战略与国际研究中心-PONARS-Policy-Memo-005_6页_86kb

Summary of Domestic Politics of NATO Expansion in Russia: Implications for American Foreign Policy by Michael McFaul (October 1997)

I. Core Content

This policy memo analyzes the impact of NATO expansion on Russian domestic politics and its implications for American foreign policy. It explores why NATO expansion has not significantly affected Russian domestic politics and what factors could disrupt this status quo in the future.

II. Main Points

A. Internal Factors

1. Yeltsin's Leadership

   • Yeltsin's victory in the 1996 presidential election ensured a pro-Western stance.
   • If Zyuganov had won, NATO expansion would have been a more contentious issue.
   • Russian liberals have dominated policy-making, despite internal challenges like the Chechen war.

2. Weak Opposition

   • The Russian Communist Party and its allies have been ineffective as an opposition force.
   • They have supported Yeltsin's government and failed to mobilize significant public opposition.
   • A cohesive nationalist opposition has not emerged.

3. Domestic Priorities Over Foreign Policy

   • Russian society prioritizes domestic issues over foreign policy.
   • In the 1996 election, foreign policy received minimal attention.
   • Most Russians still favor cooperation with the West.

4. Economic Lobbies and Pro-Western Orientation

   • Pro-Western economic elites (e.g., Gazprom, oil companies) dominate policy-making.
   • These groups prioritize access to Western capital and markets.
   • They have supported NATO expansion to maintain engagement with the West.

5. Russian Weakness

   • Russian leaders accepted NATO expansion due to a lack of credible alternatives.
   • The Chechen war demonstrated Russia's military and political vulnerability.

B. External Factors

1. American Strategy of Engagement

   • The US strategy of supporting Russian reform and integration helped ease tensions.
   • Personal ties between Clinton and Yeltsin played a key role in defusing the issue.
   • The "group of eight" summit in Denver was well-timed and provided incentives for cooperation.

2. NATO Membership Selection

   • Hungary, Czech Republic, and Poland are seen as more anti-Russian than the Balkans or Baltic states.
   • These countries are perceived as more "European" and less of a threat to Russian interests.

3. Unclear US Motivations

   • The US's vague motivations for expansion made it easier for Russian elites to accept the decision.
   • The "electoral" explanation was more reassuring than other interpretations.

4. Russia's Lack of Counter-Options

   • Russia has no viable alternative to NATO expansion.
   • Attempts to form military alliances or deepen ties with Belarus or China are economically unfeasible.

III. Future Risks

A. Internal Factors

1. Leadership Change and Opposition Rise

   • Yeltsin's eventual exit could lead to a shift in the political landscape.
   • The next election may see the rise of protest candidates and authoritative administrators, who are less aligned with Western interests.

2. Breakdown of the Liberal Coalition

   • Economic elites are becoming more divided, which could affect their unified support for NATO engagement.
   • This division may lead to a more fragmented approach to foreign policy.

3. Postponement of Elections

   • Delaying elections could lead to instability and possibly a coup or military takeover.
   • This would likely result in a more anti-Western government.

4. Shift in Foreign Policy Significance

   • As the revolutionary transition ends, foreign policy may become more salient.
   • Economic growth could lead to a more diverse middle class with different foreign policy preferences.
   • Conversely, lack of growth could fuel nationalist scapegoating.

B. External Factors

1. Further NATO Expansion Without Russia

   • If NATO expands without Russia, it could cause more domestic unrest and increase anti-Western sentiment.

2. Belligerent NATO Actions

   • Russian nationalists are waiting for a provocation from NATO that could justify opposition to expansion.

3. Russian Military Conflict

   • Any war involving Russia could strengthen nationalist forces.
   • However, the likelihood of such a conflict remains low.

IV. Recommendations for American Foreign Policy

1. Strengthen NATO-Russian Relations

   • US diplomats must work to make the relationship with NATO meaningful for Russia.

2. Promote Transparency in NATO

   • Disseminate more information about NATO's new structure and goals to Russian audiences.

3. Integrate Russia into International Institutions

   • Encourage Russia's participation in institutions like the WTO, G8, and OSCE to counter fears of exclusion from Europe.

4. Support Russian Democracy

   • Continue and expand democratic assistance programs.
   • Insist on free and fair elections to ensure stability and support for liberal governance.

5. Engage with Russian Leaders

   • Maintain close ties with pro-Western leaders like Yeltsin.
   • Foster better understanding with leaders in the "gray zone," such as Lebed and Luzhkov.

6. Promote Economic Development

   • Support economic growth to strengthen the liberal government's position.
   • Economic development is unlikely to influence the next election in the short term.

7. Dialogue with Opposition Leaders

   • Develop informal channels with Russian nationalists and communists to better understand their motivations and ideas.
   • Encourage engagement through NGOs and academic institutions.

V. Key Takeaways

• NATO expansion has not significantly impacted Russian domestic politics due to weak opposition, economic interests, and Yeltsin's leadership.
• The current liberal coalition is fragile and could be disrupted by internal and external factors.
• US foreign policy must continue to support Russia's integration into international institutions and democratic development to maintain stability.
• The risk of a more anti-Western Russia increases if NATO expansion proceeds without Russia or if internal political dynamics shift.