In the past years, an international discussion about the future of global politics and speculation that we live in a new Cold War, specially, after the Ukrainian crisis, has arisen. In the following paper it will be argued otherwise, it will be argued that we actually do not live in a new Cold War between Russia and the West. Firstly, it will be explained the re-emergence of the concept “Cold War” followed by the analysis of the arguments that support the idea that the use of “new Cold War” to refer to the current situation is inaccurate and misleading. In other words, we will look how the different characteristics of the past Cold War differ from those in today’s situation.
The term “Cold War” refers to the period of time from the end of the Second World War (1945) until the fall of the Soviet Empire or USSR in the 1980s. Taking this into account, a legitimate question to make is, why is the term “new Cold War” been retaken? One possible answer is that the end of the bloc politics and hegemonic aspirations that were characteristic of the Cold War has still not been resolved . Others however think that the Russian government is eager to promote the idea that a new Cold War is in place. It may benefit Russia domestically, by making its citizens “rally around the flag”, make them worry about a common “enemy” and distract them from criticising the government for not delivering economic growth. Moreover, internationally, if a new Cold war truly exists, it would mean that Russia has a status of a global power and has a right to have its sphere of influence (like the past Soviet Union); and in the case that the West argues otherwise, if it is not a new Cold War, then the West should stop sanctioning and isolating Russia internationally .
The first argument that must be brought to light, as one of the main differences between the old Cold War and today’s situation, is the absence of the USSR. This is a key strategic difference. Although nowadays we have Russia, Putin knows it cannot be restored nor does he wish it to be rebuilt. The classic definition of the Cold War involves the presence of two superpowers: the United States of America and the Soviet Union. The absence of one of the two elements implies the absence of the situation itself. This can also be related to the idea that the Cold War was a period of clear boundaries that shouldn’t be crossed in order not to intervene in the other’s internal affairs. In the past Cold War, USSR and USA had its own sphere of influence important to their interests and while they fought proxy wars in third world countries, both avoided a new World War that could end up in a nuclear disaster. This established a stable relation. This, in part, kept the Cold War ‘cold’ as Professor Cox mentions. Currently, the USA has influence on areas, which used to be under the Soviet sphere and the clear boundaries of two blocks dividing the world are not as clear as in the past and therefore it is an unstable and more unpredictable situation . An example of this can be the interference of Putin in supporting anti-EU political parties, interfering in the US presidential elections or the development of cyberattacks and cyberespionage .
As mentioned before, the old Cold War was characterized by the emergence of two blocs, the West and the Soviet Union. Both blocks are representatives of two clashing models. Firstly, they had opposing economic systems. On the one hand, the U.S. was the capitalist leader and on the other hand, the Soviet Union had a state-controlled economy, characteristic of the communism . Secondly, they also had clashing political systems: liberal democracies on the West side and totalitarian regime on the Eastern side. In other words, the old Cold War was characterized by an ideological struggle, different and opposing views of political, economic and social development. Nowadays, Russia’s economic system is capitalist, with specific Russian characteristics, but still, capitalism. This differs form the Soviet economy and this model goes along with the capitalist USA model; so nowadays there are no clashing economic systems. In terms of the political system, today there are no rival ideological projects on a global scale. Russia’s mentality changed and the communism era ended. Russia is not guided by any specific political ideology and Putin is not pursuing communism domestically nor internationally; there are no consistent system of ideas that function as a state ideology, as communism did in the past.
Furthermore, the Cold War era was a period of global deadlock between NATO and the Warsaw pact alliance. NATO was the Western security organization led by the U.S. to collaborate on common security with western European states, whereas the Warsaw Pact alliance between the USSR and many central and eastern European states provided the same collective security for them. The current situation, as Mr. Sakwa defined, is an asymmetrical one . In contrast to the Soviet Union collapse and the Warsaw pact dissolution, NATO grew in membership by adhering former communist eastern European states, making an asymmetrical advance. As a way to exemplify this we can take a fragment of a press conference by Putting on the 18th of July 2001 in which he reference to this asymmetry: ‘We do not consider NATO an enemy organisation or view its existence as a tragedy, although we see no need for it. It was born as the antipode to the Warsaw Pact, as the antipode to the Soviet Union in Eastern Europe. Now there is no Warsaw Pact, no Soviet Union, but NATO exists and is growing” . Russian policy-makers were well aware that the very existence of an expanded NATO creates a permanent source of tension in the centre of Europe. Again we are missing here one of the two elements of the old Cold War: the existence of the Warsaw Pact.
The next argument to be analysed is the lacking of the bipolar world order characteristic of the Cold War. Nowadays we do not live on a period of constant rivalry between two powers that act as magnetic poles in global affairs. Today we live in a multi-polar world with Russia and the USA being two of many potential great powers among others such as BRICS or the G20 countries. Russian–American relations are no longer the axis on which world politics turns. The Cold War was characterized by a bipolar world order, while the world order of the twenty-first century is a polycentric one.
Another major difference is the economic dependency and economic relations between both of them. Apart from the different economic systems that existed in the past and were mentioned before, nowadays we live on a more global economy. During the Cold War, Soviet officials were economically isolated due to the non-market principles of the Soviet economic system and totalitarian control over the citizens. Soviet entrepreneurs could not establish businesses anywhere, let alone western countries. After the fall of the USSR, Russian post-Soviet elites, managed to integrate into the West economically, opening businesses or simply making economic transactions and establishing economic relations with the West. A new Cold War would mean that the current economical system must be reversed and no interaction should exist.
In terms of warfare, the Cold war was characterized by two opposing military blocks, both countries’ military expending were considerably high with millions of troops in Europe; battle fleets all around the world; Enormous nuclear arsenals. If we now look at the Russian federal budget for 2016 it spent around 4.7% of its GDP on defence and only 3.3% of the GDP in 2017. Also the non-public part of the military expenditure will decrease in 2017 compared to 2016, which was the year of Russia’s active involvement in the war in Syria and continuation of its war against Ukraine. This is a clear difference from the past Cold War, when both sides had military funding and melioration as a priority.
All in all, nowadays, there are undeniable tensions between Russia and the USA. However new Cold War is largely an elusive concept to describe the current situation, significant differences exist and tell us otherwise. The analysed lacking elements of different characteristics lead us to conclude that we do not live in a new Cold War. It is a misleading, past-centred metaphor that doesn’t fit to today’s circumstances.
Bibliography
- Ciută, Felix and Ian Klinke. “Lost In Conceptualization: Reading The “New Cold War” With Critical Geopolitics”. Political Geography 29, no. 6 (2010): 323-332. doi:10.1016/j.polgeo.2010.06.005.
- Cox, Michael. “Towards A New Cold War? Putin’s Russia And The West”. Presentation, LSE moodle, 2017.
- Fforde, Matthew. “Contemporary World History”. Presentation, LUMSA moodle, 2017.
- Gromyko, Alexey. “Russia–EU Relations At A Crossroads: Preventing A New Cold War In A Polycentric World”. Southeast European And Black Sea Studies 15, no. 2 (2015): 141-149. doi:10.1080/14683857.2015.1060018.
- Hanson, Philip. The Rise And Fall Of The The Soviet Economy, n.d.
- Harper, Jim. The New Cold War?. Ebook. 1st ed. The International Economy, 2012.
- Sakwa, Richard. “New Cold War” Or Twenty Years’ Crisis? Russia And International Politics. Ebook. 1st ed. International Affairs, 2017.
- SHEKHOVTSOV, ANTON. “This Is Not A New Cold War”. Opendemocracy, 2017. https://www.opendemocracy.net/od-russia/anton-shekhovtsov/this-is-not-new-cold-war.
- Stavridis, James. “Are We Entering A New Cold War?”. Foreign Policy, 2017. http://foreignpolicy.com/2016/02/17/are-we-entering-a-new-cold-war-russia-europe/.
- Varol, Tugce. THE RUSSIAN FOREIGN ENERGY POLICY. Ebook. 1st ed. Kocani, Macedonia: EGALITE (department :European Scientific Institute), 2017.