Azerbaijan, Baku, 6 Dec / Trend corr. E.Tariverdiyeva, R.Agayev/ European security architecture may be maintained providing compromises and direct dialogue with Russia.
"In my opinion, there is no need for a new European security architecture providing that NATO maintains a level of direct and honest dialogue with Russia and assumes positions that pave the way for a greater understanding, accommodation and collaboration between the two sides," U.S. expert for security Ioannis Stivachtis said.
The meeting of OSCE fifty Foreign Ministers in Helsinki actively focused on the questions of European security, including Russia's proposal on the new transatlantic security agreement.
This proposal made by the President of Russia Dmitry Medvedev did not find support in OSCE. Medvedev has been insisting on the new agreements on European security for already long, emphasizing that only NATO is insufficient for ensuring the security in Europe.
From the perspective of those Americans and Europeans who see Russia as a threat, then there is no substitution for NATO. It is expected that NATO will continue containing Russia as it contained the Soviet Union during the Cold War, Stivachtis said.
Stivachtis believes there are perspectives that it is the existence of NATO that makes Russia assuming a more threatening diplomatic position. "A new European security architecture which could accommodate Russia and its fears is seen as the solution to the current state of relations between Russia and the Transatlantic Community," Stivachtis, Director for International Studies Program at Virginia Tech, said to Trend via e-mail.
Stivachtis believes there is no need for a new European security architecture providing that NATO maintains a level of direct and honest dialogue with Russia and to pave the way for a greater understanding and collaboration between the two sides.
"But Russia should also reciprocate for otherwise it would signal that it is indeed a threat," he said.
European observers believe Russia indeed plays an important role to provide European security.
As to the Russian President's idea itself, it is already acknowledged in Europe, that the security challenges of the 21st century are broad and demand multilateral responses, European expert for security Kamil Zwolski said.
According to Zwolski, one of the most urgent security challenges for Europe in the foreseeable future will be securing the stable access to the energy resources. "This is also the area where Russia's policy plays the vital role," Kamil Zwolski, a researcher in the field of European Union and international security at the University of Salford, UK, said to Trend via e-mail.
Russian Americanist historian, political scientist Anatoliy Utkin also believes that the dialogue and efforts of both sides are necessary to ensure effective architecture of European security. "Cold War will finish, when there will be created general command with the strategic nuclear forces of Russia and West, or NATO or new organization, which will include Russia and the USA," Director of Centre for International Studies of the Institute of the USA and Canada of the Academy of Sciences of Russia, Anatoly Utkin, told Trend . Russia or USA can not carry out policy of large union in this organization only with their national decision, he said.
However, he said that Russian political elite's distrust on NATO can complicate relations with Russia.
According to Zwolski, The Russian President creates an ambiguous framework for the cooperation with the new US President. "Medvedev on the one hand says: yes, we want to cooperate with the new US Administration. Yet on the other hand he demands that the new President changes the US policy in Europe completely and de facto suggests that the US presence in Europe is not necessary at all," he said.
Undoubtedly there is a necessity for a change in the European structure of security, and the main problem is that the USA builds one-sided security system, not advising with NATO, Russian political scientist Gleb Pavlovsky said.
Being the member of NATO, the USA does not trust this block in the questions of anti-missile security of the country and some allies, the expert said. "This speaks of the high degree of the ineffectiveness of this block, because it seems that for some unknown reasons, the USA can not or does not want to solve this problem inside NATO. But indeed, the block exists exclusively for resolving security questions," the President of the Effective Politics Foundation, Pavlovsky, told Trend .
Have any feedback? Contact our journalist at [email protected]