Alternate present: Friendly Russo-American relations after Cold War?

With a POD of any time after the fall of the Soviet Union in December 1991, change history so that the current animosity between the American and Russian governments does not exist, and that there is collaboration and widespread friendship instead.
 
American support for Russian actions in cheyna would help. “We are fighting the same extremists you are Putin told bush.” Joint space projects could also warm the emotional temperature.
 
With a POD of any time after the fall of the Soviet Union in December 1991, change history so that the current animosity between the American and Russian governments does not exist, and that there is collaboration and widespread friendship instead.

First, this would naturally require different strategic decisions by Russian leadership, naturally. What would help, from US side, would be a massive Marshall-aid type program towards former USSR, jointly both by US and EU. Another factor might be a China going rogue after 1989 instead of trying it's best to integrate into global economy.
 
Another factor might be a China going rogue after 1989 instead of trying it's best to integrate into global economy.

This is probably the most likely scenario. I highly doubt there's going to be much stomach for dumping huge loans into the black hole of corruption that was the post-Soviet Russian state, and heading that off is going to require some fundimentally different forces in power that can and would somehow prevent the crippling levels of immediate economic collapse and hardship and fire-sale of state assets that produced the kind of insider trading and pennies on the dollar buy-up of the share coupons by desperate citizens taht allowed the rise of the oligarchs (Of course, those kinds of people are also exactly the sort that are unlikely to be able to stage the successful secession from the USSR in the first place) without an extremely strong geopolitical motivation. A Red Dragon taking up the place or the Red Bear would be just the kind of conditions for "buying policy" low-interest loans, perhaps as a result of the Russian government keeping direct control of some of the more profitable areas of former Soviet property (The Oil and Gold extraction, for example) and tying down the revenues as a gurantee of payment to secure the capital for reforms.
 
If one was to consider Putin to be a Tom Clancy or James Bond villain, he sure did revenge the Rodina against the malefactor’s wife.
 
From what I know, US-Russia relations were fairly good under Russian President Yeltsin, but the economy of the new Russian Federation quickly tanked and it led to Putin’s presidency. From what I’ve read, Russia privatized their industries far, far too quickly, leading to an Oligarchy. Perhaps if the US and EU see the value in getting Russia as their ally and invest money in rebuilding their economy, much like in West Germany and Japan following World War II, then maybe Russia will not suffer the severe economic difficulties it did IOTL and be much more western-friendly. Also, likely giving lots of advice to Yeltsin may help prevent the rushed privatization and prevent the disastrous situation which occurred IOTL. I still see it as an absolutely terrible mistake that the US did not make a large effort in rebuilding the Russian Federation’s economy and potentially having a fantastic powerful ally and an overall much more peaceful world, but oh well, what’s done is done.
 
From what I know, US-Russia relations were fairly good under Russian President Yeltsin

Not really. The US never wanted to deal with Yeltsin and if Bush could have kept Gorbachev in power, he would have. And relations only got worse as time went on. On the Russian side, the US was pressuring him to do things their way, while actively making that way harder for Russia and on the US side, Yeltsin was a drunkard and a nationalist.

From what I’ve read, Russia privatized their industries far, far too quickly, leading to an Oligarchy.

They did so under US pressure. Indeed, that the Russians slowed the process down from the speed the US preferred, which led to predictable grumbling from US commentators. Of course, the US had also made shock therapy unworkable because the US Congress was not willing to loan Russia the hundreds of billions that would be required to re-capitalize Russia. Instead Russia got the shock, but not the therapy.

Add this to continuation of NATO (which the Russians have always remembered started as an anti-Soviet alliance), the expansion of NATO into the former Eastern Block, bringing in countries fearful of Russian attack (which makes NATO look like it's now an anti-Russian alliance), and US obstructionism when Russia tried to integrate into the Capitalist world infrastructure.

At the end of the day, the lesson Russia learned from the Yeltsin years was "don't drink and drive the country and don't trust the US further than you can throw them, because they're still fighting the cold war". (Not to say that the US doesn't have legitimate grievances with Russia - but I reckon people will be more familiar with them, hence my focus on the Russian side of the story.)

Also, the privatization didn't lead to oligarchy - the oligarchy was already emerging during Gorbachev's last reforms. The laws allowing private companies to be set up were poorly written, so lots of enterprise managers set up "private companies" that asset stripped their state-owned workplaces and if their employees wanted jobs, they'd have to put in extra hours (which weren't well paid, if paid at all) in the "private company". It's better to say that the shock therapy encouraged this Oligarch-formation process, rather than started it.

And of course, the enterprise managers had so much power because of Brezhnev's reforms, that allowed so many to remain in place for long enough that they gained more power over the enterprises they managed than the centralized state did. And the Tsarist-vintage patronage networks that were the real organizing principal of the Soviet Union didn't help either.

For an unusual PoD: how about if the Soviet Union falls apart, but Gorbachev wins the power struggle with Yeltsin? That would certainly lead to better US-Russian relations in the 90s. Though there's enough time that relations could cool to OTL's levels.

fasquardon
 
Have the US give the Russians the Polish Treatment. Help them secure a big IMF loan and aid them in having their loans forgiven.

Then have Russia admitted into NATO before the Visegrad states are.
 
Not really. The US never wanted to deal with Yeltsin and if Bush could have kept Gorbachev in power, he would have. And relations only got worse as time went on. On the Russian side, the US was pressuring him to do things their way, while actively making that way harder for Russia and on the US side, Yeltsin was a drunkard and a nationalist.



They did so under US pressure. Indeed, that the Russians slowed the process down from the speed the US preferred, which led to predictable grumbling from US commentators. Of course, the US had also made shock therapy unworkable because the US Congress was not willing to loan Russia the hundreds of billions that would be required to re-capitalize Russia. Instead Russia got the shock, but not the therapy.

Add this to continuation of NATO (which the Russians have always remembered started as an anti-Soviet alliance), the expansion of NATO into the former Eastern Block, bringing in countries fearful of Russian attack (which makes NATO look like it's now an anti-Russian alliance), and US obstructionism when Russia tried to integrate into the Capitalist world infrastructure.

At the end of the day, the lesson Russia learned from the Yeltsin years was "don't drink and drive the country and don't trust the US further than you can throw them, because they're still fighting the cold war". (Not to say that the US doesn't have legitimate grievances with Russia - but I reckon people will be more familiar with them, hence my focus on the Russian side of the story.)

Also, the privatization didn't lead to oligarchy - the oligarchy was already emerging during Gorbachev's last reforms. The laws allowing private companies to be set up were poorly written, so lots of enterprise managers set up "private companies" that asset stripped their state-owned workplaces and if their employees wanted jobs, they'd have to put in extra hours (which weren't well paid, if paid at all) in the "private company". It's better to say that the shock therapy encouraged this Oligarch-formation process, rather than started it.

And of course, the enterprise managers had so much power because of Brezhnev's reforms, that allowed so many to remain in place for long enough that they gained more power over the enterprises they managed than the centralized state did. And the Tsarist-vintage patronage networks that were the real organizing principal of the Soviet Union didn't help either.

For an unusual PoD: how about if the Soviet Union falls apart, but Gorbachev wins the power struggle with Yeltsin? That would certainly lead to better US-Russian relations in the 90s. Though there's enough time that relations could cool to OTL's levels.

fasquardon
From what I know Yeltsin-era Russia-US relations were just decent-not great, sorry if I gave that impression. Whatever the case-they were certainly much better than Putin's Russia-US relations currently. I'll admit that I'm not the most knowledgable about Russian economy post-Soviet collapse, I was just sharing how I thought it was a big mistake that the US did not try and help Russia a lot economically after the fall of the Soviet Union.
 
The balkian crisis started the disaffection cheyna inflamed the conflict. Just because Stalin exiled them, there isno justification for isis style violence and theocracy. The west should have diverted Russian fears, Putin is not a soviet style Autocrat,
 
From what I know Yeltsin-era Russia-US relations were just decent-not great, sorry if I gave that impression. Whatever the case-they were certainly much better than Putin's Russia-US relations currently. I'll admit that I'm not the most knowledgable about Russian economy post-Soviet collapse, I was just sharing how I thought it was a big mistake that the US did not try and help Russia a lot economically after the fall of the Soviet Union.

For sure. It saved money in the short run in return for long-term destabilizing Eurasia which will cost who knows how much in the end.

fasquardon
 
Top