VoyForums
[ Show ]
Support VoyForums
[ Shrink ]
VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: [1], 2, 3, 4 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 10:13:05 01/21/02 Mon
Author: Howard Witt
Subject: U.S. throws wrench into Russia ties

http://chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-0201170171jan17.story
From the Chicago Tribune
U.S. throws wrench into Russia ties
ABM, disarmament moves irk Kremlin
By Howard Witt
Tribune senior correspondent

January 17, 2002

WASHINGTON -- For all the talk of a strengthening personal relationship between President Bush and Russian President Vladimir Putin, the Bush administration has begun pressing Moscow, bluntly and without apology, to accept a range of U.S. security decisions that clearly are rankling to the Kremlin.

First it was the unilateral U.S. withdrawal from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty over sharp Russian objections. Then came indications that Washington is contemplating establishment of long-term military bases in formerly Soviet Central Asia. Last week the administration revealed it is planning to retain nuclear weapons that the Russians thought would be destroyed as part of a mutual arms reduction agreement the former Cold War rivals are negotiating.

A senior Russian defense official visited the Pentagon on Wednesday, seeking clarification of the U.S. plan to maintain decommissioned warheads as a security reserve. He left without much satisfaction.

Administration officials have argued that the security decisions are being taken to safeguard essential U.S. interests. But it's the administration's expectation that Russia will simply accept them without jeopardizing the newfound bilateral relationship that is provoking alarm among Russia experts.

"There's now a real question arising within the Putin administration whether the Americans are sincere in trying to reshape the relationship with Russia," said Stanford University professor Michael McFaul, an authority on Russia. "Suddenly the terms of the friendship have become vague."

Partnership not equal

Administration officials no longer offer even the pretense that the U.S.-Russia relationship is a partnership of equals.

A senior U.S. diplomat, speaking last week on condition that he not be identified, offered an unblinking assessment of Russia's comparative weakness.

"If we were to defer to Russian neuralgia" over the prospect of NATO expansion, for example, the senior official said, "if we were to nevertheless defer to this irrational judgment, it would only embolden the Russians to kind of go back to a sphere of influence policy toward all their neighbors, and we'd end up making our lives more difficult."

Putin, the official said, has "put aside all this mumbo jumbo about a multipolar world" and "cast his lot very clearly with the West . . . as a means of playing in the big-power game."

Such words are startling to the Russians, who, despite a decade of economic turmoil and military decline after the collapse of the Soviet Union, still consider their country a "big power." Now, they see Washington rewarding their quick support for the U.S.-led anti-terrorism coalition with unilateral decisions on issues such as nuclear arms reductions.

Bush and Putin, declaring that the U.S. and Russia no longer were nuclear foes, agreed in principle last November to dramatic mutual reductions of nuclear weapons over the next 10 years. Each side pledged to reduce its nuclear arsenal by about two-thirds, to fewer than 2,200 warheads.

But it was only last week that the administration revealed the fine print behind its proposal: An unspecified number of decommissioned warheads and missiles would not be destroyed but would be stored as a reserve for future redeployment.

Advantage feared

The Russians strongly protested. Coming on the heels of Bush's decision last month to withdraw from the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty so the administration can pursue creation of a missile defense system, the U.S. intention to retain part of its decommissioned nuclear arsenal raised Russian fears that Washington was seeking to maintain a long-term advantage in nuclear weapons.

"We are for transparency. We are for predictability," Yuri Baluyevski, first deputy chief of the Russian armed forces general staff, said after a meeting with Pentagon officials Wednesday. "But we also are for irreversibility of the reduction of the nuclear forces."

The issue of keeping nuclear arms in reserve threw a wrench into ongoing disarmament negotiations between American and Russian officials intended to codify the proposed nuclear arms cuts so Bush and Putin can formalize them at a summit meeting in the spring.

"We didn't get to the point of even agreeing to disagree" about the reserve plan, said Douglas Feith, U.S. undersecretary of defense for policy.

In Central Asia, meanwhile, the U.S. is deepening military cooperation with former Soviet republics, ties that flourished quickly after Sept. 11.

The U.S. is building an air base in Kyrgyzstan that military officials say will be a "transportation hub" in the region and house up to 3,000 troops. Uzbekistan offered extensive use of its military bases to U.S. forces for the Afghanistan campaign, and U.S. officials have suggested that the arrangements could be long-term. The State Department recently lifted arms sales restrictions against Tajikistan to recognize its cooperation in the international anti-terrorism coalition.

The Central Asian nations have welcomed the American military presence as a potential bulwark against the spread of Islamic extremism in the region--an objective that suits Moscow's interests as well.

But Putin, for whom the Central Asian region holds deep strategic interests, said in December that he didn't expect U.S. forces to stay a long time.

Extending NATO's reach

The Russians are also awaiting clarification of a U.S. proposal to extend NATO cooperation with the Kremlin by means of a new NATO-Russia council, intended to mitigate Russia's long-standing objections to expansion of the European defensive coalition. NATO is set to consider adding new member countries next fall, including the Baltic nations, which by their acceptance would extend NATO's border to Russia.

"A month ago, it didn't seem much in doubt that the Bush administration wanted to coax Russia toward a deeper cooperation with the West," said Andrew Weiss, a fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations and a Russia specialist in the Clinton administration's National Security Council. "But today, there are a lot of questions about how much the administration thinks it can keep ramming down the Russians' throats."


Copyright © 2002, Chicago Tribune

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]
[ Contact Forum Admin ]

Forum timezone: GMT-8
VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2019 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.