U.S.-Russia Cooperation in Counterterrorism: A Literature Review

This report delves into the complexities of U.S.-Russia cooperation in counterterrorism, examining the historical context, differing ideologies, and the impact of events like 9/11. The study explores the need for collaboration in combating global terrorism, highlighting the conflicting and mutual interests of both nations. It reviews extensive literature to analyze the factors influencing cooperation, including differing terrorist threats, the initiation of the 'reset' by Russia, and the challenges posed by historical distrust. The report emphasizes the importance of understanding the conditions that support cooperation and predicts whether the nations will choose cooperation or isolation. It concludes that while counterterrorism is a vital policy concern for both nations, the partnership between the United States and Russia does not exhibit utmost certainty, due to the conflicting nature of the threat raised from terrorism encountered by the United States and Russia.

Running head: INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
Name of the Student:
Name of the University:
Author note:

1INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
Abstract
The United States represented the West supporting democracy and capitalism whereas
the Soviet Union represented the East which considerably represented the East by supporting a
totalitarian administration and communism. It has been noted that even though Russia showed
incompetence following the closure of the Union of Soviet Republics (USSR), it sustained its
essentiality that the United States and Russia collaborate on global affairs, particularly for
combating the global terrorist threat. Furthermore, conflicting ideologies, principles, with a
history of doubt brought severe complications to the partnership but issues regarding terrorism
and to combat acts of terrorism has emphasized on the partnership of the United States and
Russia. The paper has reviewed extensive literature in order to determine if they provide an
appropriate framework to analyze when the U.S and Russia will cooperate.

2INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
Table of Contents
Introduction......................................................................................................................................3
Literature Review............................................................................................................................3
The Need for U.S.-Russian Cooperation against Terrorism........................................................4
Differing character of the U.S and Russian Terrorist Threats.....................................................5
Initiation of Reset by Russia after 9/11.......................................................................................7
Literature Gap..............................................................................................................................8
Conclusion.......................................................................................................................................8
References........................................................................................................................................9

3INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
Introduction
The end of the Second World War saw the emergence of a bipolar world initiated by two
super influencers with diverging ideologies. The United States represented the West supporting
democracy and capitalism, whereas the Soviet Union represented the East further supporting a
totalitarian regime as well as communism. Series of cooperation and negotiation categorized the
association between the United States and Russia. Tsygankov (2009) have noted that differing
ideologies, periodic narration of distrust along with conflicting welfares have complicated their
competence to cooperate. However, issues related to counterterrorism, climate change in addition
to non-proliferation keep bringing both nations back to the bargaining table. Moreover, for the
United States, terrorism raised to the front position of its foreign policy agenda subsequent the
attacks of 9/11. Developing counterterrorism strategies developed as a priority for U.S
policymakers, government leaders and military officials. Part of this strategy has been
establishing a global coalition against terrorism. Soon after the 9/11 attacks, the United States
realized it would not be able to stem the influx of foreign fighters into the U.S or intervene
terrorist financial associations alone (U.S. Department of State, 2014). In order to review
whether the levels of counterterrorism cooperation change depending on the general status of the
U.S-Russian relations, the following paper will review extensive literature to determine if they
provide an appropriate framework to analyze when the U.S and Russia will cooperate.
Literature Review
The United States and Russia share common interests which demand cooperation.
However, comprehensive studies of Abrams (2016) have mentioned that they also follow
diverging foreign-policy interests. At frequent times, the United States and Russia tend to pursue

4INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
contradictory as well as mutual interests at the same time. Thus, to enhance the level of
corporation between the United States and Russia, it is essential to comprehend the conditions
supporting corporation. However, Hall and Ross (2015) have noted that when the United States
and Russia simultaneously pursue conflicting and unified politics, it is critical to predict whether
the nations will choose cooperation or isolation.
The Need for U.S.-Russian Cooperation against Terrorism
Deliberated and publicized contemporary terrorism emerged approximately 125 years
ago and went over 40 years ago. The view of global terrorism changed as the 9/11 attacks
revealed an antisocial threat which was unprecedented in its extent and criticality and further
entailed a global association with great strategy along with logistical capabilities. Sergunin and
Konyshev (2016) in their studies have mentioned that the 9/11 attacks explained that the
antisocial threat of radical Islamic terrorism rises not only from a single anti-social leader,
Osama Bin Laden and from his organization Al Qaeda, but the threat tends to emerge from an
extensive international network with a global reach. A global threat necessitates international
network with a global reach. Comprehensive studies of authors have noted that a global threat
requires international counterterrorism cooperation and action. Meanwhile, similar views have
been mentioned by Hall and Ross (2015) who states that the U.S has shown incompetence to
fight terrorism single-handedly as it constitutes certain unparalleled power by every traditional
measure, which cannot be initiated to accomplish the most critical security challenges
encountering humanity regardless of reliable partnerships. Research of Sergunin and Konyshev
(2016) have noted that the United States spends more on its military services than Russia, China,
France, India and Germany.

5INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
Blechman (2015) has opined that regardless of its annual military budget of
approximately $ 600 billion, the U.S has shown incompetence to avoid terrorist attacks on its
ground or the extensive dissemination of terrorism abroad. Furthermore, following the 9/11
attack, the U.S with the broader global community has considered that to successfully arrange
criminal actions across several jurisdictions in order to send back individuals supposed to be
engaged in terrorist offenses and further to regulate money from reaching terrorist agencies
require to be well-established associations and build on trust within the broader international
community. However, Sergunin and Konyshev (2016) have argued that Russia being an integral
associate of the international community requires being an associate in counterterrorism efforts.
Moreover, the U.S and Russia constitute the world’s major nuclear arsenals and have been
intrinsically engaged in the world’s key regional disagreements. Hall and Ross (2015) in their
study have found that both the United States and Russia play decisive roles in refuting
international terrorism and the increase in the use of weapons intended for mass destruction. At
this juncture, Twine (2015) has argued that notwithstanding the gains which will be generated
from the U.S-Russian security alliance, high level of cooperation has been regarded as a
continual challenge. Furthermore, according to Hall and Ross (2015), to a record of doubt and
lack of harmonization on few important policy issues, cooperation particularly on issues with
counterterrorism has proven to be highly critical because of the conflicting temperament of the
risks of terrorism encountered by the U.S and Russia.
Differing character of the U.S and Russian Terrorist Threats
Comprehensive studies of Kofman (2017) on U.S Russian counterterrorism conflicts
have shed light on the need for affiliation and indicate the challenges of sustaining an association
to divergent nature of the terrorist threat of both the countries. Drawing relevance to the claims

6INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
of authors, Smith and Twardowski (2017) have noted that the U.S-Russian relations tend to show
high complexities by their historic relationship as opponents along with their conflicting values
and principles. However, authors have argued that acts of counterterrorism centric conflicts are
in certain points intricate by their conflicting terrorist threats. Furthermore, Chivvis (2017) has
claimed that even though the U.S and Russia both encounter acts of terrorism, each nation is
likely to demonstrate its policies in relation to terrorist threat and the nature of that threat also
draws disparity. Smith and Twardowski (2017) through their research have found that
international majors, mainly the Saudi nationals carried out the 9/11 attacks. However,
comprehensive studies of authors have claimed that subsequent to the 9/11 attacks, the U.S
mainly shed light on external terror threats. Reports of Felgenhauer (2016) have revealed that the
9/11 attack gave rise to Islamic terrorism to the front position of global security. However, the
Russia has been conflicting with Jihadi antisocial acts in Chechnya since the 1990s. Notte (2016)
in his study have found that the disintegration of the Soviet Union in the 1990’s produced a
range of self-regulated Muslim republics which did not involve Chechnya. Drawing credence
from the above evidences, Felgenhauer (2016) have noted that the conflicting nature of the U.S
and Russian terrorist threats did not hamper the associations. However, authors have claimed that
during the attack of Jihadi in the U.S, the severe threats initiated to unite. The 9/11 attacks have
led the U.S to be highly considerate towards the Russian cause and less decisive to Russian
actions in Chechnya. Meanwhile, Smith and Twardowski (2017) have argued that the U.S at
certain times has been critical of Russia’s actions in Chechnya. Similarly, Russia has been highly
critical of certain U.S accomplishments during its war especially in Iraq. However, authors in
their studies have found that regardless of certain areas of disagreements related to

7INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
counterterrorism both nations have expressed a significant concern for preventing the spread of
international terrorism and upholding a U.S-Russian partnership against terror attacks.
Initiation of Reset by Russia after 9/11
Research conducted by Cornell (2017) has mentioned that Putin had primarily initiated
the reset subsequent to the 9/11 attack and recognized as the first foreign leader to interact with
the then U.S. President Bush following the attacks to offer condolences and support.
Furthermore, Deyermond, Zhemukhov and Ortthung (2016) have claimed that Russia has gained
considerable advantages from the reset as it seeks global guidance to modernize and elevated its
status comparative to the West. However, the claims raised by authors have shown contradiction
to other scholars which claim that soon after the 9/11 terrorist attacks, the partnership began in
order to loosen because of the growing prices of oil which implied that Russia no longer has
shown any reliance on the West for financial support. Moreover, Cornell (2017) has opined that
the United States and Russia have maintained contradictory views on policies related to
leadership of Saddam Hussein and its strategies against the West. Comprehensive studies of
Deyermond, Zhemukhov and Ortthung (2016) have highlighted the way Russia raised the issue
with the U.S purpose to use armed force for initiating change in administration change
specifically without the approval of UN.
The reset shed light to the collective and conflicting welfare between the U.S and Russia.
Meanwhile, authors in their study have further established the inclination of the U.S and Russia
to work in agreement in pursuit of their common area of interest. Gaddy and O'Hanlon (2015)
have noted that the end of the reset particularly the forth one has explained the multifaceted
nature of the U.S-Russian relations. Furthermore, the United States has been noted to have not

8INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
followed the democracy encouragement as well as NATO enlargement as enthusiastically as it
had show before due to its need of Russian partnership on nuclear rise in Afghanistan, and Iran
Literature Gap
There can be seen substantial literature on the generalized nature of the U.S-Russian
relations which have extensively discussed the way the influence of history and differing
foreign-policy agendas have damaged associations with Russia. However the extensive
literatures did not focus on the underlying factors related to the attempt of the United States of
initiating partnership with Russia. The paper aims to fill the gap whereby no inclusive insights
have their significance on levels of counterterrorism collaboration over the path of U.S.- Russian
relations.
Conclusion
The paper has noted that acts of counterterrorism are regarded as a vital policy concern
for both nations focus on the value in collaboration against terrorism. The literature review has
shown insights which exhibit a consistent partnership between the United States and Russia
between 2009 and 2014. Furthermore, the literature has provided comprehensive insights of the
conflicting nature of the threat raised from terrorism encountered by the United States and Russia
as a potential obstacle towards their path of partnership. The literature review has focused on the
alignment of the United States and Russia on fighting against terrorism. However, the literature
explains that partnership between the United States and Russia does not exhibit utmost certainty.

9INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
References
Abrams, S. (2016). Beyond propaganda: Soviet active measures in Putin’s Russia. Connections:
The Quarterly Journal, 15(1), 5-31.
Blechman, B. M. (2015). Why we need to eliminate nuclear weapons—and how to do
it. Elements of a nuclear disarmament treaty, 21.
Chivvis, C. S. (2017). Understanding Russian Hybrid Warfare. Rand Corporation.
Cornell, S. E. (2017). Security Threats and Challenges in the Caucasus after 9/11. In Eurasia in
Balance (pp. 43-68). Routledge.
Deyermond, R., Zhemukhov, S. N., & Ortthung, R. W. (2016). Russia and the US
election. Russian Analytical Digest (RAD), 194.
Felgenhauer, P. (2016). Russian Strategy in the Chechnya Wars. Bundesheer. at. Accessed
April, 24.
Gaddy, C., & O'Hanlon, M. (2015). Toward a “Reaganov” Russia: Russian Security Policy after
Putin. The Washington Quarterly, 38(2), 205-221.
Hall, T. H., & Ross, A. A. (2015). Affective politics after 9/11. International
Organization, 69(4), 847-879.
Kofman, M. (2017). A Tale of Two Campaigns: Us And Russian Military Operations In
Syria. Пути к миру и безопасности, (1), 163-170.

10INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
Notte, H. (2016). Russia in Chechnya and Syria: Pursuit of strategic goals. Middle East
Policy, 23(1), 59-74.
Sergunin, A., & Konyshev, V. (2016). US-Russian Relations. Russian Analytical Digest, 178.
Smith, J., & Twardowski, A. (2017). The future of US-Russia relations. Center for a New
American Security.
Tsygankov, A. (2009). Russophobia: Anti-Russian lobby and American foreign policy. Springer.
Twine, F. W. (2015). Outsourcing the womb: Race, class and gestational surrogacy in a global
market. Routledge.
U.S. Department of State. 2014. “Adherence to and Compliance with Arms Control,
Nonproliferation, and Disarmament Agreements and Commitments.”. Retrieved from
https://www.state.gov/documents/organization/230108.pdf