A stronger, more assertive Russia is generally viewed with horror by European diplomats. They need not be so aghast.

By Alex Stevenson

The fear of a resurgent Russia is at the forefront of the Commons' defence committee's report on London's relations with Moscow today. 'Russia: A New Confrontation?' is set against the context of "some commentators" suggesting "there is a risk of a new cold war emerging as a result of Russia's increasingly assertive foreign policy".

Those pundits have a point or two. Just look at the last year, which shows Moscow's enthusiastic embracing of both actions and words as foreign policy tools. Earlier this year saw brinkmanship from Moscow over its energy policy, as it cut supplies across much of Europe because of a dispute with Ukraine. And last August witnessed the outrageous military intervention into South Ossetia.

Georgia acted recklessly, it is accepted. But Russia's actions showed the limits of its respect to state sovereignty - and its preparedness to fly in the face of the international community.

Then there's the willingness to use the diplomatic tools at Russia's disposal. That was summed up, last October, by Vladimir Putin's refusal to attend talks with German chancellor Angela Merkel. It followed Russia's veto, earlier in 2008, against proposals to impose sanctions on Robert Mugabe's regime in Zimbabwe at the UN security council. That was a clear example where Russian interests, clearly not directly affected, did not play a part. Diplomats were shocked as a result.

We only have to go back to Moscow's refusal to extradite the man named as chief suspect in the Alexander Litvinenko murder case, Andrei Lugovoi, as an example of that stubbornness affecting Britain's interests. It's Russian diplomats' notorious and consistent refusal to play ball, when combined with their happy enthusiasm to take action on the ground when it matters, which sets Foreign Office officials on edge like fingernails on a blackboard.

Commentators can be forgiven for fearing a new cold war in this context. But they should not be alarmed.

MPs, assessing the situation in today's report, conclude that a gritted-teeth approach is just what the doctor ordered. They urge London to forget "abstract and misleading notions of shared values" and instead concentrate on the harsh "realities" of Russia's actions.

"However desirable cooperation with Russia may be, it should not come at the price of accepting the legitimacy of a Russian sphere of influence," it concludes.
The tone of the report is underpinned by fear. It wants to avoid Russia returning as a powerful, tantrum-prone, dangerous actor on the world stage.

As it happens, this is the right line for the Foreign Office to take. But not because of a dread about Russia resuming its old aggressive, assertive prominence. Russia's return to confidence should be welcomed.

It is in Britain's interest to have Russia strong. Not because we want it strong-arming its way around the former Soviet bloc nations, but because it gives us something real and meaningful to deal with.

Consider the situation after the break-up of the Soviet Union. Then the weakened new nation was full of power vacuums across its sectors, quickly filled by competing factions. Oligarchs emerged to build their own small empires. The Kremlin, after decades of supremacy, was weak. And British diplomats hated it. There was no point making complex agreements with this mess of a country because the odds of them actually becoming reality were slim.

The Kremlin's return to supremacy, carefully crafted by Putin and only coming to fruition since around 2005, has changed all that. It is the reason the now-prime minister remains so popular. Dmitry Medvedev, his replacement as president, has grown in stature and become the powerful figure Russians like in charge.

It is also the reason Foreign Office diplomats are secretly pleased by Russia's re-emergence. Moscow's natural position has always been a thorn in the side of the world order. But at least the outcomes hashed out by our diplomats on the ground there now have a better shot of being long-lasting and enduring.

There is still room for caution and reserve, of course. There is much about Russia's ambitions which act directly against London's interests. At least now, though, the Foreign Office's chances of communicating effectively with Moscow are maximised. The new, stronger Russia is not all bad for Britain.