FROM: Ralph A. Kuiper, Chairperson Peninsula Chapter World Affairs Council of

Northern California

SUBJECT: Report for the Peninsula Chapter Kickoff Event on September 14, 2014

“Russia and the West: Challenges for Diplomacy”

Speaker: Michael McFaul, Former Ambassador to Russia and Senior Fellow at

the Hoover Institution and Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies

Moderator: Ralph Kuiper, Chairperson for the Peninsula Chapter of the World

Affairs Council of Northern California

Overview and Abstract Michael McFaul, the Ambassador to Russia from 2012 to 2014, discussed the relations between

Russia and the Western countries, one of the most important of the many foreign policy challenges

facing the United States. He drew upon his personal familiarity with Russia and its history as well as

his relations with Russian diplomats and leaders to discuss the events following the Winter Olympics

in Sochi Russia, including the annexation of Crimea and incursions into Eastern Ukraine and the

resulting sanctions imposed by the Western Nations.

A major theme and framework was a description of how we arrived at the present relationship. He

contrasted the political science theories that relied on one hand on Structural elements like geography

and cultural issues versus Agency elements that relied more on the personalities involved. He

concluded that in this case the ideology and beliefs of Vladimir Putin are playing a more dominant

role.

While serving as the Ambassador the Obama Administration moved for a “reset” in U.S./Russian

relations that seemed to be making progress when Dmitry Medvedev was President. The relationship

changed dramatically when Vladimir Putin became President for the second time. Since McFaul left

office, events in Ukraine have sharpened differences between Russia and the West, adding to the

existing issues of Syria, Iran, missile defense, NATO expansion, Russia’s energy policies, Russia’s

relations with China, and the broader Middle East conflicts.

He described his understanding of Putin’s objectives based on his personal interactions. While

optimistic over the long run, he felt that it was essential to confront Putin’s aggressive behavior with

respect to Ukraine as it is against international norms to annex another country’s territory and to

conduct incursions into their territory as in Crimea and Eastern Ukraine. He was unsure of the

outcome in Ukraine as Putin’s methods and objectives remain uncertain and opaque. He

acknowledged that Russia’s perspective differs in that they see their actions in Ukraine as protecting

the interests of Russian speaking people in these territories and that their actions are expressions of

opposition to NATO’s Eastward expansion. However, he noted that the “reset” had accomplished

many positive steps long after NATO’s last expansion.

Michael McFaul Michael McFaul served as the U.S. Ambassador to Russia from 2012 to 2014 and is presently the

Peter and Helen Bing Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution where he is the Co-Director of the Iran

Democracy Project. Prior to this he was the Special Assistant to President Obama on the National

Security Council and as the Director of Russian and Eurasian Affairs. He is a professor of Political

Science and is affiliated with the Center for International Security and Cooperation within the

Freeman Spogli Institute of International Studies at Stanford. He spent substantial time in Russia as a

student and scholar and established many personal relations before his service in the administration.

He has conducted extensive research and been embedded in Eastern European and Soviet Union

history, politics and foreign policy since being a student. McFaul was raised in Montana and earned

a B.A. in International Relations and Slavic Languages and an M.A. in Slavic and East European

Studies from Stanford University. He also spent time as a student at St. Petersburg State University

and earned a PhD in International Relations from Oxford University as a Rhodes Scholar. His thesis

was on U.S. and Soviet intervention in revolutionary movements in Southern Africa.

He serves on the boards of several organizations that conduct research in and that are engaged with

Russia and Eastern Europe. He provides expert analyses in a variety of international news media and

reports. When he was the Director of the Center for Democracy Development and the Rule of Law at

Stanford he helped to develop the Draper Hills Summer Fellows Program that brings together

emerging civic leaders from developing countries all over the world to learn and share their

experiences. Ambassador McFaul spoke at the Kickoff Event in 2006 on “Promoting Democracy:

Can we should we?”

How Did We Get Here Ambassador McFaul noted that he has been with the Obama administration for close to 7 years

beginning with Obama’s run for the Presidency in 2008, and he was willing to discuss any issue

ranging from the sanctions imposed on Russia to President Obama’s jump shot. He said that he is a

recovering bureaucrat and is finding it a challenge to return to academia. A major theme in his

discussion was going to be “how did we get here” and he began by recounting George Schultz’s

stories of the Reagan’s administration dealings with Gorbachev which seemed like euphoria

compared to today’s involvement with Russia. Today’s challenges seem more like the cold war

except that we had clear understandings of what we were dealing with.

Today the uncertainty is more frightening as we have even heard President Putin threaten the use of

nuclear weapons. Unlike the cold war, today’s relations have become much more unpredictable, and

the question is why?

McFaul stated that in political science there are two major theories to address this broad question,

Structural and Agency Theories.

Structural Theory In the Structural Theory there are innate forces reflected by individuals and groups. These would

include geography, culture, economics, and the balance of powers. In today’s context the classic

realism would see that the basic drivers are the large states holding the balance of power. Russia has

emerged as a great power after the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991 and has become more

assertive. The United States can be seen in this context in that as it became more powerful it annexed

California and even became more belligerent to its neighbors.

Using “counterfactual thinking” one might imagine the outcomes if Russia had managed to

consolidate democracy and capitalism, even though very difficult. But Poland managed to do so and

has not threatened its neighbors. McFaul observed that democracies don’t fight one another.

Another counterfactual occurred at the Winter Olympics in Sochi when Vladimir Putin spoke of

uniting Russian-speaking people but not about invading Ukraine. At that time his obsession was with

creating the Eurasian Economic Union (EEU) to compete with the European Union (EU). In fact

Ukraine with its 45M potential consumers of Russian products would have been important for the

success of the EEU. In his last few weeks as Ambassador, McFaul noted that Russia wanted more

favorable relations with the West as evidenced by the release of Mikhail Khodorkovsky, the former

oil oligarch, and the “Pussy Riot” Girl singing group. The $50B Olympic party was intended to show

that Russia was part of the international community. The closing ceremony was a salute to Russian

cultural heritage by displaying all of the famous Russian authors, which would not have happened

during the Soviet days. They also had 5000 English speaking young people serving as greeters and

guides. So the question remains as to what happened to turn these positive signs around?

Reset Critics have suggested that it is all the fault of the United States, either having done too much or too

little. Examples of too much include lecturing them after the Soviet Union collapse and not paying

attention to their interests by bombing Serbia and expanding NATO. However, as McFaul noted

there was the “Reset” in between when things seemed to be improving thereby obviating the

criticism. There were very productive relations including the New START treaty and a new

transportation route through Russia for military equipment to Afghanistan instead of having to go

through Pakistan. The demise of Osama Bin Ladin would have been more difficult otherwise

considering Pakistan’s interest. Additionally Russia helped to initiate tougher sanctions against

Iran’s nuclear program and the U.S. helped Russia into the World Trade Organization. At this point

60% of Russians had a positive view of the United States. So, what happened?

On the too little side the argument is that the U.S. did nothing when Russia invaded Georgia,

President Reagan did little when the Soviet’s cracked down on the Solidarity Movement, and

Eisenhower did little to “roll back” Communism. Therefore, Putin’s advisors probably told him the

U.S. would do nothing if he moved into Crimea and Eastern Ukraine.

The Agency Theory At this point it is clear that the Agency Theory in which individuals and personalities are the most

important in framing the decisions and outcomes dominates the argument. McFaul holds that the

change from Dmitry Medvedev to Vladimir Putin changed everything. President Obama had

invested much in relations with Medvedev when in 2011 Putin decided to run for reelection. McFaul

was still predicting continuity and that the reset policies should continue, but the President thought

that the individual would make a big difference in the politics. Putin as it turned out did not see

things in win/win terms but in zero sum terms and the U.S. as a competitor, not a partner. This

suspicious outlook probably stemmed from his KGB background.

Russia held parliamentary elections in December of 2011, but social media exposed the wide spread

fraud and hundreds of thousands demonstrated, not unlike what had been seen in the Middle East. In

order to preempt a similar result, Putin began a TV propaganda campaign blaming the U.S. as the

instigator. McFaul himself was also blamed as the emissary of these undermining efforts. The

fleeing of Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych fit Putin’s claim of fomenting revolution and

regime change and therefore had to be countered by actions including the annexation of Crimea and

the incursion into Eastern Ukraine.

Ambassador McFaul concluded his remarks by stating he did not feel we are destined to have

confrontations with Russia because of history, culture, and its rise to power. But in the short term we

will have to deal with Vladimir Putin whose objectives are not clear or transparent as he continues to

think in zero sum terms. He will continue as the Russian leader for some time to come and we must

learn to deal with him.

Putin Ambassador McFaul first met Vladimir Putin in the spring of 1991 when he had been invited by the

mayor of St. Petersburg to work with the National Democratic Institution, a group of somewhat pro-

western liberals. Members of Los Angeles and New York city councils joined the activities and were

surprised that there were no property taxes until they were reminded that no one owned property. At

this time Putin had been working for the mayor for five years. McFaul noted that Putin had never

been elected to public office until Yeltsin brought him to Moscow and he subsequently ran for

President in 2000 after Yeltsin resigned. McFaul saw this as another example of the triumph of

Agency versus Structure. Yeltsin picked Putin and so he became president. Putin had gone from a

low level bureaucrat to President in six months.

Vladimir Putin famously stated that the most tragic event in the 20th

Century was the collapse of the

Soviet Union and that anyone who does not lament the collapse does not have a heart and anyone

who does not want to recreate it does not have a brain. However, he also saw that he had to deal with

realities and recognized that capitalistic relations with Exxon Mobile were essential for Russia’s oil

and gas industry.

He has become more conservative on social issues over time in that he has embraced the Russian

Orthodox Church, has accused the west of being pro LGBT, and that we don’t believe in God. He

was even making progress with American Christian organizations until the Ukraine situation. He has

seen this as a way to strengthen public support in Russia. He has also become more conservative

about markets and less trusting of democracy, as it is too unpredictable. McFaul noted that he is

becoming more isolated as he rarely comes to work in the Kremlin and stays in his dacha where he

meets all his visitors. The additional negative aspect is that no one is telling him of his mistakes.

Sanctions and Missed Russian Opportunities The U.S. supported the EEU and Yanukovych was negotiating with the EU when he suddenly refused

to sign the agreement. McFaul felt that he should have let the resulting demonstrations peter out.

Instead he quelled the riots with force and 100 people were killed which led to his downfall. This

was another possible win/win situation, especially since the Canadian ambassador was negotiating a

free trade agreement with Russia. McFaul had helped the administration shape the sanctions, but he

was not in office when Putin annexed Crimea. He noted that he left his position immediately after

the Olympics, so the annexation was “not on his watch.” He was grateful because he is now back at

Stanford and his son is now at Gunn High School as he had promised several years earlier. Sanctions

were essential, as Russia could not be allowed to annex another country’s territory without

consequences. He supports sanctions, but they will only have a long-term impact, and we will be

involved for a long time.

Crimea With respect to Crimea, he felt that western reporting was not good. For example, there was no real

referendum in Crimea. Only 60% are ethnic Russians and additionally proven voter fraud clearly

demonstrated that the vote for annexation could not have been 98% as reported in the press.

Similarly, the majority of people in Donetsk in Eastern Ukraine are not ethnic Russians. Conditions

in Crimea are not good, but under the circumstances Putin will invest what is necessary to prevent an

abject failure.

The Media Social media does not play a major role in communications and as a news source in Russia although

it is growing rapidly. Many people get their news via the Internet, but the major source is from

television, especially among the older population. Most of the TV sources are owned by the state and

they are used effectively as a propaganda tool as evidenced by the disapproval of the U.S. going to

70% from only 40%. McFaul has over 130,000 followers on Twitter and Facebook. (He took a photo

of the gathering to incorporate into his twitter messages.) He said that our State Department

encourages its use and provides advise on how to attract more followers by adding some personal

notes in addition to a policy point. The media is difficult to deal with when outright lies are

employed.

Russian Economy and Oil Prices The Russian economy is at zero growth rate or worse, and needs the price of oil to be at about

$118/barrel to break even instead of its present $98/barrel. This situation will be worse once the

West and the U.S. begins to export more energy into the region. The recent major deal between

Russia and China requires a new pipeline that gives most leverage to China. In the mean time Russia

is not investing in a Silicon Valley type entity. As a result few investors will be attracted to Russia.

Possible Cooperation Ambassador McFaul did not see many opportunities to deal with Russia in a win/win situation, and

there are not obvious ways to Reset the relations. In the short run the only response is to contain

what Putin is doing is not to cooperate. McFaul felt that Putin would continue on to Kiev if we don’t

put up resistance. We share some objectives such as not wanting Iran to have nuclear weapons and to

resist the Islamic State from gaining more ground in the Middle East. Following up on the example

of the young people at the Olympics, he noted that there are opportunities to exchange students

between Russia and the United States. An example is the Stanford University Russian Forum,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanford_US%E2%80%93Russia_Forum.

Personal Notes Ambassador McFaul shared some thoughts on his travels from his home in Montana as a teenager to

Stanford and to his position as the Ambassador to Russia. Chance played a major role and he

encouraged the students present to be open to opportunities when they appeared. Coming to Stanford

was one for him as well as his first trip out of the country being to Russia. There was a major

political revolution taking place while he was there and he committed to an academic career even

though there were few opportunities. Chance played a role again when a former classmate, Susan

Rice, invited him to join the Obama campaign in 2008 and he decided to “get on the train.” When

the usual government stint was up he was again offered the chance to become the Ambassador to

Russia and he persuaded his family to take advantage of the opportunity. Initially it went the way he

hoped with Medvev in office and he is somewhat depressed that things have taken the turn they have.

He wanted the young people there to remain convinced that through engagement the world could be

made a better place.

In Summary: Ambassador Michael McFaul presented his views on why the relationship between Russia and the

West, in particular the United States, had arrived at what seems to be a zero sum situation. He made

the case for why the Agency Theory of foreign policy may be the more dominant than the Structural

Theory in this case as Vladimir Putin is having a larger role in the relationship than national interests

or geography. He sees a protracted situation in Ukraine with western imposed sanctions having an

effect over a long period of time. He is still optimistic over the long haul with opportunities for

cooperation.

Eight students from Gunn High School in Palo Alto helped to set up the venue and assisted during the

Q&A session. We will continue to look for ways to support their interest in international affairs.

They include: (1) Monica Boerger, (2) George Lee, (3) Ian McElfresh, (4) Camilla Samuelsson, (5)

Anthony Tran, (6) Donovan Wallach, and (7) Tyler Wong. Their teacher, Lauren Cory, accompanied

them.

The Peninsula Chapter’s next event will be in the Los Altos Youth Center, at 1 North San Antonio

Road, on Wednesday, October 1, beginning with refreshments at 7:00 and the program from

7:30 to 9:00 PM. Paul Wise, Professor of Child Health and Society and Senior Fellow at the

Stanford FSI Institute for International Studies, will present “Ebola and Global Health and

Security.”

Regards,

Ralph A. Kuiper