The latest developments in post-Soviet space indicate serious omissions in American policy, addressing the establishment of US-loyal regimes in the ex-Soviet republics. In actual fact, the “colour revolutions” in Georgia, the Ukraine and Kyrgyzstan additionally complicated both the situation in these countries and their problems, caused by the serious economic crisis.
Thus, Georgia becomes more and more discontented with Saakashwili, the Ukraine is overwhelmed by chaos, while Kyrgyzstan is permanently unstable and the local government is torn by growing internal discord. Meanwhile, the Presidents of Azerbaijan and Kazakhstan, Ilham Aliev and Nursultan Nazarbaev, who were re-elected in spite of the lack of US “support”, managed to keep stability in their countries and to continue the implementation of economic reforms.
The main reasons for the mistakes in Washington's foreign policy are the inadequate assessment of the situations in CIS countries, the rendering of support to unsuitable political figures or outright populists, as well as the gradual exhaustion of the so called “colour revolutions”. All of these pose serious problems for the USA. Thus, at the end of December 2005 the Georgian newspaper “Georgian Times” noted that “the USA have been making serious errors with respect to Georgia. Unfortunately, the “rose revolution”, backed up by them, did us no good. Instead, it complicated the situation in the country and generated anti-American sentiments in Georgian society.”
Meanwhile, Washington is unwilling to admit its mistakes and prefers to cast the blame for its failures on others. When blaming Russia for trying to take advantage of the energy dependency of the Ukraine, the Americans tend to forget their own policy for energy pressure and imposing of embargoes.
At the beginning of 2006 the British newspaper “The Independent” paid attention to the fact that the Ukraine, Russia and some other countries, which import energy resources, frequently admonish the usage of raw materials as a political instrument. “How should we perceive US military superiority or the positions of the US dollar as a world-wide currency – the newspaper experts ask – is it possible that taking advantage of them deserves approval and does it comply with the principles of the free market, which are so loudly acclaimed by the USA? The gas dispute between Russia and the Ukraine is one of many examples of ruthless application of the so called “double standards” in attacks against Moscow”.
Claiming that Moscow uses its resources as a political instrument, the USA ignore the fact that before the latest leap in the prices of natural gas Moscow had actually been subsidizing the Ukraine with USD 3 – 5 billion per year. This amount exceeds the overall EU support for Kiev for the last 14 years (as regards US support – in 2005 it amounted only to USD 174 million).
The latest failures of Washington in the post-Soviet space (especially in the context of growing domestic criticism against US policy to Iraq) could further radicalize the behaviour of US administration. It is possible, for example, that it would stake on the victory of anti-Russian circles in the Ukrainian elections in March 2006, including by means of tampering with election results. This was suggested by the US Secretary of State, Condolisa Rise, and the CIA Director, Porter Gos, to President Yushchenko during their visit to Kiev at the end of 2005.
It is also possible that the so called “colour revolutions” pattern be tested during the March elections in Belarus and to this end Washington has been allocating significant funds for the local NGOs and the media, which act against President Lukashenko.
Institute For Balkan And European Researches