Euro-Atlantism is a reality we must take into account

RIA NOVOSTI

Vagif GUSEINOV
Valdaiclub.com interview with Vagif Guseinov, Director at the Institute of Strategic Studies and Analysis, Editor-in-chief of Vestnik Analitika (Analyst’s Bulletin)

1. Do you think the European partners will accept the security pact proposed by President Dmitry Medvedev? Which of its provisions are most important to Europe and Russia?
Europe is unlikely to accept the pact; it is satisfied with the situation in the sphere of security characterized by Western military and political domination. It is based on the Euro-Atlantic alliance, which the United States and most European countries think proved effective during the Cold War.
Euro-Atlantism remains a key factor of consolidation in the changed conditions, even though its influence has weakened, and an attractive feature for a number of countries that have not yet joined the alliance.
The reasons for this are, first, the inertia of political mentality noted for Cold War residues, and second, a natural desire to resist jointly new major challenges and threats to European and global stability and peace.
Euro-Atlantism is a reality we must take into account when considering options of a new structure of European security.
Its main drawback is that it divides Europe, wittingly or unwittingly, into more and less worthy countries; that is, it contains a potentially dangerous virus of inequality in the field of security.
The Russian security pact takes this into account, which is its main advantage. In addition, it proposes establishing legal limits for all the international organizations working in Europe, including military political unions, whose activity is currently limited by only their statutes and strategies.

2. Can the proposed European security pact be implemented in the framework of NATO’s new strategic concept?
That’s not the point. The pact cannot be squeezed into a narrower bloc strategy of NATO. Instead, we should ponder possibilities to implement the new NATO strategy if the European security pact is adopted, which I don’t think would be a problem. However, the North Atlantic alliance rejects any forms of binding international obligations and any limits on its activity.
Moreover, the proposed pact better meets modern realities and development prospects of Europe and the world. As for the new NATO strategy presented by Madeleine Albright’s commission (Madeleine Albright chairs NATO’s Strategic Concept Expert Group), it contains many elements which a German analyst aptly described as a desire to determine the future by means of the recent past and the present.

3. The last EU-Russia summit demonstrated both sides’ commitment to integration, as evidenced by discussions of visa requirement changes for Russians. What lies ahead for EU-Russian integration? What could be the reaction of the United States (NATO)?
Russia should not, and does not seem to, aim for EU membership. But this does not detract from the importance of promoting integration and multilateral cooperation between Russia and the EU and its individual member countries.
I am moderately optimistic about EU-Russian integration. It will be a difficult process that could be hindered by many obstacles due to the sides’ different stands and unavoidable conflict of interest, as well as by resistance of some anti-rapprochement forces. But the main thing is that both sides understand the importance of their rapprochement and consolidation.
As for the attitude of the United States and NATO, I think sober approach towards Russia will gradually prevail there. In fact, the process has already begun. The same concerns rapprochement between the EU and Russia, which will have positive consequences for the Untied States and NATO, even though they are wary of it.

http://en.rian.ru/valdai_op/20100603/159287364.html
http://valdaiclub.com/content/vagif-guseinov-euro-atlantism-reality-we-must-take-account