The Ups and Downs of Russia-U.S. Relations; From World War II to the Collapse of the Soviet Union

Introduction (Despite Vladimir Putin's hopes for improved relations with Washington and efforts made since Donald Trump's rise to power in the U.S. to repair ties with Russia, the U.S. President ultimately decided to impose new sanctions against Russia under pressure from Congress and lobbying groups starting late this month. In the past, the U.S. has condemned Russia's actions in Crimea and Ukraine alongside Europe and has imposed sanctions at times. However, the current sanctions, which will take effect in the last week of August, are due to Russia's involvement in the poisoning of former double agent Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia. The two were poisoned in March in Salisbury, England, using a type of nerve agent known as 'Novichok,' which is considered military-grade and was produced during the former Soviet Union. Moscow denies involvement in this incident. At the time of the incident, the U.S. President supported British Prime Minister Theresa May's stance against Russia, and the current sanctions are a continuation of that trend. The U.S. government has accused Russia of violating international laws and regulations prohibiting the use of chemical and biological weapons. In contrast, some believe that President Trump's actions are related to the midterm elections and creating a favorable atmosphere for the 2020 presidential election. The private meeting between U.S. and Russian leaders and the subsequent joint press conference held on July 16 in Helsinki not only failed to resolve the differences between Russia and the U.S. but also turned the President's performance and his responses to questions during the press conference into a central topic of discussion in American society. A significant number of Republican Party members joined the ranks of critics of the President from his own party, and Democrats intensified their criticisms. Although the House Judiciary Committee currently considers impeachment of Trump to be premature and unwarranted, the topic of impeachment has resurfaced. What is clear is that Trump's friendly relationship with Vladimir Putin, his reluctance to explicitly condemn Russian interference in the 2016 elections, and many of his managerial traits are under severe criticism. It seems that Trump's concern is not about Russian interference or lack thereof but rather about proving that he did not collude with the Russians. In fact, more than anything, he is heard saying 'there was no collusion.' Naturally, if Special Counsel Mueller's investigations conclude that there was effective collusion between Trump or members of his campaign team and the Russians to influence the election results, a fate similar to Richard Nixon's would await Donald Trump; however, this is a process that, the longer it takes, the less likely it is to materialize. Meetings between the leaders of two hostile countries are not unprecedented, and it can be said that it entirely depends on the President to decide on the appropriate manner of conduct and speech in meetings and discussions with foreign leaders, but the criticism directed at Trump is his disregard for reports from high-level security and counterintelligence officials confirming Russian interference in the elections. This is while some of these officials are appointees or ministers approved by him. Although he ultimately accepted their views, he simultaneously proposed inviting Putin for a visit to Washington, which sparked another wave of reactions and was somewhat contrary to his previous move. Susan Rice, National Security Advisor under President Obama, believes it was fundamentally a historical mistake for the U.S. President to have a private meeting with Putin, the Russian President. In an interview with an ABC television program host, she states: 'Not only Donald Trump but any other President should not sit for two hours next to one of the most hostile leaders in the world without anyone to assist him or take notes.' The perspective of American society - In summary, American society is sensitive to how its Presidents interact with foreign leaders, especially Russia, viewing it through the lens of national dignity and reputation. Although the ideological gap between the Soviet Union and the U.S. decreased after the Soviet collapse in 1991 and the Russians distanced themselves from communism, this did not reduce their gap and distance from the U.S. Trump's mild tone towards Putin has been criticized by various segments of American society from a reputational standpoint. This opposition has transcended political dimensions and is not limited to Democratic Party affiliates, the political opponents of the President; many Republican Party affiliates also object to Trump's leniency and softness towards Vladimir Putin. A broader look at the history of interactions between U.S. and Russian (Soviet) leaders reveals other dimensions of these political, cultural, and sociological differences. Temporally, this examination is divided into two periods: 1943-1991 (the time of the Soviet collapse and the beginning of the political life of the Russian Federation) and 1991 to the present (2018). What meetings have the leaders of the two countries had from World War II until now? Roosevelt and Stalin) Franklin Roosevelt, Joseph Stalin, and Winston Churchill, the then Prime Minister of Britain, met in Tehran in November 1943. This conference agreed on opening a second front against Nazi Germany and subsequently led to the Yalta Conference in Crimea (February 4-11, 1945). In the final stages of Germany's defeat and the end of World War II, Roosevelt secured Stalin's support for confronting Japan in the Pacific, while the Soviet Union was consolidating its spheres of influence in Eastern Europe. This cooperation continued smoothly until the signing of the Free Europe Declaration, which promised 'the establishment of democratic and elected institutions' to the people of Europe, but five months later, the leaders of the three major world powers gathered in Potsdam, located in the state of Brandenburg, West Germany. The main outcome of this conference was finalizing the terms of Japan's surrender, but the U.S. and Britain took this opportunity to strongly condemn Russia's efforts to impose communism in Poland, Czechoslovakia, Romania, Bulgaria, and Hungary. Shortly after this meeting, the Soviet Union distanced itself from the Western world, and the Cold War and arms race began. The Soviet Union viewed the U.S. Marshall Plan, which was implemented throughout Western Europe, as a tool for influence and control and the creation of export markets for American goods. Eisenhower and Bulganin) Ten years later, Dwight Eisenhower and Nikolai Bulganin, head of the Soviet Union's presidium, met in July 1955 in Geneva. This meeting paved the way for Nikita Khrushchev and Eisenhower to meet in September 1959 at Camp David, Maryland. John F. Kennedy and Khrushchev) Less than two years later, Nikita Khrushchev and John F. Kennedy met in June 1961 in Vienna, Austria, which is recorded in history as one of the worst meetings during the Cold War between the leaders of the two countries. Khrushchev mocked Kennedy over the Bay of Pigs issue, saying, 'Do six million (Cubans) really pose a threat to the omnipotent America?' The construction of the Berlin Wall began shortly after this meeting, and the Cuban missile crisis peaked during this period. Johnson and Kosygin) After that, Lyndon Johnson met with Alexei Kosygin in June 1967 in New Jersey. This discussion, which took place during the Six-Day War between Arabs and Israel and on the sidelines of Kosygin's speech at the United Nations, was a positive step in the relations between the two superpowers but could not progress beyond a certain limit. Nixon and Brezhnev) Subsequently, in the early 1970s, their successors, Richard Nixon and Leonid Brezhnev, had three meetings with each other and signed several important treaties, including the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty and the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Agreement. Ultimately, in August 1974, the Watergate scandal ended this relationship. Reagan - Gorbachev - George Bush) Ronald Reagan's contacts with Mikhail Gorbachev in the 1980s brought the two hostile rivals closer together. In a situation where the outbreak of a nuclear war meant mutual destruction, Ronald Reagan said to Gorbachev during their first summit in Geneva (November 1985), 'The United States and the Soviet Union are two global superpowers; the only countries capable of starting World War III, but at the same time, the only two countries that can bring peace to the world.' Following this message, in 1986, the two countries reached an implicit agreement on the principles and necessity of reducing their nuclear arsenals in Reykjavik (Iceland). A year later in Washington, the two superpowers moved towards reducing the arms race and agreed, and Gorbachev's cooperation with the next U.S. President, George H.W. Bush, continued in various arms-related fields, including chemical weapons. This cooperation continued during the Gulf War in Iraq but ceased with the collapse of the Soviet Empire in 1991. According to the timeline from the U.S. State Department, between 1943 and the collapse of the Soviet Union, a total of 26 meetings took place between U.S. and Soviet leaders. With the collapse of the Soviet Union, the era known as the Cold War came to a close. In the new era where the Russian Federation replaced the ideological system of the Soviet Union, there was hope that cooperation between the two countries would expand. The early years of this relationship also showed such signs. However, the subsequent course of historical developments has been accompanied by many ups and downs. In the second part of this review, we will address the relations between the two countries from 1991 to the present. The opinions expressed in this note do not necessarily reflect the views of Radio Farda. Jalil Roshandel, Professor of Political Science at East Carolina University.