From Cold War to Warm Relations? U.S., Russia, & Nuclear Weapons

I guess if anything can unite enemies of the past is a shared enemy of the present.  And I am not pointing to any one country or leader that both the Russians and the U.S. are threatened by.  I am speaking of a general topic: nuclear proliferation.

Analysts and political scientists, 20 years ago, would not have predicted that these two giants would end up finding common ground on which to stand.  However, after Hillary Clinton’s trip to Russia to push the reset button shortly after Obama assumed his office, and recently after Obama and Medvedev held a joint conference, it seems this is the reality of 2009.

In a report on the July 6th conference, Medvedev points to the idea of nuclear proliferation in potential unstable places as a reason for closer cooperation with the U.S.  He named the Korean peninsula and the Middle East as places where nuclear proliferation could have destabilizing effects.

For those who shout “hypocrisy” when these two superpowers talk of restricting the nuclear achievements of other nations, I have little rebuttal.  However I will say that the conference also addressed goals for both Russia and the U.S. to reduce their stockpiles within 7 years.  This is not necessarily a unique or ambitious initiative – but I highlight this to demonstrate one of Obama’s points in the conference.

“Lead by example.”  A great idea.  Asking other nations to not pursue the path to nuclear weaponry while relying on the threat of your own advanced, destructive weaponry is like a child seeing their parent do the same thing they told the child not to do.  ”Do as I say, and not as I do” does not work in foreign policy, especially with nuclear proliferation, because it can lead to resentment of the self-appointed parental nature these larger superpowers are filling in relation to these developing countries. 

Do I expect full nuclear disarmament worldwide?  Not anymore than I expect a beauty pageant contestant to get her wish of ending world hunger or giving the world peace simply by wishing it or pushing money toward it.  However, any step forward could be considered  a step of good faith.

Needless to say, the potential cooperation of two powers with a deep history of mistrust, disdain, and standoffs is a sign that what may seem implausible today is the most obvious course of action tomorrow.  What may seem an implausible solution to the question of nuclear weapons in the hands of some countries but not others in 2009 will be the most accepted solution 20 years from now.

Popularity: 1% [?]