UNM community members agreed that a long-term commitment and a combination of three different foreign policy approaches are necessary to broker a better relationship between the United States and Russia.
A group of 25 people participated in a forum Wednesday night sponsored by UNM at Science and Technology Park on University Boulevard to discuss views concerning the future of U.S.-Russia relations.
The meeting was a part of a larger effort in the United States and Russia to identify the relationship between the countries and how it should evolve.
Albuquerque resident Jack Jekowski said hope exists for a strong relationship between the United States and Russia.
"There is a lot that the United States can do for Russia," Jekowski said. "It sounds to me like that critical issue here is how the political system and people here in the United States can be convinced of how important it is to provide that assistance."
Taylor Willingham, a Kettering Foundation research assistant, moderated the forum that centered around three approaches the United States could take with the former superpower - the first approach stressing that the United States put its safety and security first and force Russia to eliminate its nuclear capability through a strict policy and monitoring.
Get content from The Daily Lobo delivered to your inbox
The second approach discussed encouraged the United States to build strong democratic and economic partnerships with Russia, while the third approach suggested that the United States take a "Good Neighbor" stance and offer humanitarian aid and assistance in Russia.
While no strong consensus formed in favor of any approach, many said that a combination of all three would be most beneficial for the United States.
Kevin Thornton, a computer programmer, said he believed that the group leaned toward economic investment in Russia as the best way to help in its recovery. However, he added, return on that investment wouldn't be seen immediately.
"We have to understand that if we are talking about a very long-term commitment and we're talking not just about the money, not just the people, but the actual knowledge and resources to bring them up to speed, eventually we'll see a return on that investment," Thornton said.
The strongest debate was over the merits of the first approach, which states that the United States keep the military strong and focus on missile defense.
It also states that it target aid at eliminating Russia's nuclear weaponry and impose sanctions if Russia did not abide by the rules of the potential agreement.
Many participants said that it was an outdated, Cold War era vision. The United States' gains in self-protection and self-investment, some members said, would be lost by jeopardizing Russia's security and polarizing any potential relationship.
Many in the group saw a lot of benefits to working with Russia in building economic partnerships and investing in the country. The major concern was time and money.
"It may sound good and attractive to think about trying to provide some support or economic development, but there aren't many resources available to allow us to help them in many ways," UNM faculty member Ed Walters said.
