President Trump flew back home after his Helsinki rendezvous with Russian President Vladimir Putin to a gathering storm of criticism and outrage. Washington is awash in a mixture of disappointment, anger, and disgust that an American president would take the word of a Russian autocrat over the assessments of his own intelligence community on Moscow’s interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election. The furor grew to such a fever pitch that Trump attempted to clarify his prior statements.
Members of Congress are threatening additional economic sanctions on Moscow as a sign of protest (the U.S. has already levied an astronomically large list of sanctions on Russia, including three statutes and at least four executive orders that encompass 131 pages of individuals or entities banned or restricted from doing business with U.S. persons). Even media outlets typically supportive of the president have written editorials blasting Trump for his coziness to the Kremlin.
Trump absolutely could have handled himself far better than he did—indeed, the only way the president could have done worse was if he hugged Putin. But however disturbing Trump’s neglect was on the question of Russian electoral meddling, we all run a risk of forgetting what is truly important: that U.S.-Russia relations are at dangerously low levels, and that is unsafe and unsustainable.
Washington has a poor habit of concentrating on the object of the day to the exclusion of the questions that determine whether the U.S. national security is protected. Amidst the polarization of the moment, it is crucial not to lose sight of reality.
First, notwithstanding Trump’s unfortunate rhetorical performance on stage with Putin, the president is ultimately correct on the policy—and more important, Washington elites have been wrong for many, many years.
As Trump has mentioned time and time again, it is indeed far better if the United States and Russia get along than not. The reasons for this are not hard to figure out: While Moscow is a poor and dull economic power and a shell of its former Soviet glory, it is still the world’s largest nuclear weapons power whose foreign policy decisions during the last four years have caused pain and consternation to many in its neighborhood. We may not like or trust Vladimir Putin, but the reality is that Russia is still a formidable regional state with a vested interest in many of the world’s trouble spots, from Syria and Ukraine to the Black Sea region and the Korean Peninsula.
Sanctioning the Russians on the assumption that Putin will change his behavior or dramatically reorient his foreign policy is at least as delusional as believing that Moscow has not interfered in the democratic processes of the U.S. and Europe.
The U.S. has no plausible alternative other than to try to find points of commonality with Russia. Long-term diplomatic isolation and economic pressure on Moscow is highly unlikely to rescue a bilateral relationship that desperately needs a reprieve. And as Putin has exhibited since Russia’s annexation of Crimea and the corresponding U.S. sanctions in retaliation, he is highly unlikely to back down in response to pressure alone.
A coherent and effective U.S. policy on Russia requires a carrot-and-stick approach. Trump’s decision to meet with Putin this week, an appropriate and pragmatic one, will hopefully establish far more resilient communication channels between these two nuclear superpowers and begin to turn around an acrimonious bilateral relationship.
There is one more reality to consider. At the same time the Trump administration works to improve relations with Moscow, it must also keep the Russian threat in perspective.
Moscow relishes the spoiler role, but at its core, Russia is a middle power with an anemic economy, no strong allies, and serious social problems within its borders.
As of last year, Russia’s gross domestic product was approximately $1.5 trillion, a relatively paltry figure for a country that once administered a system of proxy states during the Cold War. The European Union, by contrast, boasts a $17.2 trillion GDP and (next to the U.S.) remains the envy of the businesses around the world searching for new opportunities. In comparison, Russia has a static, natural-resource driven economy that is dependent on the oil and gas industry.
Russia’s military operations in Syria and Eastern Ukraine may lead one to believe that Moscow is now a formidable conventional military power. Again, the numbers tell a different story: In 2017, due in large measure to western sanctions and declining crude oil prices, Moscow’s defense budget was about $61 billion. This figure may seem large, but it is peanuts compared to a U.S. defense budget that is set to climb to $716 billion in FY 2019. For comparison, the U.S. military is set to spend 38 percent of Russia’s entire military budget ($23.3 billion) on repairing physical infrastructure.
Regarding military power, Washington and Moscow are poles apart.
This, of course, does not mean the U.S. can sanction or pressure Russia into submission. It can’t, and it would be counterproductive to try. America must push back against Moscow when our national security interests are at stake. But Russia, while certainly problematic, is not the 10-foot tall monster many in Washington and the media claim.
U.S.-Russia relations are as adversarial as they have been in decades. Instead of relitigating Trump’s unfortunate remarks on Russia and the 2016 campaign, or repeatedly expecting this president to act at all like his predecessors, Washington should focus its attention and resources on what is truly important: Pursuing U.S. policies that most benefit Americans, including decreasing the chances of conflict with Russia.
Daniel DePetris (@DanDePetris) is a contributor to the Washington Examiner’s Beltway Confidential blog. He is a fellow with Defense Priorities.
