Russia: The Challenges of Transformation

13 Russia: The Eastern Dimension

353 chapter thirteen Russia: The Eastern Dimension Bobo Lo The course of Russian foreign policy over the past four hundred years offers up a singular paradox. On the one hand, Russia’s eastward expansion during the sixteenth to nineteenth centuries established the physical reality of a state whose territory lies predominantly in Asia. On the other hand, its rulers—in tsarist, communist, and post-Soviet times—have consistently viewed Russia as part of a larger European and Western civilization. The two-headed Romanov eagle on the national coat of arms makes for a nice image, but at no stage has Russia developed an Asian outlook. Central Asia, Eastern Siberia, and the Russian Far East (RFE) acquired specific identities as European outposts , isolated redoubts of civilization in a vast Asian wilderness,1 and interaction with mainstream Asia was marked by ignorance and a profound sense of alienation. It is striking, then, that we are witnessing today the rise of the East in Russian foreign policy thinking, barely two decades after the fall of communism and the apparent triumph of the West. While Moscow continues to look principally to the United States and Europe, there has been a distinct process of “Asianization” in recent years. The most visible sign of this is the transformation of the relationship with China into one of the most important in Russian foreign policy. But it is also apparent in other areas—in Moscow’s developing ties with Iran and the Muslim world, the reassertion of Russian influence in Central Asia, and multilateral engagement in the Asia-Pacific region. Most of all, there is the dawning realization that the East matters, not 354 Lo simply as an adjunct or counterbalance to the West, but in its own right. The sheer diversity and complexity of the East presents enormous policy challenges to Russian decision makers. So far, they have been more adept at recognizing Asia’s importance than in developing effective strategies for engaging with it. Old stereotypes and ways of thinking exert a disproportionate influence, and Moscow has found it difficult to reconcile the pursuit of Russia’s security and economic interests across Asia with a worldview that remains overwhelmingly Westerncentric. The story of Russia’s eastern dimension, then, is one of aspiration over achievement. Intellectually, Moscow grasps the need for a more considered, balanced, and long-term strategy toward Asia. In practice, however, pursuit of this goal is undermined by lack of vision, inconsistent policy making, ideological hang-ups, and an anachronistic geopolitical mind-set. The Key Questions This chapter analyzes the principal features of Russia’s approach toward Asia—its motivations, strengths, weaknesses, and prospects. To this purpose, it addresses five key questions: 1. How does Moscow conceive of Asia and Russia’s place within Asia? Although it has long been an article of faith that Russia is an Asian as well as a European country, there has been little attempt to define what this means. Mere geographical extent scarcely constitutes proof of Asian credentials, and it is significant that most Asians regard Russia as a European country, albeit one with distinct characteristics. Although the Russian elite is now more committed to engagement with Asia, this does not imply a sense of belonging or willingness to view Russian national identity through an Asian prism. 2. What are the objectives and instruments of Russia’s Asia policies? Generally speaking, it is easier to establish what Moscow opposes than what it wants. This is especially true in Asia, where its policy options are limited by a lack of standing, weak influence, and brittle self-confidence. Confronted by diverse challenges, the Russian approach has been largely reactive and driven by geopolitical instinct. This reflects a fundamentally defensive outlook, as decision makers grapple with a number of inconvenient realities: the vulnerability of the Russian Far East, a long-term The Eastern Dimension 355 American presence in Asia, and the rise of China. Moscow has resorted to various mechanisms in its search for solutions, yet the overriding impression of Russian policy is of aimlessness. If there is a vision of Russia in Asia, then it is unsupported by any comprehensive strategy. 3. How successful is Russia’s “Asia project”? Despite the enhanced importance of the East, the Asianization of Russian foreign policy remains a work in early progress. In Central Asia, Moscow’s historical ties with local elites have enabled it to preserve a substantial influence. But in...