Skip to main content

Puzzling: US shunning diplomacy when it is arguably more necessary than ever

By James W Carden 

The principal American and Russian diplomats, Antony Blinken and Sergei Lavrov, have spoken precisely once since Russia launched its illegal invasion of Ukraine in February.
In a phone call on July 29, the two diplomats discussed issues around a possible prisoner exchange involving two Americans being held in Russian custody, former US Marine Paul Whelan and WNBA star Brittney Griner. Nothing came of the call.
Writing from the G20 meeting in early July, the Associated Press diplomatic correspondent Matt Lee noted in a dispatch that Lavrov told reporters there that “…it was not us who abandoned all contacts…it was the United States. That’s all I can say. And we are not running after anybody suggesting meetings. If they don’t want to talk, it’s their choice.”
The shunning of diplomacy by Blinken at a time when it is arguably more necessary than ever is puzzling given that one of the rare foreign policy successes of the Obama-Biden administration, the Iran Nuclear Accord, was owed to countless hours of backchannel diplomacy. In this case it might be hoped that Blinken is not taking meetings with his Russian counterpart because another, far more substantive and experienced statesman, William Burns, is conducting talks and they are simply being kept from public view. Burns, after all, is the administration’s most experienced Russia hand and is no stranger to playing the role of backchannel envoy.
Whatever the case, Biden’s national security team might familiarize themselves with the diplomatic strategy as carried out by US President Ronald Reagan and his secretary of state George Shultz at what historians often point to as among the two most dangerous periods (the first being the Cuban Missile Crisis) of the Cold War.
“The basis of a free and principled foreign policy,” said former California governor Ronald Reagan in a speech accepting the 1980 Republican nomination, “is one that takes the world as it is, and seeks to change it by leadership and example; not by harangue, harassment or wishful thinking.”
But the very early years of his administration were indeed marked more by harangue (“Evil Empire”) than by diplomacy. A New York Times profile of the Soviet Ambassador to the US, Anatoly Dobrynin, noted that he could not “recall a period more tense than the present….On his visits back home, he finds his relatives asking him, for the first time, if there is going to be war with the United States.”
The nuclear scare resulting from NATO’s Able Archer exercise of 1983 served as a wake up call to the president – as did the ABC television movie The Day After, which is said to have made a deep impression on the president.
The departure, in July 1982, of secretary of state Al Haig and the arrival of former Nixon labor and treasury secretary George Shultz as Haig’s replacement, set the stage for a new approach to the Soviets.
In a memo to the president, Shultz called for “intensified dialogue with Moscow.” But Shultz had his work cut out for him. The team Reagan had assembled around him was replete with hardline anti-Soviet hawks, some of which, prominently Harvard University scholar Richard Pipes (born 1923, Cieszyn, Poland), who served on the NSC, were part of a large and influential (though perhaps not as influential as they are in today’s Washington) “Captive Nations” diaspora community which carried with it the preconceptions, prejudices and hatreds of the old country. These have, inevitably, colored the policy recommendations offered by members of that community – then and now.
Pipes and his deputy, John Lenczowski, were the team behind the policies laid out in National Security Decision Directive 75, which was more or less an extension of the hardline approach toward the Soviets carried out by president Jimmy Carters’ national security adviser Zbigniew Brzeziński (born 1928, Warsaw, Poland).
NSDD 75 said US-Soviet policy should be predicated on the understanding that “Soviet aggressiveness has deep roots in the internal system and that relations with the USSR should therefore take into account whether or not they help to strengthen this system and its capacity to engage in aggression.”
Plus ca change. The very same arguments made then are being recycled today – but under the pretext that the US and the West must wage a battle in what is said to be a fight between “Democracies vs. Autocracies.” Such reasoning makes little sense, but nevertheless has become an article of faith among both members of the bipartisan foreign policy establishment and their progressive critics.
It is trite but nonetheless true that personnel is policy, and the Reagan administration was no exception. As the scholar James Graham Wilson noted in his superb history of the Reagan-Gorbachev years, The Triumph of Improvisation, “Absent new individuals in positions of power, stagnation shaped the international environment in the early 1980s and old thinking determined the relationship between the United States and Soviet Union.”
But once the personnel began to change, so too did the policy. Shultz, working with Reagan’s top NSC Soviet expert, Jack Matlock, successfully pushed back against the neoconservative agenda. As Wilson writes, “Unlike the hardliners William Casey, William Clark, Richard Pipes, Jeane Kirkpatrick, and Caspar Weinberger, Shultz and Matlock believed that the Soviet Union had the capacity to reform.”
Shultz orchestrated a meeting between Reagan and Dobrynin at the White House in February 1983, during which the president told the Soviet ambassador that he wanted Shultz to be his direct channel to Soviet premier Yuri Andropov. And throughout 1983 and into 1984, a new policy – crafted by Shultz, Matlock and national security advisor Robert McFarlane – of engagement emerged in the form of a four-part framework consisting of bilateral relations, regional matters, arms control, and human rights.
The similarities between the early Biden years and the very early Reagan years are therefore hard to miss. Under President Biden, Russia hardliners dominate every high national security office but one (Burns, CIA). And it is an open secret that the Biden team is taking their cues from the hardest of hardline members of the Captive Nations lobby which has a virtually, yes, Soviet-style stranglehold on what is and what is not allowed to be said with regard to US policy toward Russia and Ukraine.
Reagan, like Nixon before him, wisely turned aside the lobby’s counsel in pursuit of diplomacy. Will Biden? One need only look at the results of his administration’s policies to intuit that perhaps a change is needed. In short, Biden needs a Shultz.
In about three months time, the president could use the midterm elections as an opportune moment to put an end to the Blinken-era at Foggy Bottom – and appoint a secretary of state with the experience and gravitas necessary to meet the current moment.
And it’s not as though the president doesn’t have plenty of options. William Burns, former California governor Jerry Brown, former secretary of state John Kerry (currently serving as the administration’s climate envoy), former deputy secretary of state Thomas Shannon, and former national security adviser Tom Donilon should be on any short list of contenders to replace the current secretary of state and usher in a new era of diplomacy between Russia and the West.
---
This article is distributed by Globetrotter in partnership with the American Committee for U.S.-Russia Accord. James W. Carden is a journalist based in Washington, D.C.

Comments

TRENDING

Abrogation of Art 370: Increasing alienation, relentless repression, simmering conflict

One year after the abrogation by the Central Government of Art. 370 in Kashmir, what is the situation in the Valley. Have the promises of peace, normalcy and development been realised? What is the current status in the Valley? Here is a detailed note by the People’s Union for Civil Liberties , “Jammu & Kashmir: One Year after Abrogation of Art. 370: Increasing Alienation, Relentless Repression, Simmering Conflict”:

Release of dabang neta: Rule of law can't be allowed to be slave to political rhetoric

By Vidya Bhushan Rawat*  When we look to politicians for solutions and politics as the 'final solution' for every evil then we are disappointed most of the time. In politics, we knowingly or unknowingly become part of the propaganda tool of the ruling elite which exists everywhere across different castes. We often provide issues and talk about them in binaries which suit our elites. The minorities among the marginalised who have no political space and representation rarely get heard by these majoritarian parties whose agenda remain power communities. Every political party in today's time is following the 'successful' formula of 'democracy' which is keeping the 'powerful' 'jaatis' with them leaving aside the marginalised one. The BJP started this but yes they cobbled together all other communities too through a diverse narrative.

Why are 17 Indian cos, including Sterlite, blacklisted by Norway bank

By Venkatesh Nayak* Readers may recall the gory incidents that took place at Thoothukudi (Tuticorin) in Tamil Nadu in the southern part of India on 22 May, 2018. Thirteen protesters died on the spot when the police opened fire to disperse an assemblage of thousands of local residents and representatives of civil society groups. They were protesting against the adverse environmental impact of the industrial operations of Sterlite Copper which runs a copper smelter plant in the area. Accusations against the company have ranged from polluting local water resources to plans for expanding the installed capacity of the plant without the necessary environmental clearances. A ground report published in The Wire recently, mentions the decision taken by Norges Bank a few years ago to not invest funds from Norway’s Government Pension Fund Global (GPFG) in Sterlite “due to an unacceptable risk of complicity in current and future severe environmental damage and systematic human rights violations

India’s macroeconomic resilience amidst global fragility: facts, factors, forecasts

By IMPRI Team  Under the series, The State of the Economy – #EconDialogue , Center for the Study of Finance and Economics (CSFE), IMPRI Impact and Policy Research Institute, New Delhi organized #WebPolicyTalk, a distinguished lecture on the topic India’s Macroeconomic Resilience amidst Global Fragility: Facts, Factors and Forecasts, by Dr Deepak Mishra. Dr Deepak Mishra is the Director and Chief Executive of the Indian Council for Research on International Economic Relations (ICRIER) , New Delhi. The session was chaired by Dr Rafiq Dossani, Director, RAND Center for Asia Pacific Policy , a Senior Economist and the Professor of Policy Analysis, Pardee RAND Graduate School . The discussants of the event were Prof Nilanjan Banik, Professor and Program Director (BA, Economics and Finance), Mahindra University, Hyderabad , Dr Pooja Misra, Associate Professor and Area Head, Economics, Birla Institute of Management Technology, Greater Noida and Mr Arvind Chari, Chief Investment Officer, Qua

Upcoming monsoon: No lessons learned from past flooding, waterlogging of Vadodara

Letter to MoEF&CC, Vadodara Municipal Corporation, Vadodara Urban Development Authority, Collector Vadodara, Chief Secretary, Gujarat, GPCB, CPCB and Others by Concerned Citizens of Vadodara*: *** Let us take into account the uncertainty of weather and climatic conditions and the prevalent erratic rainfall. Let us hope that we remember past floods and waterlogging and have learnt lessons from those disasters and tragedies. So, let us act immediately before the upcoming monsoon of 2023. It is apparent that, practically, no lessons have been learned from the past flooding and waterlogging events and from the ill-advised and ill-conceived rejuvenation efforts of Vishwamitri River. No action has been taken yet by the Vadodara Municipal Corporation in terms of identifying and removal of the debris from the ravines, water ways, lakes, ponds, wetlands, and low-lying areas. Instead, dumping of debris and other wastes continues into the river environs. Even clear directions given by the con

Why was this BJP leader forced to call off marriage of his daughter with Muslim boy?

By Vidya Bhushan Rawat*  A marriage of two individuals belonging to different faiths was ultimately postponed as the 'champions' of the social morality dominated the discourse and threatened the father of the girl who happened to be the chairman of Pauri city municipality. Yashpal Benam, a BJP leader, posted the invitation of his daughter's wedding with a Muslim boy from Uttar Pradesh. Both the boy and the girl became friend during their B Tech course and were in relationship. There were reports that they already got married in the court but we don't know the reality. Perhaps the family of the girl wanted to send a message of 'acceptability' and 'appreciation' of such a marriage by the society.

Against genuine pace, spin Rohan Kanhai was best player, on par with Viv Richards

By Harsh Thakor  Rohan Kanhai took creative genius in batting or aesthecism to regions unexplored. He virtually gave the art of batting a new dimension, being the equivalent of a Beethoven or Rembrandt to batting. He in full flow was manifestation of a divine energy. He could literally invent strokes of his own. He could eviserate any bowling attack, in any conditions.

Adherent of Charu Mazumdar who failed to confront policy of annihilation of class enemy

By Harsh Thakor  Communist Revolutionary leader Chandi Sarkar expired at 76 years old at his home in Krishnanagar of Nadia on, 5th April, at 11 pm. He has carved a permanent niche amongst the great Communist Revolutionary leaders of India. Till his last breath he blazed the spirit of revolution. Few leaders in West Bengal, more ressurected spirit of Naxalbari. Only with characters like Sarkar, can the Indian revolution ever advance. With unflinching resilience he defended Mao Tse Tung Thought and concept of peoples War. Chandi Sarkar was born on 15 August 1947 in a landlord family of Maharajpur village of Chandra Police Station of Nadia district. His father’s name was Ashok Sarkar. He was an accomplished sportsman since childhood, being given a trainee job as a for hockey player.

In terms of sheer statistics Sydney Barnes was indisputably the best of all bowlers

By Harsh Thakor  Late Sydney Barnes just reached the milestone of 150. Born at Smethwick, Staffordshire, April 19, 1873. Died at Chadsmoor, Staffordshire, and December 26, 1967. Sydney Francis Barnes was the second son of five children of Richard Barnes who spent nearly all his life in Staffordshire and worked for a Birmingham firm for 63 years. The father played only a little cricket and Sydney Barnes pledged that he never had more than three hours' coaching. Billy Ward of Warwickshire gave him the tutelage in his cultivating the off break from which he developed a leg break.Barnes was a gaunt faced man with wide eyes and an austere expression. Action and Style With a bouncy run up his long strong fingers could spin, swerve and seam a cricket ball in the air at medium pace, a but a stock speed well above medium..He bowled with his middle finger over the seam with the first and third spread on either side. His full circular swing enabled him to produce a smooth, coordinated delive

Killing of Atiq raises questions regarding lapses in cops' professional competence

By Prof Sudhanshu Tripathi*  What next or who next? The ongoing narrative in popular media over the slain Atiq Ahmed began with CM Yogi’s oft-cited speech in the state assembly that “iss mafia ko mitti mein mila denge.” And consequent encounters of four shooters by the UP police involved in the cold blooded murder of Umesh Pal -- the only witness alive in Raju Pal’s broad daylight murder by Atiq and his henchmen -- in February 2023. Further, few more encounters by the UP police since then have boldly underlined the oft-cited zero-tolerance policy of the Yogi government.