Haka near the rose garden

17.06.2021

Villa La Grange is situated in a Genevan park of the same name on the southeast end of Lake Geneva. The park is - like most parks in Geneva for a tourist from Central Europe - infuriatingly beautiful. It hosts an amazing rose garden. 

Sadly, the US President Joe Biden, and the President of the Russian Federation, Vladimir Putin did not come here on a June afternoon to admire the roses - the rosarium is closed for renovation. Instead, they came to probe each other.

Biden’s locker room

The American diplomacy made good efforts to prepare the international ground for the summit. 

It was preceded by the G7 meeting, NATO summit, and EU-US meetings. All communique issued after these meetings stressed the problems arising from Moscow’s policies. They varied in accents and vocabulary. For example, many European countries continue to call the Russian-Ukrainian conflict “a conflict in Eastern Ukraine”, while NATO can use more assertive language.

Nevertheless, Biden emerged from these meetings as a leader, supported by the West. At least in problems of democracy and European stability.

And apparently, Biden’s team did everything possible, to have him well prepared, and avoid the 2018 Helsinki fiasco. Apparently in the prepping not only the current administration participated. Some external experts were also called in, including high-ranking foreign policy officials from Barack Obama’s or Donald Trump’s administrations. Leaking information about this briefing to the press [1], was also an important signal to the Russian side.

Some hiccups, however, took place. Shortly before the trip to Europe, the US president informed the media, that he will not block the further construction of the Nord Stream 2. The American president gave his statement to the press, without earlier discussion or at least informing its partners from Central and Eastern Europe, that will be affected by the project.

Another problem was the fact, that given the context of the meeting it would look differently if the meeting with the Russian president would have been preceded by the meeting with the Ukrainian president, Volodymyr Zelenski. 

Putin’s locker room

Russian’s preparation for the meeting was significantly different. This arose from the fact, that Putin’s goal is not to reach any targets during the meeting. His target was to have the meeting, and by this - reassert Russia’s position as a global US interlocutor.

He achieved this by series of propaganda and diplomatic moves at the beginning of the year. They cumulated in the escalation of the Russian military presence on the borders with Ukraine and on the occupied Crimea peninsula. 

During the immediate period before the summit, Kremlin focused on media actions.

Russian media outlets continued to underline that the solution to the Russia-Ukraine conflict lies in Kyiv. They continued to criticize the existence of NATO. Russian journalists would also underline the old age and health problems of the American president.

The final accent was Putin’s interview for the USD NBC outlet. It was a classic example of Russian president rhetorics. 

Putin used the opportunity to criticize the American political system - when asked about Alexei’s Navalny imprisonment. In a particularly interesting remark, he suggested that protesters that stormed the Capitol in Washington were illegally detained.

Asked about Ukraine he stressed the fact, that allegedly “Ukraine keeps bringing equipment and personnel to the conflict zone”. He also linked Russia’s army movements along the Ukrainian borders with NATO exercises in Turkey. And - as usual - recalled the alleged promise Mikhail Gorbatchev received from Washington that NATO will not expand east. 

Not a rugby game

If you ever heard about rugby, you’ve also probably heard of haka. It’s a traditional Maori dance, that New Zealand’s All Blacks, perform before international matches. It is performed to intimidate the opponent, pressure him or her psychologically.

This is what Biden and Putin did on the run-up to the summit. Contrary to haka, there were not showing each other’s tongues. Still the “bringing together of democratic countries” by Biden, and Putin’s interview for NBC was exactly this.

However, international relations are not a rugby match (maybe it’s a good thing, neither the US nor Russia are particularly good at it). This game never ends, it is played on different pitches and restricted by the structure of the goals of its participants.

To understand the outcome of this meeting we need to look at this framework. The perception of international relations is crucial for understanding the limiting framework. Both the US and Russia look at this structure globally. All other decisions are an effect of the definition of these problems. And - maybe safe for Donald’s Trump non-linear presidency - most of the countries' presidential administrations behaved like this. In the Russian case, this approach is deeper rooted in history. In the US case - it’s sometimes connected with the faith of the promotion of democracy in its capitalist incarnation. But general structure remains the same. 

For the US the current global challenge is the growth of China’s position in the world. To make it more general one can simply understand this as a growth of any country that could challenge the US position in the world. It is a constant threat.

For Russia - it’s the domination of Washington in the world. A single-polar world. Moscow (and before that St. Petersburg) always claimed a seat at the most important table, where world issues are decided. And it doesn’t matter if they are at the table and listened to - it is always not enough.

The relations with other countries and approaches to the solution of different problems are always subordinated to the strategic approach.

The structure of the relations

The nuclear arsenal was always a common ground for both capitals. In January, Biden and Putin agreed to prolong the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty. This is the last nuclear non-proliferation treaty, signed by the two states. Analysts and media of both sides kept underlining the importance of this cooperation, during the whole period before the presidential summit. I think that only warm words, said by Putin in his interview for NBC, were on the START prolongation.

As I’ve mentioned China is a global problem for Washington, but it’s also a challenge to Moscow. 

For Washington, Beijing is a power it cannot ignore, that challenges its interest in different parts of the globe. In the security sphere, it’s, particularly in the Pacific. In terms of economic and political posturing - pretty much everywhere, with China being very assertive in South America, that Washington considers his “close neighborhood”, to use Russian expression applied to countries that once were part of a wider Soviet bloc.

That is why Biden is looking for allies against China. The announcement in the NATO summit’s statement, that China is a threat was an important success of Biden’s administration. The nervous reaction of Emmanuel Macron confirmed that. Some suggest that therefore Biden meets Putin before meeting Xi Jinping - to probe him on China.

Moscow looks at China from a bit different angle. They do share a common global goal - to undermine the US position. Here both countries cooperate, particularly in global fora. Moreover, Russia frequently uses the threat of deeper cooperation with China, whenever it wants to force its European partners into different projects, for example in the energy sphere. 

But this partnership has limitations. The potentials of both states are different, and Moscow sees that. Currently, their global partnership is a friendly one. Both try not to step on each other’s toes in different areas of engagement. But they both know - it will eventually come to the conflict, and it is not entirely clear who would turn out to be the winner.

Finally, the two countries share a border. And relations between neighbors are never smooth.

The third crucial problem is the European continent. The two countries perceive the situation in Europe through the prism of NATO and (what is linked to it) Ukraine.

The US sees NATO as a guarantor of its position in Europe, a part of a wider global security network. This should be understood widely - also as a part of energy security. 

Ukraine is a part of this approach. On one hand, it is a partner that strengthens Washington's presence. On the other - a place where NATO equipment and protocols can be tested.

For Moscow, of course, NATO is an obstacle to their expansion (in political, economic, and security terms) in Europe. Russia aims at undermining this alliance and ultimately - at dismantling it. And ideally - replacing with a framework in which it has a clear say in the security of the whole continent.

The issue of Ukraine is a bit more complex from the Kremlin perspective. On one hand, this is the reverse of the US approach. The more partners a Washington-led grouping has, the smallest the area under Russia’s control is.

However, Ukraine is also a mentality problem. Russian decision-makers seriously believe that Kyiv needs to be under Moscow's control. Many reasons are being quoted - from historical, through religious to economic. But it doesn’t matter - Russia wants Ukraine.

One can also mention other issues that are on the US-Russian agenda - COVID-19, the Middle East, Iran, Syria, Libya, cybersecurity, global terrorism, environment. Unfortunately, the issue of the future of the planet and all other problems come as pawns in the global game.

The structure of relations between Russia and the US-bound these countries to conflict. It’s just the nature of their goals. With this structure and the fact that they focus on the global level, other partners will always be secondary to the solution of global problems. These are means to gain higher ground in the never-ending game of superiority.

What happens next

Let’s return to Villa La Grange

Every gesture of the two politicians, that were visible to the media, were analyzed in detail by international experts. I’m not particularly fond of analysis that reminds old-school Kremlinology, where the specialist would analyze the position of an important USSR apparatchik on an official event or the visible effects of elderliness on Soviet leader face.

However, gestures are important in diplomacy. And there were two important ones.

Putin arrived at the meeting on time. An important event given his habit to have western leaders wait for him. Some claim that this is because he needed the meeting. I think that it was radar an attempt to shake the table just a little. Since Biden was so well briefed - he would be warned that the Russian president will arrive late. So, let’s do the unexpected.

Another one was the format of the conference. As announced earlier by Washington, the American’ President administration did not agree to a joint conference. Moreover - the US president gave his conference after Putin.

Smart move. The US president marked his position. Avoided possible KGB-style tricks, that the Russian side may have in store for him. And gave himself a chance to react to possible Putin’s statements.

The only substantial effect of the meeting was the agreement of the two presidents to return their ambassadors to their respective capitals. This is an important change from the point of view of day-to-day diplomacy. But that’s it, this doesn’t change the framework in which two countries work.

They also agreed to consult the Ministries of Foreign Affairs of the two countries. Again - an important thing for a dialogue, not necessarily for solving problems. In a way, this also plays in the internal agenda of the two presidents. Biden was saying that one of his goals is to have a dialogue, to see his partner and return to stability in their bilateral relations. Putin said that his goal is to establish a framework for cooperation between the two countries. In the Russian political language, this means - framework in which Russia has a veto.

Important exchange of blows was observed over the issues of human rights and democracy, particularly on the issue of Alexei Navalny. Putin essentially repeated his earlier statements. Biden called his remarks on the attackers of the Capitol “ridiculous”. But I don’t think anyone expected any progress in this sphere.

Both presidents mentioned cybersecurity. Seemingly they agreed, “in principle” to discuss this problem. But - as Biden said during his conference - agreements in principle need to be followed by actions.

Finally, both presidents expressed their satisfaction with the fact that these talks took place. Putin called Biden “an experienced statesman”. Biden said the atmosphere of the talks was positive.

In an unannounced move, both presidents issued a very short statement in the evening. They stressed that “the New START Treaty exemplifies our commitment to nuclear arms control” and confirmed that “the United States and Russia will embark together on an integrated bilateral Strategic Stability Dialogue soon that will be deliberate and robust”. Thus, they confirmed that nuclear weapons are always a thing the two countries can use as a symbol of their dialogue.

With this final statement, the meeting confirmed - there is a stable framework of relations between Washington and Moscow. This meeting was not even the first half of this never-ending game. This was just another stage of haka.