A few days ago we posted some comments and video from American observers on U.S.-Russian relations, which included some exchange of views on realism and the whole “reset button” approach to the Kremlin currently being offered by the Obama Administration.  Inevitably this comes back around to assigning blame for “who started it” or whose fault it was for the deterioration of relations.

Dmitry Rogozin, Russia’s Ambassador to NATO (who also heads up the ultra-nationalist Rodina party) has penned an article in The New York Times, making it very clear whose fault Russia believes it is.

In essence, the entire future of the Euro-Atlantic region is at
stake. Missing this opportunity to come to an agreement is fraught with
the danger of sliding into chaos on security matters. NATO will be the
first to suffer, in terms of both the security and economic stability
of its member-states. If there is no political progress in relations
with the West, Moscow will have to look eastward to define its foreign
policy. Then the West will be faced with new economic and security
difficulties.

Is this in NATO’s interests, with its operation
in Afghanistan at a deadlock and no chance (as NATO allies themselves
confess) of solving the Iranian nuclear problem without Russia? Is it a
good idea to tease the Russian bear by continuing to support regimes in
Georgia and Ukraine only so they stand ready to be used as a
counterweight to Russia?

If so, security in Europe is not
increasing but, on the contrary, degrading. The conflict zone between
the West and Russia is being expanded artificially through no fault of
Moscow.

Last 5 posts by Robert Amsterdam

• Practicing Legal Nihilism - November 24th, 2009
• Energy Blast - Nov 24, 2009 - November 24th, 2009
• Today in Russian Business - Nov 24, 2009 - November 24th, 2009
• RA's Daily Russian News Blast - Nov 24, 2009 - November 24th, 2009
• Russia's China Envy - November 23rd, 2009