Western countries have never ceased their efforts to contain Russia. It has long been their constant strategic goal to keep Russia "weak but not chaotic" by adopting an approach of "cautious cooperation." They have grown even more cautious about Russia in recent years, given the country's rapid development. The United States not only fueled "color revolutions" in member countries of the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS), but also invited Ukraine and Georgia to join NATO while ignoring the fact that the CIS is part of Russia's sphere of influence.

After it penetrated Central Asia in the name of fighting terrorism following the outbreak of the war in Afghanistan in 2001, the United States put forth a "Greater Central Asia" plan in 2006. Under the plan, it had tried to create a southward passage for energy, transportation and communications to link Central Asia to South Asia and compel Central Asian countries to break away from Russian control. In terms of European security, NATO is shaping a missile defense system to besiege Russia. It also announced in the first half of 2007 that it would deploy missile defense systems in Poland and the Czech Republic.

While encroaching upon Russia's strategic space, the United States has directed harsh criticism against Russia's domestic and foreign policies. It questioned the legitimacy of Russia's "sovereign democracy," saying it was a regressive notion from the perspectives of human rights and democracy. It also accused Russia of practicing "energy blackmail" against some CIS states. In an attempt to damage Russia's national image, the West made every effort to demonize the country by using Litvinenko's poisoning, calling Russia a "spy country." British security agencies even claimed that Russia's Federal Security Service was responsible for Litvinenko's death.

Despite the decrease in its strategic space, Russia has been able to fight back in various ways. It carries out a two-pronged strategy toward the CIS. On the one hand, it has strengthened political and economic cooperation with pro-Russian countries, including Belarus, Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan, to cement its bonds with these countries. On the other hand, while exerting economic and political pressure on Ukraine and Georgia, it has warned these countries about the consequences of joining NATO.

Russia also seeks to have a greater say on regional hot-spot issues. Regarding Hamas as an important political force in the Middle East, Russia underlines the importance of holding talks with this organization. On the Iranian nuclear issue, it firmly opposes the use of force against Iran and calls on Iran and the United States to pursue a political and diplomatic solution to their disputes. It has proposed that Iran relocate its uranium enrichment to Russia to allay Western fears of the technology being diverted to making nuclear weapons. On the status of Kosovo, Russia stands against the U.S.-backed proposal by UN Special Envoy Martti Ahtisaari, which calls for the independence of Kosovo and is opposed to the submission of the proposal to the UN Security Council. It insists that UN resolutions on Kosovo's future status should be recognized by Serbia.

Moreover, Russia has defied the United States openly. At the Munich Conference on Security Policy in February 2007, Russian President Vladimir Putin accused the United States of imposing its policies in various fields on other nations. In his World War II Victory Day speech on May 9, Putin drew parallels between America's diplomatic policy and the expansionism practiced by Nazi Germany. On July 14, he signed a presidential order to suspend the Conventional Forces in Europe Treaty. Analysts considered these moves as Moscow's responses to Washington's unrelenting attempts to build a missile defense system in Eastern Europe.

With its rising power, Russia is challenging the international order dominated by Western powers led by the United States. Western countries, however, have refused to drop their containment policy toward Russia. The frequent diplomatic disputes between Russia and Britain are testaments to this irreconcilable contradiction.

Tightening its reins

Russia punished the British Council as an example for other foreign NGOs attempting to infiltrate the country. NGOs have enjoyed rapid development in Russia along with the country's social, economic and political transition since the disintegration of the Soviet Union more than a decade ago. Russia currently has more than 600 independent Western NGOs. These organizations have become a major social force exerting a significant influence on Russia's economic transition and the rebuilding of its social structure.

Despite their positive role in promoting democracy and shaping a market economy in Russia, their negative impact has become increasingly pronounced. Some hostile Western NGOs have tried to interfere in Russia's internal affairs or have carried out other activities to undermine the Russian Government. They have posed a threat to Russia's national security and stability with their attempts to change Russia according to Western standards.

To prevent Western NGOs from pushing for a "color revolution" in Russia, the country has tightened its management of these organizations by introducing stricter laws for them. The State Duma, or the lower house of Russia's parliament, adopted a new bill in November 2005, demanding the re-registration of all NGOs in Russia. It also authorized government agencies to scrutinize the activities and financial states of NGOs based in the country. Any breaches of the law would result in the abolition of an organization. If found to be engaged in activities not specified in their registered charters, the NGOs would be immediately banned by the authorities. These measures have made it difficult for Western NGOs to operate in Russia.

The British Council, founded in 1934, has nearly 200 offices in 109 countries and regions across the world. The cultural body is one of the world renowned NGOs that entered Russia following the disintergration of the Soviet Union. The British Council, a semi-official organization backed by Britain's foreign office, has seen its presence decline in Russia since the end of 2005. By the end of 2007, it had had only three offices left in the country. By shutting down two of these offices, with the office in Moscow being the only exception, the Russian Government obviously intended to warn NGOs from other countries not to challenge it or the country's national interests.

The author is an associate research fellow at the China Institutes of Contemporary International Relations