A series of global policy disagreements impends against the backdrop of the crisis in international finance. The "reserve of accord" in the relations of Russia and the United States has for the second time in 10 years approached exhaustion, and there are no conditions for the buildup of a new one. Russia is not the ideal actor on the world stage. But Vladimir Putin's diplomacy was flexible in all that concerned mutual understanding with the United States.

Russian foreign policy propaganda, official propaganda, in any event, was restrained. Nonetheless, the movement toward impasse has not been halted. The best result of the Russo-American summit in Sochi was the parties' consent to once again (for the last time?) to employ in the text of the joint document the word "partnership". There was no agreement on anything reassuring on practical issues.

The main cause of the estrangement is economic security, the half-hidden skirmish over the most favorable positions possible in world power engineering. Russia has strengthened its positions noticeably here, the United States wants to restore its erstwhile dominant position, which it subsequently lost. The positions of American corporations in the energy sphere have in 15 years weakened abruptly, those of the companies of other countries have gained.

Of the seven biggest transnational energy corporations in the 1970s, only two were non-American. Today the Americans are not represented among the "seven principals" at all. The places there are shared by Saudi Aramco, Russia's Gazprom, the Chinese National Oil Corporation, the National Iranian Oil Company, Petroleos de Venezuela S.A., Brazil's Petrobras, and the Malaysian Petronas.

The US Administration is attempting to "rectify" the situation by reliance on organizational and strongarm resources. The state, which it has been customary to consider the strongest, is experiencing spasms of uncertainty in the face of
energy vulnerability. These neuroses are only making things worse for everyone.

Washington understands that the Near and Middle East are saturated with anti-American feelings. Whether a war is unleashed against Iran or not, the situation in the world's "old oil store" will remain unpropitious for America. Whence
Washington's eagerness to find a "new oil store," which is how the Caspian appears to it. A surge toward its resources, consolidation there, and the building of lines for the transportation of Caspian energy resources--in any way that is not dependent on Russia--is a most important American policy objective.

America is essentially implementing a set of measures, in military language, to build a "system of defense in depth" of what US politicians would like to make a strategic reserve of energy sources for the West's economy for the next half-century. The "bottom line" is extraordinarily high and appears to Americans to be associated with assurance of the survival of the entire transnational organism of American business--although we are essentially talking only about the fortunes of America's global leadership, which is also considerable, for that matter. Whatever the case, the United States has returned to a high-risk strategy--evidently seeing no unacceptable risks for itself in the modern world. Impunity corrupts no less than absolute power. The "liberal hegemony" of the United States at the global level is paradoxically stimulating anti-liberal trends and authoritarianism at the level of the policies of individual states.

For the Russian the threat additionally is that the Americans are involving Russia in the escalation of risk. It is effectually part of the context of the American strategy of global energy security--but such that it not be asked about this. The United States cooperates with Moscow. But it does not trust it as far as to agree with the thought that Russia might to this extent or the other influence the United States' access to the "world strategic store of energy resources".

Whence the dual strategy in relation to our country. First, to create a system of pipelines in circumvention of Russia. Second, the infrastructure of the direct projection of American military might to the belt of pipelines running through European Russia east to west. A tad more, and impressionable senators in Washington will be feeling the need to declare European Russia a sphere of America's vital interests. It is not surprising that it is becoming almost impossible to come to terms with the United States on security issues.

The strong passions of the news media over Georgia and Ukraine are distracting us from more unpleasant thoughts. The liberal hegemony of the United States are international practices that Washington is eager to extend to the world's oil-and gas-bearing zones and the energy-source transportation routes. These practices infringe the interests of the economy and security of Russia. Only mutual restraint can help us avoid an exacerbation. The mutual escalation of unilateral actions is being observed in practice.

Washington is doing what it wants. Russia is preparing to follow its example. We've already been through this--prior to M.S. Gorbachev.