February 25, 2009

Verbatim, as delivered

Remarks by Chairman Berman at hearing, “From Competition to Collaboration: Strengthening the US-Russia Relationship”

We’re holding this hearing – our first full-committee hearing in the 111^th Congress -- to examine one of America’s most important – yet often neglected – bilateral relationships: with the Russian Federation. The Cold War is long over, and yet in recent times this relationship, that is the relationship between the United States and the Russian Federation, has been quite chilly. We don’t always agree. But Washington and Moscow face a number of common challenges that could form the basis for a more constructive partnership.

At the Munich Security Conference, Vice President Biden lamented the “dangerous drift in relations” between Russia and the NATO alliance, while at the same time calling for a reassessment of areas in which we can work together. The positive response his remarks generated among Russian officials indicates that Moscow may also be willing to, in the Vice President’s words, “press the reset button.”

At the heart of our relationship with Russia lie a number of inter-related foreign policy issues and challenges: Iran’s nuclear program, the war in Afghanistan, the future of NATO, peace and security in the Caucasus and the Balkans, missile defense, and arms control. Unfortunately, there has been a tendency in recent years to stovepipe these issues – addressing them in isolation without establishing a clear set of priorities or integrating them into – to use Professor Legvold’s words – “a comprehensive and coherent foreign policy.”

One important question concerns Russia’s perception of its vital interests, particularly its engagement with its “near abroad.” Some of Russia’s recent behavior toward its neighbors has been deeply troubling. Its decision to recognize South Ossetia and Abkhazia as independent states was a mistake that undermines regional stability. The recent dispute with Ukraine regarding the price and transit of gas left many Eastern Europeans without heat in the dead of winter. And Russia’s apparent role in persuading Kyrgyzstan to close a vital American air base on its territory – while allowing U.S. supplies to transit Russian territory – will complicate U.S. efforts to conduct essential military operations in Afghanistan.

How are we to understand these actions? Are they part of a larger pattern of behavior through which Russia is seeking to reassert its power over former Soviet states and define itself as America’s strategic competitor? This was the troubling conclusion that some observers reached last August when Russian President Medvedev spoke about regions where Russia has “privileged interests.” Or does Russia, as some others have suggested, perceive itself as acting in self-defense against an expansionist NATO and western encirclement?

Second, questions have been raised about the linkage between Russia’s sense of financial wellbeing and its foreign policy assertiveness. Higher oil prices, it has been argued, have increased Russia’s political and economic leverage and emboldened Moscow to oppose US policies it finds objectionable.

Yet Russia, like the U.S. and most of the world, has suffered from the global financial downturn. What opportunities, if any, has the current crisis created in terms of encouraging greater economic engagement with Russia? And would closer commercial ties help create the conditions for greater political cooperation down the road?

A third set of issues concerns NATO. While some members of the Alliance have argued that eastward enlargement will promote democracy and stability among aspiring members, Russia has charged that NATO is seeking to assert regional dominance and threatens Russian security. Is pausing or slowing the pace of enlargement likely to encourage greater cooperation from Russia in addressing challenges in the Balkans, Caucasus, and Iran? Should the Alliance make greater use of the NATO-Russia Council to engage Moscow as a partner?

It’s clear that improving our bilateral relations will require good will and serious effort by both sides. In that context, the Obama Administration and Congress should examine what steps we should take to shift the U.S.-Russia relationship from confrontation to collaboration.

For example, should we consider “graduating” Russia from the so-called Jackson Vanik trade restrictions? Should the US assist Russian efforts to progress more quickly toward membership in the World Trade Organization?

Clearly, part of the roadmap for WTO accession is implementation of the IPR agreement which was signed over two years ago in November 2006. While some progress has been made, I’m troubled by reports, for example, that has failed to take adequate enforcement actions against plants involved in producing pirated CDs and DVDs.

There are also numerous arms control, security and non-proliferation issues to be addressed by our countries in the coming year. Should the U.S. bring into force the U.S.-Russia Agreement for Nuclear Cooperation that the Bush Administration withdrew from Congress after the Georgia conflict, and under what circumstances? Should the new administration continue to pursue missile defense in the Czech Republic and Poland as it seeks to engage Russia in efforts to prevent the emergence of a nuclear-armed Iran?

And finally, what’s the appropriate role for the promotion of democracy, human rights and the rule of law in our relationship with Russia? The trends in recent years have been troubling. Journalists and opinion leaders who are critical of the government have suffered physical attacks and have even been murdered. Political pressure on the judiciary, corruption in law enforcement, and harassment of some non-governmental organizations undermine the accountability of the Russian government. There are also disturbing reports of vicious attacks motivated by xenophobia, neo-Nazism, or anti-Semitic tendencies. To what extent, and in what manner, should the U.S. continue to press Moscow on these issues?

The U.S.-Russia relationship is exceptionally complex. We undoubtedly will continue to agree on some issues, and disagree on others. But it clearly is in our national interest to promote more positive ties with Moscow if doing so will help us achieve some of our most urgent foreign policy goals, such as preventing Iran from developing a nuclear weapons capability. I believe that Iran should be at the top of the agenda in our bilateral discussions. 

The committee is fortunate to have three witnesses with us today who are uniquely qualified to help us answer some of these questions. Ideally, we’ll not only talk about what pressing the “reset” button might mean, but we’ll also fast-forward to consider the benefits to global security that improved U.S.-Russian relations might yield in the future.

It’s now my pleasure to turn to the distinguished ranking member, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, for any opening comments she may wish to make.