241
is debatable as to whether this benefitted Russian or Western companies more in
the region.
According to Matteh Bryza, who served the Clinton, Bush, and Obama administrations as “Director for European and European Affairs on the National Security
Council” staff, US Ambassador to Azerbaijan, and Assistant Secretary of State for
Europe and Eurasia, there was no difference between the Obama administration and
the Bush administration—or the Clinton administration for that matter; however,
Obama was in a far more advantageous position due to allies having gotten on board
with the US drive for diversification:
I spent two years going around Brussels and other EU capitals trying to explain why this
made sense. And it got to a point where President Bush actually asked, ‘why are we—why
are you—working so hard to convince the Europeans of something we think they need to do
but they don’t want to do?’ So the Germans resisted the push to diversify, the Italians
resisted, the Brits resisted a bit. And it was only after a time, when the Russians cut off gas
to Ukraine in 2006, that the EU finally woke up. But for a couple of years it was us and a
couple of others going around EU capitals saying ‘don’t you think you need to diversify
your supplies? Because the Russians want to manipulate you’. So that was the focus under
Bush. The Obama administration continued that, but came into the game when the EU had
already decided to pursue the Southern Corridor, so then the State Department and White
House could support the EU effort.
For Obama’s critics, this is the cause of contention. Whereas Bush had struggled
to convince the EU, Obama in a position to benefit, yet was accused by numerous
sources as having failed to exploit his advantage in the name of the Russian Reset
policy (Author’s interview with Steve LeVine 2017). The Obama Administration
believed the Bush administration had been too aggressive about Georgia’s independence, especially given the Bush Administration’s efforts to give NATO membership to Russia’s neighbors and install a Missile Shield defense system.
Part of this reset, for Obama, involved scaling back the work President Bush
initiated in the Caspian states in terms of shoring up the democratic institutions.
Bush’s international world view, which combined idealistic aims using real political
methods under the guise of security measures thus allowed for interaction with the
region which measured deeper than simply pipeline mapping. According to
Barkeshli, Barak Obama drew “a thick line” between the social and political values
of America at home, and the business interests of his country toward Caspian Sea
and Russia, and thus relations naturally cooled because of decisions made in line
with this.
The US’ New Silk Road Initiative
As of 2011, the New Silk Road Initiative became the main metaphor which US
foreign policymakers framed their strategy toward Central Asia and Afghanistan.
Yet by June 2013, during John Kerry’s trip to India, the project was barely mentioned. By January 2015, Barrack Obama, himself on a trip to India to attend Indian
The US’ New Silk Road Initiative
is debatable as to whether this benefitted Russian or Western companies more in
the region.
According to Matteh Bryza, who served the Clinton, Bush, and Obama administrations as “Director for European and European Affairs on the National Security
Council” staff, US Ambassador to Azerbaijan, and Assistant Secretary of State for
Europe and Eurasia, there was no difference between the Obama administration and
the Bush administration—or the Clinton administration for that matter; however,
Obama was in a far more advantageous position due to allies having gotten on board
with the US drive for diversification:
I spent two years going around Brussels and other EU capitals trying to explain why this
made sense. And it got to a point where President Bush actually asked, ‘why are we—why
are you—working so hard to convince the Europeans of something we think they need to do
but they don’t want to do?’ So the Germans resisted the push to diversify, the Italians
resisted, the Brits resisted a bit. And it was only after a time, when the Russians cut off gas
to Ukraine in 2006, that the EU finally woke up. But for a couple of years it was us and a
couple of others going around EU capitals saying ‘don’t you think you need to diversify
your supplies? Because the Russians want to manipulate you’. So that was the focus under
Bush. The Obama administration continued that, but came into the game when the EU had
already decided to pursue the Southern Corridor, so then the State Department and White
House could support the EU effort.
For Obama’s critics, this is the cause of contention. Whereas Bush had struggled
to convince the EU, Obama in a position to benefit, yet was accused by numerous
sources as having failed to exploit his advantage in the name of the Russian Reset
policy (Author’s interview with Steve LeVine 2017). The Obama Administration
believed the Bush administration had been too aggressive about Georgia’s independence, especially given the Bush Administration’s efforts to give NATO membership to Russia’s neighbors and install a Missile Shield defense system.
Part of this reset, for Obama, involved scaling back the work President Bush
initiated in the Caspian states in terms of shoring up the democratic institutions.
Bush’s international world view, which combined idealistic aims using real political
methods under the guise of security measures thus allowed for interaction with the
region which measured deeper than simply pipeline mapping. According to
Barkeshli, Barak Obama drew “a thick line” between the social and political values
of America at home, and the business interests of his country toward Caspian Sea
and Russia, and thus relations naturally cooled because of decisions made in line
with this.
The US’ New Silk Road Initiative
As of 2011, the New Silk Road Initiative became the main metaphor which US
foreign policymakers framed their strategy toward Central Asia and Afghanistan.
Yet by June 2013, during John Kerry’s trip to India, the project was barely mentioned. By January 2015, Barrack Obama, himself on a trip to India to attend Indian
The US’ New Silk Road Initiative