#8
Newsday
April 18, 2003
Russia Can't Keep Going Behind U.S. Back
By Nikolas K. Gvosdev
Nikolas K. Gvosdev is a senior fellow at The Nixon Center in Washington and executive editor of The National Interest.

Continuing revelations from the Iraqi archives about the scope and extent of Russian aid to Saddam Hussein, even when it became clear the United States desired "regime change" in Baghdad, could seriously derail efforts to solidify the Russian-American partnership. The development certainly calls into question whether a new era has really dawned in relations between Moscow and the West.

Among the more egregious examples of Moscow's assistance to Hussein include the provision of lists of operatives available for hire for assassinations in the West; sharing with Iraqi intelligence intercepted conversations of British Prime Minister Tony Blair; and training of Iraqi secret police agents in Moscow - some as recently as last September.

Taken individually, any of the incidents described in documents obtained by London's Daily Telegraph and the San Francisco Chronicle could be rationally explained away. But it is the sum total of these contacts that is so worrisome.

Russia has had an ongoing problem for years with private companies set up by former members of the security services who have peddled equipment and training to all sorts of nefarious clients, often building on relationships dating back to Cold War days. Certainly, Russia was interested in gathering more information about al-Qaida cells in northern Iraq that had links to Chechen rebels. And Russia is unlikely to curtail its lucrative connections to other members of the "axis of evil" anytime soon - despite U.S. requests.

Declarations of friendship with the United States aside, Russia had a vested interest in a long and protracted war in Iraq. For one, higher oil prices. (Russia is a petroleum exporter and analysts have estimated that for each $1 increase in the price of a barrel of oil, the Russian gross domestic product rises by 0.35 percent.) An expected fall in the gold price as military operations wind down would have a negative impact on Russia's economy. And prolonged fighting would have also given Russia (along with France and Germany) the possibility of brokering a settlement and enhancing its own influence in the region.

The question now is whether these Iraqi-Russian ties (and similar relationships with North Korea and Iran) occurred with the blessings of the senior Russian leadership. For years, the Kremlin has - in regard to lucrative deals for military equipment and training - turned a blind eye to "freelance" operations and third-party go-betweens (such as Belarus or Yemen). These transactions have brought an infusion of much-needed cash to the strapped Russian economy while preserving "plausible deniability" on the part of the government.

The average Russian sees nothing wrong with selling goods and services to any buyer, especially if the West isn't prepared to provide any compensation for desisting. Russian Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov complains, "a state with whom Moscow one day has been 'advised' not to maintain mutually beneficial relations because of supposed 'bad behavior,' the next day ... its markets are suddenly flooded with American companies." In other words, everybody's doing it.

Washington's and London's low-key responses, so far, seem to confirm a widely held opinion in Moscow that it is possible for Russia to keep these sub rosa deals functioning as long as Moscow is prepared to accommodate the West on big-ticket items such as NATO expansion and the war on terror.

Sure, Russian aid to Saddam Hussein, whether jamming equipment or training secret police agents, did not have any noticeable influence on the outcome of the war. But that is not the point. If Russia expects full political and economic integration with the West - an outcome both President George W. Bush and Blair support - these sideline activities have to stop.

Washington needs to make this message clear. It needs to demonstrate that any short-term gains made by colluding with rogue states imperils Russia's long-term benefits of a closer relationship with the United States.

The United States needs to get the Kremlin's attention - that if Moscow genuinely wants a constructive relationship with Washington, Russian officials must act. The pervasive corruption in Russia cannot be used as an excuse for failing to stop what are illegal transactions - even under Russian law.

The United States should be prepared to forgive Russia's past sins in Iraq - as long as we have definitive proof that Moscow plans to "sin no more" in Iran or North Korea. The ball is now in the Kremlin's court.

BACK TO THE TOP    #253 CONTENTS    NEXT ARTICLE