Fears should be eased over whether America would sell out Ukrainian national interests for the sake of better relations with Russia. Judging from the public coolness and private slights, U.S. President Barack Obama and his Russian hosts didn’t get along all that well during the July 6-8 summit.
Aside from the well-rehearsed pledge to cut nuclear arms and cooperate closely on Afghanistan, Obama voiced unwavering support for the democratic aspirations and independence of Russia’s neighbors, including their right to join NATO. “State sovereignty must be a cornerstone of international order,” Obama told students of the New Economic School in Moscow, mentioning Ukraine and Georgia. This was a direct rejection of Moscow’s claim to have a privileged sphere of interests among former Soviet republics. Obama also hasn’t excluded the possibility that the United States might go ahead with an Eastern European missile shield defense over Russia’s objections.
Obama wasn’t exactly greeted warmly. His speech at the Moscow university was not broadcast on the most popular state-controlled TV stations. In return, Obama chose a July 7 breakfast meeting with Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin (known as a night owl) and spent one of his two precious nights in Moscow privately with his family. He also carved out time for Kremlin opponents and members of Russia’s oppressed civil society.
All of this adds up to a U.S. president who, while seeking to make progress on common interests, is not finding many of them. We hope that the Obama administration defends Ukraine’s interests strongly. Ukraine could help its case a lot by not trying so hard to be the basket case of Europe. The trick for Ukraine and the United States is to not antagonize Russia in the process. This is a difficult path, because Kremlin autocrats are more interested in menacing and controlling than in forming constructive partnerships with either nation.
