Russia,USA& NATO might create joint military bases

The meeting of the Russian Defense Minister and American
Secretary of Defense caused an unusual reaction. This reaction was primarily connected with the rumors about possible arrangement of the US military bases along the Russian borders. The US is really revising the principles of deployment of American troops abroad.
The US started reduction of its military presence in Europe right after the end of the cold war. In any case, the situation in the world that has changed in the last decade, as well as the content and geography of appearing threats require not only reduction of forces where they are not needed but also a possibility of their transfer and deployment to where it is necessary. Working out a
new concept for deployment of troops abroad, the US is obviously guided by purely pragmatic motives.
It is obvious that creation of large military bases with many thousands of servicemen is not rational. With regard to geography of location of new bases, most likely they will be tied to potential regions of instability, as well as to the regions rich with energy resources. That is why, first of all, it is necessary to expect arrangement of the bases
along the arch of instability, or "Big Middle East." This means that these objects will be arranged near the Russian borders. With regard to Europe, in addition to reduction and liquidation of a number of existing bases it is logical to shift them to the southeast. Preserving of American bases in Europe is necessary because continuation of "Islamization" of European countries may have different consequences and Southeastern Europe will "digest" the Balkan crisis for a long time ahead. Relocation or creation of bases in Northeastern Europe is not ruled out, but it will belong
to recurrences of the cold war and will be as "smart" as the
urgent beginning of patrolling by NATO aviation in the sky of theBaltic neophytes.
What does this mean? How should Russia take this prospect?
Stability in Big Middle East belongs to our common interests
with the US and other CIS countries and countries of the Western community. The current situation shows that neither the US nor Russia can cope with contemporary threats on their own. In any case, it is necessary to bear in mind the inevitably inclination of the US as the only present super power towards hegemony and independent actions proceeding from its own national interests and without any special respect to the interests of partners and allies. That is why it seems that simultaneously with possible American military presence it is also necessary to use and develop the existing mechanisms of cooperation in the security arena.
First of all, this is NATO and the Russia-NATO council. The option of creation of not American bases but NATO bases under the aegis of the Russia-NATO council would be optimal. NATO has started to gradually go out of the dead end of passiveness helping to solve security problems outside of the traditional zone of responsibility; for instance, in Afghanistan. Russia-NATO council also begins to play an important role in buildup of collective efforts in the security arena.
It is impossible to be sure that European countries will have
an ardent wish to create such bases. Europeans are inclined to
reduce military activities and cut military expenditures. We may have a situation already familiar to us. We have the example when the peacekeeping forces of the CIS or the base of the collective security treaty organization of the CIS are actually Russian due to passiveness of other member states of the commonwealth. That is why it is possible that these bases will consist mostly of American and Russian servicemen. There is nothing fantastic in this. We have the memorandum on opening of a joint center for exchange of information from the missile attack warning systems in Moscow, which makes provisions for watch duty of joint crews of American and Russian servicemen. At any rate, such option of the military bases near the borders seems the best. If the matter is
about objects of the air defense system, arrangement of joint
objects in Russian territory is not ruled out. We have failed to cope with the task of counteraction to nuclear weapons and
proliferation of missile technologies; that is why pooling of
efforts in the interests of costs minimization and efficiency of the missile defense system would be logical. Control over the missile-hazardous directions by radars from the southern borders of Russia is much more efficient from Eastern Europe.
It is also possible that in one region there will be both
Russian - American bases and bases of the collective security
treaty organization of the CIS. The main thing is that it is
necessary to be guided not by the wish to divide the areas of
influence but by the wish to pool efforts in the interests of
security. The epoch of division of areas of influence inside of the countries of the Western community, into which Russia is being gradually involved, should remain in the past. Developing military cooperation either on bilateral base or through Russia-NATO council, bases in one region should interact and not compete. In any case, for this purpose it is also necessary to be active in military diplomacy and in buildup of our own military power. The US is not the partner who can take into account and respect interests of a weak partner. The US has become hostage of its own super power status. The US needs an enemy and often seeks one where there is no enemy, acting like an elephant in a china shop incurring damage on global security. Russia should be able to act as a responsible partner of the US, like on the eve of the war in Iraq, but much stronger and more influential than now. It is impossible to ensure equal partnership by diplomatic means alone. This also corresponds to the long-term interests of the US.