#5
Nezavisimaya Gazeta
January 30, 2003
MOSCOW BOWING TO WASHINGTON
The US will probably get what it want from Russia in the matter of Iraq
Is Moscow sending signals that it may support Washington on Iraq?
Author: Yevgeny Verlin (Nezavisimaya Gazeta observer), Nikolai Zlobin (Director of Russian and Asian Programs at the US Center for Defense Information, Washington)
[from WPS Monitoring Agency, www.wps.ru/e_index.html]

IF IRAQ STARTED MAKING PROBLEMS FOR UN WEAPONS INSPECTORS, RUSSIA MIGHT REVISE ITS OPINION AND AGREE WITH THE US ON THE NEED FOR HARSHER DECISIONS BY THE UN SECURITY COUNCIL. THESE WORDS FROM PRESIDENT PUTIN LAST TUESDAY INTERESTED OBSERVERS MUCH MORE THAN PRESIDENT BUSH'S ADDRESS TO THE NATION.

If Iraq started making problems for UN weapons inspectors, Russia might revise its opinion and agree with the United States on the need for harsher decisions by the UN Security Council. These words from President Vladimir Putin at his meeting with students of the Kiev University last Tuesday interested some observers much more than President George W. Bush's address to the nation. Indeed, everything is clear with Bush. With Moscow, however, it is not...

Analysts immediately interpreted Putin's phrase as follows. When valid grounds for a military operation against Baghdad are presented, Moscow would "give its blessing" to Washington for what it has tried to avoid.

Very soon, Moscow may find additional reasons to support Washington. Secretary of State Colin Powell will address the UN Security Council on February 5. He is supposed to provide "serious evidence" that Saddam Hussein is still working on weapons of mass destruction and retains chemical and biolgical weapons. Alexander Yakovenko, a spokesman for the Foreign Ministry, said yesterday that Moscow will listen attentively and analyze the information thoroughly.

On the other hand, Yakovenko said when commenting on Bush's address that Russia did not see "any reasons for the use of military force against Iraq." The Kremlin doesn't think the resources of diplomatic and political settlement have been exhausted. It is convinced that international inspectors should be given a chance to continue their work in Iraq.

These new nuances in the Kremlin's position make some factors particularly interesting. Firstly, Putin's words on the issue of Iraq at Kiev University were not posted on the official presidential website. Interpret this as you will: either Putin made a slip which was hastily corrected, or it was a kind of test, the first step on the path of shaping public opinion and telling the public that Russia might support the United States even should it fail to get UN approval.

There is one other fact not to be missed. Putin did not receive Abdel Wahid Belkaziz, General Secretary of the Islamic Conference, during the latter's visit to Moscow. It just happened that the schedule of Belkaziz's visit coincided with Putin's visit to Ukraine.

All this makes it clear that the Kremlin has suddenly found some serious grievances.

Neither would Moscow want things to progress as far as the need to make a difficult choice in the UN Security Council, should it meet to consider a military operation against Iraq. Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov ducked a question on whether Moscow would invoke its veto if the United States or Britain came up with a draft resolution. "We'd rather find a compromise, a solution that would enable us to retain unity of the UN Security Council," Ivanov said. "That is why we are going to concentrate on how we can avoid the veto and find a solution that will leave the UN Security Council united."

Ivanov's cautious words become much more understandable against the background of Putin's phrase that day in Kiev. Clearly aiming to dispel the assumption made by some media that Russian-American relations might deteriorate because of the American war on Iraq, Putin said: "We do not agree with absolutely everything, and actually object to some things. On the other hand, the quality of our relationship will prevent a confrontation."

Addressing the US Congress, Bush never answered questions about allowing UN inspectors to continue their work if the war on Iraq was inevitable, or why it was inevitable at precisely this point. On the contrary, the president's speech merely fed suspicions that the US Administration had painted itself into a corner over Iraq and no longer has any room for political maneuvering.

The White House claims that Saddam Hussein will never honor decisions of the international community, and the UN in its turn will never summon the courage to permit America to launch a military campaign. The US president has not given an exact starting date for the hostilities. Bush merely said that the United States is prepared to lead a coalition devoted to the idea replacing the Iraqi regime.

Bush did not say a word on some vital issues for every American. How long does the United States intend to remain in Iraq? What are its ultimate objectives in the region? No one in America has any doubts that the eventual military operation will succeed. Moreover, Americans are even morally prepared to accept relatively heavy casualties. On the other hand, the public in the United States is worried by the prospect of a lengthy presence in a post-Saddam Iraq (up to five years, according to some observers). Americans understand that the presence of their troops in the Arab world will raise the danger of terrorist attacks against the United States. It doesn't appear at this point that the US president had an exact plan for post-war activities in Iraq, or exact calculations and forecasts for developments. Last but not least, no one knows what long-term dangers a military operation against Iraq may imply for America itself.

BACK TO THE TOP    #242 CONTENTS    NEXT ARTICLE