised by Putin’s introduction of the re-emergence of Russian nationalism, showing his aggressive, maligned, paranoid, and isolationist behavior toward the outside world. His disdain for the West was noted.
Doing Our Job, Stepping on Toes
Western reaction was to question our own strategy of engagement and our own strategy of providing security guarantees to the peoples of former Soviet and Warsaw Pact states and members.
Some did not take Putin seriously at first, arguing that he was reflecting the true Russian nationalist posture shown during his time in St. Petersburg and over centuries from Moscow. The West debated whether to tread carefully in protecting its new allies of Central and Eastern Europe and countries born out of the dissolution of the USSR. The latter category of thinkers and policymakers were (and are) concerned that the Western effort to protect their liberty “steps on the toes’ ‘ of Russia and its hegemonic leader.
There was debate as to NATO expansion, and especially regarding the membership of Ukraine and Georgia.
Many argued that we must not antagonize the Moscow regime, that we must tread carefully, that we need to maintain global geo-political balance, that Putin and company have a right to protect their national security interests–no matter how twisted perception of security affects sovereign nations around them. Policymakers, academics, think tank leaders, and business groups. Their concerns are based upon geo-political as well as economic interests.
Benefit of the Doubt, Blinded by Hope
They failed, however, to understand reality from the lens of Russia’s rank and file. No matter how much the West gives Russia the benefit of the doubt, the Kremlin will never consider such engagement as sufficient.
More NATO More Members
NATO membership should be available to any country which meets its criteria and has the desire to join this successful security alliance.
This should not merely be some altruistic effort by NATO and its allies, but an effort to protect the populations of countries under the constant threat of subjugation by Moscow.
In the end, we are in the West. Yes, we should be forward-leaning when it comes to Russia but not forward-leaning in our policy of hope.” Forward-leaning in terms of staying ahead of the inherent Russian desire for malign influence is part of the prescription. We should protect those in the way of such malign influence.
We should craft our manifest destiny, and that of other countries, based on the realities of the repetitive Russian behavior.
“Trust but Verify” should be replaced by “Suspect and Verify.”
China and Russia, A Reprise
We need to realign world order to isolate Russia into its own territory.
Cease all trade; cease all investment; this is globalism without Russia. She will never be a responsible member of the global order. Selling LNG to Europe, the Central Bank sanctions, end of SWIFT, stopping energy imports, as well as Europe deciding that Russia DID use energy for blackmail is a beginning. Supply chain global networks should exclude Russia, invest in companies and industries that can be the alternate supplies and in time, become the main suppliers. Russia has failed that test hundreds of times over a thousand years.
Ukraine in 2022 is just another example.