LACK OF TRUST

This year, the Munich Security Conference, which is the world’s most authoritative foreign policy forum, took place in a rather decadent mood. There were statements about the crisis of liberal democracy and the Western values, as well as the changing world order. Nevertheless, there was no clear answer to the question whether this phenomenon is temporary or whether it is time to look for ways to adapt to new realities.

The event was opened with a 90-page report entitled Post-Truth, Post-West, Post-Order? Main topics of the report were: disunity within the European Union, security threats posed by terrorist groups, growing popularity of far-right parties, strengthening of countries such as Russia and China, which many in the West believe are authoritarian. However, the main reason behind this pessimistic mood was the new host of the White House Donald Trump. His arrival has intensified the talks about “the strongest uncertainty ever” on both sides of the Atlantic. This obviously resulted in spreading of the lack of trust in relations between the US and Europe. In fact, most European politicians are frightened with unpredictability of the new American leader. This fearing is so intense that even the statements of the Russian and Iranian Foreign Ministers Sergei Lavrov and Mohammad J. Zarif about “the sunset of the post-West world order” sound rather weak.

For instance, The New York Times called the last conference “absurd” blaming only Trump, who brings chaos to once orderly and joined ranks of the western states because “his administration contradicts itself.” The US president “responds through Twitter to the last guy in the room or what he’s just seen on TV, has no notion of or interest in European history, and has turned America’s word into junk.” Therefore, “Europeans are reeling”. But for some reason no one cares why the Europeans get guidance from Washington. On the contrary, NYT carefully lists the causes of EU’s current weaknesses such as the notorious Brexit, and the migration crisis, nasty right-wing trends, and the long-standing systemic crisis.

The US Vice-President Mike Pence, the US Secretary of Defense James Mattis, the US Secretary of Homeland Security John F. Kelly and members of Congress came to Munich to soothe European partners. While Trump called NATO “an outdated” organization during his campaign, all of these gentlemen pledged support for their partners in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization “on behalf of the President”. In his speech, Pence recalled the indestructible ties of Europe and the United States: “The fates of the United States and Europe are intertwined. Your struggles are our struggles. Your success is our success. And ultimately, we walk into the future together.” However, many of these words seemed too generic and pompous. The NYT noticed that Pence and Mattis came and exited without taking questions from the audience, and Pence “never mentioned the European Union, whose fragmentation Trump encourages.” The newspaper also quotes Wolfgang Ischinger, the chairman of the Munich conference, who told that “if Trump continues to advocate against the European Union, it would amount to a nonmilitary declaration of war”.

It seems the Americans came to Munich with their own mini-program, made the Europeans rightly nervous. In fact, Washington requests that the NATO partners increase military spending, which is obviously quite a fair request. After all, the US spends 3.3% of GDP to NATO, while the individual share of the UK, France and Turkey equals about 2% of GDP. Germany, the Netherlands and Spain spend about 1.2%, while Luxembourg and Iceland spend almost nothing. Apparently, the new US administration has decided to set the record straight, which means the Europeans either agree on higher costs, or say goodbye to American military support in the Organization.

On the other hand, Washington gets a number of significant advantages on the international arena and the EU will hardly be willing to refuse the US backup. So, the question is not related to NATO’s relevancy or whether the EU is able to ensure its security and independence having its own army but who will put the squeeze on the opponent. Most likely the EU countries will spend from national budgets much larger than the cost of maintaining the NATO plus the cost of weaponry. For example, the German Minister of Finance Wolfgang Schäuble and Chancellor Angela Merkel have promised to increase the military spending. But this is a two-edged sword: many key EU countries are on the eve of elections, and the question of financing NATO is a tasty foreign policy issue for any campaign. So, the real hit is yet to come.

Another important theme in the spotlight of the conference was the Russian-Western relations, in particular the relations between Russia and the United States amidst the ongoing war in Syria and the recent deterioration of situation in the south-east of Ukraine. But Trump did not show up in Europe, and Putin, whose famous speech at the conference ten years ago is still remembered, ignores the forum for several years. Instead, Sergei Lavrov voiced the Kremlin’s stance: “NATO remains a Cold War institution. The world has become neither ‘Western-centric’, nor a safer and more stable place. This is evident in the results of ‘democratisation’ in the Middle East and North Africa, and in other places too”. He added that Moscow wants constructive and pragmatic relations with everyone, although it will not retreat its own vision of the world. Everyone was waiting for the details from the US, and indeed some of the statements were made. Mr. Pence speaking in Munich on behalf of Trump assured his European partners that the United States will continue to call on Russia to account for its actions, even despite the fact that they are now looking for a common ground for cooperation. Prior to that, Mattis said about the impossibility of military cooperation with Russia. And all this was said immediately after the National Security Advisor for Trump, Michael Flynn, was forced to resign due to the fact that in December, he discussed the sanctions with the Russian diplomat, and then not informed Mr. Pence about this. Trump’s new advisor is General Herbert McMaster, who believes that Russia pursues aggressive goals and is trying to destroy the order that has emerged in Europe after the Cold War. But, on the other hand, just before Munich during the first official meeting with Sergei Lavrov, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson at the G20 summit in Bonn, no radical statements were made. However, the observers note that Mr. Pence avoided mentioning “Crimea” in his Munich speech when putting the responsibility for the Ukrainian aggression on the Russian Federation. So, the foggy relations between Moscow and Washington remain as is.

Moscow and Washington also contacted on February 16 in Baku. This was a meeting between the Russian Chief of the General Staff Valery Gerasimov and the US Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Joseph Dunford. Gerasimov and Dunford exchanged views on the current state of Russian-American relations and assessed the situation in international security in Europe, the Middle East, North Africa and other key regions of the world. However, according to the Pentagon, the dialogue in Azerbaijan does not mean a change in the US policy towards Russia, and was not related to the White House. According to Dunford, the parties, given the situation in Syria, took a moment to discuss the measures aimed at avoiding unwanted conflicts and any incidents. It is understandable: the aggravation, especially in the military sphere, do not need anyone to deal with what is already available. Trump, by the way, as stated by the White House spokesman Sean Spicer, a meeting was satisfied.

One can make the following conclusion from all the above: the White House does not have a sound foreign policy strategy yet. This includes the European countries, the role of NATO, relations with Russia, activities in the Middle East and even with Iran, which Trump and Pence have declared an enemy possibly thinking to identify the details of this step later. Apparently, the US administration is not yet fully formed and in a serious struggle, which continues. On the other hand, for the Europeans, it is even hard to think about living without the American leadership. Russia also looks a little lost without the usual level of pressure from the overseas and prefers to paraphrase the theses from ten years ago, but would not say anything new and unnecessary. Since the situation is indeed very vague, it is therefore incredibly interesting to know the upcoming agenda of the next meeting in Munich.