Written by Nasser Kandil,
It was remarkable for those who observe the Russian-US relationship the presidential meetings of the coordinator of the golden era in the US diplomacy the former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger who has arranged the withdrawal from Vietnam and led skillfully the openness up to China, he sponsored the understandings of cease-fire after the war of October 1973 between Syria and Israel. His held meetings for seven month included his meetings with the presidents of China, America, and Russia. He did not hide his keenness to provide the advice and the consultation to the leaders of the three countries regarding the danger of the collision, the escalation of the confrontations, and the adoption of a speech that claims imposing exclusivity or imposing wills, as long as the nuclear war is impossible. All of these three countries have what is enough of sidelines and capacities to wage a war of attrition that will force sitting at the table at the end, but after the profits of the negotiation have become much less than the cost incurred by each one of them in the absurd wars of attrition. Henry Kissinger did not stop talking about the hypothesis of the opportunity of winner-to-winner understanding in the international relationships, because confronting the terrorism is not mere a moral or humanitarian issue but a higher interest issue according to all these countries, moreover the system which they have has great motives to be based on the stability in the world, where it can grant the opportunities of prosperity and growth of their economies. Because reducing theexpenditure of the races of the nuclear arming will save many of the resources to be spent in the development plans and to have their revenues, and because most of the conflicts do not revolve around the ability of a team to extract unilateral influence in a region,however around sharing the influence in the solutions not in the wars depending on the ability of each party to disrupt the other's unilateral influence.
The few presentations of Kissinger and what is reported from him with optimism stems from the awareness of the leaders of Russia, China, and America that the understanding is their fate, he does not overcome the difficulties to announce an understanding especially according to the US President who is surrounded with a preemptive war that was waged against him under the title of accusing him with weakness comparing with the Russian President, but at the same time he does not negate the opportunities of unannounced slow understandings that lead to stop the attrition and to pave the way for showing the consequences of the understanding in order to build on them, until the moment of establishing a new world system which becomes an urgent necessary for each of the three countries. The absence of the system, the spread of chaos, and the danger of terrorism is more critical than the presence of a system even if it is subject to sharing with others, especially according to Washington which likes to talk about the exclusivity and the unilateral pole and the eagerness to restore it, since the exclusivity and the unilateral pole are no longer exist, so the insistence on not recognizing their fall does not revive them, on the contrary it leads to world with no system, where the chaos and the terrorism will grow and continue, and the number of the failing countries will increase,thus this will provide more opportunities for further chaos and terrorism.
Depending on Kissinger's experience in the concept of "step by step" which he adopted in reaching to an agreement of disengagement between Syria and Israel in 1974 after ten months of the war, the best scenario of Putin-Trump summit can be expected, which starts withsetting the rules of engagement and showing the forbidden areas at the state of collision, which means; the lines which must not be reached no matter how long the dispute remains and the struggle continues, this is known clearly by the two teams. According to Washington this is represented by not supporting the Korean President to cover his escalation against Washington, not to collide with the Syrian country, its army and its President, and at the same time not to provide the US cover to Saudi Arabia to wage a war against Qatar, on the other hand,Russia must not undermine the opponent regime in Ukraine, after that to link the conflict by identifying the issues around which the race, the competition and the conflict can continue, but under the ceiling of recording points and having more pressing papers waiting for a new round, taking into considerations the gas market and the race on the markets of the western Europe, testing each team of its capacities in order to reserve fixed shares in this market, as well as the direct relationship or through the allies with each of Iran, Turkey, and Israel whether positively or negatively on the basis of the exclusion of the threat of confrontations which affects the stability. The south of Syria will have such of these arrangements as the Kurds in its north and the Gulf,like controls to prevent the collisions and therefore to reach the appropriate moment for the major understandings or the historical deal, but to take into account the strategic maps, where Russia has a recognized presence politically, militarily, and economically in the countries in which it was their arena in the Cold War, and some of the interests outside it, contrary to America, and to restrict the variables on the maps in order to discuss their fate especially the new major players at their forefront Iran.
No one thinks that the issue is related to the differences of opinions, jurisprudences, positons, because everything is announced and clear. America's desire is to resize the position of Russia which returns strongly to the international economic, military, and political arena. While Russia has invested what is enough to impose its presence in new form, so it is not possible to expect its regression after it has imposed new unbreakable equations that cannot be neglected. The dialogue starts from the US recognition that the cooperation is a need, while according to Russia it is a goal.
Translated by Lina Shehadeh,