July, 2003

'Oil is the prize the U.S. won in Iraq'
Interview with Professor Alexei Vassiliev, International Expert on Arab, Islamic and African Affairs

by Sawsan Hussein

Professor Alexei Vassiliev is an internationally renowned expert on the Middle East and Africa. He is consultant to the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and has been president of the Institute of African & Arab Studies in Moscow since 1992. This institute, affiliated to the Academy of Science, was established in 1959 to study the politics and culture of the many new states acquiring their independence at the time. Since 1997, Vassiliev has also been president of the Centre for Regional & Civilisational Studies in Moscow. He has been editor-in-chief of the journal Asia and Africa Today since 1998.

Vassiliev acquired his Masters in Eastern Studies from the Institute of International Relations in Moscow in 1962, and his Phd from the Institute of Eastern Studies in Moscow's Academy of Science in 1967. The topic of his thesis was 'The Wahabi movement and the first Saudi state in the Arab peninsula.' He received a Doctorate of State from the same institute in 1981 for his important study 'Social and political evolution in Saudi Arabia 1945-1973.' He studied at Cairo University, Egypt, during 1960 and 1961.

Vassiliev was correspondent for Pravda in the Middle East for more than 10 years. He is a prolific writer, whose interests include Arab and African issues, Islamic civilisation, Islamic religion and its role in Russia and Europe, as well as issues related to the Islamic republics that were previously part of the Soviet Union. Among his publications are, The History of Saudi Arabia, Egypt and the Egyptians, which was also published in Arabic, Russian Policy in the Middle East: From Messianism to Pragmatism and Central Asia: Political and Economic Changes in the Post-Soviet Era.

The following is a summary of his views on contemporary international issues.

The new international order:

There are two major trends on the international scene. On the one hand, the US, the only superpower, seeks to impose a Pax Americana through its unilateral actions. On the other hand, there is a drive towards the democratisation of international relations and the development of multilateralism.

Although the first trend is predominant, the global system built by the US is unstable, and US policies are giving rise to anti-Americanism in many parts of the world. This is related to the spread of the most commercialised forms of US civilisation, the cheapest kinds of shows, literature and pornography. This cannot but evoke a response from other great civilisations - Muslim, Confucian or Hindu. However, the idea of civilisational conflict is purely propaganda and exaggeration. For example, just as the US war on Iraq created splits within western society, it also created divisions within the Islamic world. Most so-called extremists are fighting their own, Muslim, governments.

Despite the United States' economic, military, financial and informational superiority, its potential rivals are gaining strength. A united Europe, a rapidly developing China and India may in the future give Washington fierce competition. Hopefully, Russia will overcome its problems and become active in a multipolar world. Although the UN has been significantly weakened, the world community needs the UN; there is no alternative to it, and it is possible to restore its authority.

The international role of Russia:

Russia, naturally, participates less than the USSR did, in international affairs. The USSR was a global rival to the US, in a military and political sense, although less so on the economic level. Now, Russia must concentrate on itself in order to solve its domestic problems, and its foreign policy must be a tool for solving these problems. Russia is interested in partnership with the US, even as a junior partner. It can, and must, cooperate with it in fighting international terrorism, trade in drugs and the spread of weapons of mass destruction. Russia differs with the US, however, on the necessity of observing international law and the importance of a strong role for the UN.

In the Middle East, Russia can play the role of honest broker, unless this entails a confrontation with the US. The countries in the area that previously benefited from the USSR-US rivalry during the Cold War must understand that the present situation is totally different. Russia can offer the Arab countries medium- and high-level technologies, and they, in turn, can export their traditional and modern consumer goods to Russia. There is no contradiction between the long-term interests of both parties. To increase cooperation between the Arabs and Russia will require effort on both sides. The Arabs can do a lot to strengthen this connection, as for example setting up institutional venues to bring Arab culture to Russia.

The situation in Iraq:

The allied war on Iraq has considerably strengthened US and Israeli strategic domination in the Middle East. Oil is the prize the US won in Iraq. Due to developments in the world economy, oil has become increasingly important, and therefore control of the Gulf and the Caspian Sea have once again become primary objectives. It is unlikely that the allies will allow others to share in the spoils of this war. Russia is trying to protect some of its rights in Iraq. For example, it is trying to get Iraq's debts to Russia -$7-8bn- recognised under the terms of the Paris Club, and international recognition for oil concessions to Russian companies.

The 'Road Map':

Basically, Russia agrees with the tasks set up in the Road Map, but there is little ground for optimism. On the Israeli side, the government is trying to impose changes that would undermine the very idea of a Palestinian state. It is also ignoring Arab demands regarding the status of Jerusalem and the return of refugees.

On the Palestinian side, the plan will be torpedoed by the extremist organisations that believe they have the right to operate in the occupied territories and Israel itself. On the other hand, if these operations were to stop, Israel would immediately advance new demands.

Development in Africa and the Arab world:

The Arab countries must look for new domestic incentives to achieve more rapid development. However, a quick economic upsurge would be impossible without large-scale foreign investment. Egypt has the best chances for this, with its large resources in manpower, intellectuals, technical experts and managers. Yet it is difficult to say if this will happen in the near future.

To achieve development and overcome the presently tragic situation in Africa, the continent needs huge, but not astronomical investment. According to estimates by a group of experts appointed in June 2001 by the UN secretary-general to investigate the issue, the current level of development aid to Africa, $50bn a year, must be doubled. A report published by the World Bank in January 2002 reached similar conclusions. This level of aid has not yet been reached.

Although in most African countries foreign aid comes to 10% of GDP, it has not had a significant impact on economic development or the reduction of poverty. Much of this aid is returned to donor countries in various forms, or has been used to support certain regimes, such as that of Joseph Mobutu in the former Zaire. The aid distribution system is also ineffective. For example, in 1997, 25% of total aid received by tropical Africa was spent on the salaries of foreign experts.

We must also ask how much money has fled Africa illegally. Mobutu alone misappropriated and exported between $7bn and $9bn. Nigeria's military dictator Sani Abacha stole $5bn. It is believed that rich Africans transfer 40% of their accumulated wealth abroad. It is quite probable that legal debt servicing, illegal capital flight and smuggling considerably exceed the aid flow to Africa. The poorest continent of the world is bled financially and becomes a donor for developed countries.

On Domestic Russian Issues:

- The economy

Even if Russia manages to achieve its target of doubling GDP in a decade it will not become an economic power. During the last 12 years, enormous resources have been pumped out of the country, estimated at between $250bn and $300bn.

The West has not provided enormous aid to Russia, as some argue. Russia received loans from some international organisations and foreign countries, which it repays. Much of these loans was used to pay foreign experts, whose advice was not helpful, centring around buying goods from donor countries at excessive prices, and trying to westernise part of the Russian elite.

On the contrary, fortunes smuggled out of Russia since 1992 funded the decade of extensive western development.

Russia will not join the EU in the near future. It will coordinate its efforts with other CIS countries to negotiate joining the World Trade Organisation.

- Chechnya

Chechnya has become Russia's bleeding wound; its policy there has been anything but wise. Force was used on many occasions without good cause. Fortunes have been made in some circles as the result of this war, and therefore there was a motive to prolong it. However, after Chechnya gained its de facto independence, its leaders did not concentrate on building a state, but a group of gangs emerged that misappropriated funds allocated by Russia to pay teachers, doctors and pensions. They stole oil that was piped through Chechnya and took hostages for ransom. Moreover, the armed forces of Chechnya attacked neighbouring Islamic republics.

These developments led to the second Chechen war and occupation by federal Russian troops. This problem requires a political solution.

- The issue of democracy

Russia is taking its first steps towards democracy. Democracy is the political function of civil society; it cannot be created by decree. Civil society is based on a strong middle class, with a definite political culture and traditions. Although Russian democratic traditions are weak, it would be naive to assume that the Russian people are always followers. Russian history is a combination of obedience and revolutionary outbursts.

A genuine democratic regime cannot be established in a backward country. A definite level of economic development must first exist. No backward country has achieved economic success by playing democracy. After a definite level of economic welfare is achieved, democratic principles may be implanted step by step with regard for tradition, history and political culture.