History doesn’t repeat itself but it often rhymes

For those who lived through or studied the period of the Cold War, there is now an inescapable and increasing feeling of deja vu. Poisonings, the expulsion of diplomats, and the demarcation of rival interests between Russia and the West are only the tip of an iceberg that is fast developing into a new Cold War. 
In a quite unexpected turn of events, both father and daughter Sergei and Yulia Skripal are recovering well after the attempt on their lives last month via a toxic nerve agent. It is just a matter of time, and doctors’ permission, before a very eager British secret service will try, with the assistance of the two victims, to further piece together the jigsaw puzzle of this crime. Regardless of that, the UK government is already convinced that Moscow was involved in what appears to be an audacious violation of British sovereignty. Consequently, in a matter of just a few weeks, fault lines have reappeared between Russia and the West, the discourse has become radically adversarial and public diplomacy, instead of more discreet behind-closed-doors talks, has come to characterize these relations. All the signs are that, for the time being at least, the sides involved are ready to let the situation escalate without necessarily setting boundaries to this fast deterioration in relations.
The rhetoric has intensified to such a level that Boris Johnson, the British foreign secretary, compared participating in this summer’s football World Cup in Russia with taking part in the 1936 Olympics in Nazi Germany — in other words, he equated Vladimir Putin with Adolf Hitler. The Kremlin’s response was anything but appeasing, calling Johnson’s statement “utterly disgusting” and “unworthy of a foreign minister of any country.” This slippery slope of miscalculated, reactive behavior on both sides could well presage a lengthy period of extreme international tension, with the danger of it spilling over to other regions of the globe in a manner reminiscent of the Cold War rapidly growing.
Following the poisoning of the Skripals, there is something in the fiery reaction of the British government, including its expulsion of 23 Russian diplomats, to suggest there is strong evidence connecting the Putin regime with this hideous crime. The almost instant solidarity shown by more than 20 member states of the European Union and NATO, which gave more than 130 Russian diplomats their marching orders, also indicates that those countries may be privy to convincing evidence of high-level involvement by the Russian government and maybe even Putin himself.
Moscow’s robust response in terms of denying any involvement in the crime, and its retaliation by expelling equal numbers of diplomats from those countries that sent back its own, makes this incident a test case in the rapidly worsening relations between Russia and what is traditionally regarded as the West. Even the Trump administration, which is seen as Putin-friendly, has expelled Russian diplomats and, in a further step, Washington announced it would close the Russian consulate in Seattle. Moscow’s tit-for-tat response in announcing that it would close the US consulate in St. Petersburg smacks once again of a new Cold War, with all the hallmarks of the old one.
Yet concentrating on this most recent assassination attempt and its repercussions gives us just part of the picture. The international actions we have seen are more a response to a wider perception and fear that Russia under Putin is becoming a threat to world stability; some sort of reincarnation of Soviet-style expansionism minus the communism. Russia’s involvement in Georgia, Ukraine and Syria, and its annexation of the Crimean peninsula, let alone Putin’s growing authoritarianism, provides ample evidence to those who support this vision of Russia. Its cooperation with Iran and Turkey, two revisionist powers that are threatening stability in the Middle East and beyond, exacerbates the suspicions over Moscow’s intentions. Russia, on the other hand, on top of the humiliation it experienced with the collapse of the Soviet Union, has subsequently seen itself becoming increasingly surrounded by NATO and the European Union — its military, political and economic rivals, whose constant drive to expand has taken them to the country’s doorstep.

Putin — however seasoned and unsavoury a politician he is — senses the social and political turmoil in Europe and the US, which to a large extent is the result of weak, divided and incompetent leadership, and is taking full advantage.

Yossi Mekelberg

Putin — however seasoned and unsavoury a politician he is — senses the social and political turmoil in Europe and the US, which to a large extent is the result of weak, divided and incompetent leadership, and is taking full advantage. The sanctions that have been imposed on Russia by the US and EU, including on a number of Russia’s richest oligarchs, are aimed at Putin’s inner circle and thus far have drawn more defiance from the Russian president than any readiness to change his ways. Time will tell whether this is short-term bravado or whether Russia can sustain this behavior despite its struggling economy.
Last week’s UN Security Council meeting brought back distant memories of the second half of the 20th century, as accusations between the Russian and British ambassadors flew fiercely back and forth. Russia was less than subtle in warning the UK that, by inventing a “fake story” over the Salisbury poisoning, it was aiming to discredit and delegitimize Russia and, in so doing, was “playing with fire.” This threat brought a steely British response in the very spirit of the Cold War: Russia’s objective, according to the UK, was to “undermine the international institutions that have kept us safe since the Second World War.”
Now the bar of suspicion, distrust, hostile rhetoric and unilateral actions aimed at harming each other’s interests has been raised, it poses the question: Are all sides involved capable of retreating from the brink of a new Cold War?
 

• Yossi Mekelberg is professor of international relations at Regent’s University London, where he is head of the International Relations and Social Sciences Program. He is also an associate fellow of the MENA Program at Chatham House. He is a regular contributor to the international written and electronic media. Twitter: @YMekelberg