 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
|
Topics: Security/International
::
Domestic
::
JRL
:: Firefox-optimal ::
site feedback
|
 |
November 22, 2001:
#5560 
#5561
JRL #5560:
US State Department
International Information Programs
Office of Research
Issue Focus
Foreign Media Reaction
November 21, 2001
CRAWFORD SUMMIT SEALS 'NEW ERA' IN U.S.-RUSSIAN
RELATIONS
From Moscow and other capitals, last week's Bush-Putin summit was seen as
lending a public gloss to warming U.S.-Russian ties. The majority of
commentators, including many in Russian media circles, pronounced the Crawford
meeting a "success," and were hopeful that it would "open the
door to a new relationship." While the Bush-Putin rapport was in evidence
at their earlier meetings in Ljubljana and Genoa, many attributed to September
11th the rapid and welcome evolution from "rivalry to partnership."
Some in Russia and Europe looked past the "backslapping and bonhomie,"
and credited Putin's "deft" realpolitik with turning "America's
need for partners" in the anti-terrorism campaign to his advantage. In so
doing, they asserted, he has restored Russia's status as a "player on the
global political stage" and, even more significantly, solidly aligned his
country with the "Western community." Both sides' agreeing to make
deep cuts in their nuclear arsenals drew praise outside Russia, although a few
writers were disappointed at the lack of "concrete" results, citing
unresolved differences over ABM and the lack of a written accord on arms cuts.
Russian media highlights follow:
'Less Of An Enemy, More Of A Friend': Much of the media coverage accentuated
the positive, focusing more on improved U.S.-Russian ties than on continuing
"mutual grievances" over ABM and other security issues. Several
non-official and official dailies trumpeted a spirit of "cooperation"
and "partnership." Indeed, summit assessments reinforced the general
tenor of post-Sept. 11 mainstream commentary, which had lauded the Kremlin's
casting its lot with the West and "proving itself as a friend and
ally." Nevertheless, a number of analysts were quick to note that moving
from "distrust to partnership" is a "hard job." A few
predicted Putin's efforts at rapprochement would meet "opposition at
home," including among the "Russian political and military
establishment."
'Handshake Not Enough': Opinion ranged on the promised arms cuts--while
reformist Noviye Izvestiya judged them "good for Russia's security,"
an opposition paper held that Putin had made "major concessions."
Others downplayed the arms reduction pledges, with commentators for government
daily Rossiyskaya Gazeta echoing official views that any "verbal
commitment" should be backed up in writing. Centrist army Krasnaya Zvezda,
however, advised against hewing to "old standards," arguing that
"grueling talks, endless 'consultations' and the diplomacy of mistrust and
suspicion" do not jive with the new climate of "greater trust"
between Moscow and Washington.
'ABM Only Major Stumbling Block': Even prior to Sept. 11, commentators had
favored Putin's "pragmatic" approach on missile defense, preferring he
seek "dialogue" rather than "useless confrontation" with the
U.S. While some had hoped for a "compromise" deal on ABM, the lack of
an "historic breakthrough" did not disappoint most. Reformist
Izvestiya held that post-Crawford goodwill could yet provide "a major
impulse" to resolving the ABM dispute.
EDITOR: Katherine L. Starr
EDITOR'S NOTE: This report is based on 71 reports from 27 countries, November
14-21. Editorial excerpts from each country are listed from the most recent
date.
EUROPE
RUSSIA: "NATO, Russia To Become Allies"
Vitaliy Portnikov surmised in reformist, business-oriented Vedomosti (11/21):
"There is no avoiding Russia and NATO changing their relationship in a
cardinal way, if only because this country's top leadership, formally and
informally, is getting rid of notions such as an inevitable confrontation with
the United States, a probable enemy, and the danger of NATO's enlargement. Many
members of the Russian political and military establishment may still feel
comfortable telling stories about 'the main enemy.' But either they will have to
dump their obsolete ideas or the Russians will have to say good-bye to many of
their political and military leaders. Of course, Russia won't join NATO tomorrow
or the day after. But that doesn't matter. It doesn't matter now whether Russia
will be admitted to NATO or whether it will sign new agreements on cooperation
with the Alliance. What matters is that NATO and Russia are going to stop being
rivals. Instead, they are going to become allies in ensuring security and,
ultimately, the survival of our civilization."
"Partnership Is A Hard Job"
Sergey Oznobishchev, director of the Institute for Strategic Studies, wrote
in official government Rossiyskaya Gazeta (11/20): "Before Moscow and
Washington stop seeing one another as potential enemies or 'geopolitical
rivals,' the leaders of our countries will have to overcome opposition at home.
Today it is the topmost priority. Otherwise, any attempts at partnership will
run into covert and overt sabotage from the bureaucratic structures whose job it
is to put bombast declarations into practice.... Not to talk partnership to
death, our presidents must back their verbal commitment with a written one, and
the more often they do so the better. They might start by signing a legally
binding declaration on the principles of relations between Russia and the United
States.... Changing from distrust to partnership fast is akin to a revolution.
As shown by experience, revolutions are unpredictable for the most part. Russia
and the United States would do better to go step-by-step to avoid emotions and
mutual grievances, mindful of the fact that we are still at the beginning of a
transition period."
"ABM Only Major Stumbling Block"
Aleksandr Kuranov commented in centrist Nezavisimaya Gazeta (11/20):
"The only major stumbling block between Putin and Bush is the ABM treaty,
the cause of a brief thaw in Russo-American relations 29 years ago. Clearly, the
Americans will sooner or later withdraw from it, keeping some of its least
important provisions as a memento. It seems that politicians and the media in
the West are beginning to realize that the Russian president is in earnest as he
plays his foreign policy part."
"A Carrot For Putin"
Vasiliy Safronchuk remarked on Tony Blair's proposal to set up a new
NATO-Russia council on page one of nationalist opposition Sovetskaya Rossiya
(11/20): "This idea came about not in...10 Downing Street but at the
Bushes' ranch in Texas. It is a carrot of sorts for the Russian president who,
dealing with the Americans, has made major concessions regarding Russia's
security."
"Landmark"
Vitaliy Gan commented in official parliamentary Parlamentskaya Gazeta (11/7):
"Right from the start the summit became a landmark in Russo-American
interaction. It both symbolized and added to the high positive quality of
relations between Russia and the United States. There has been a sharp change in
the tenor of their ties, never mind the problems that divide them. Washington
appreciates Russia's stand on international terrorism, as well as its being
located between Europe and Asia, a unique position from the standpoint of
combating the maniacs. The Kremlin's reacting promptly to the terrorist
attacks...has caused a little revolution, to say the least, on the Potomac....
It was a constructive meeting. Anyway, coming to the White House with a strictly
orthodox, conservative agenda, Bush has clearly had to revise many of his
ossified views."
"Less Of An Enemy, More Of A Friend"
Under this headline, reformist Noviye Izvestiya carried a comment by Yuriy
Sigov in Washington (11/17): "The just ended official visit to the United
States by the Russian president has not lived up to the expectations of skeptics
on both sides who either predicted a 'limited success' or referred to the
visitor's shady professional past. Vladimir Putin has put to shame all skeptics
by endearing himself to the Americans. The secret of his great success is
simple. A guest coming from far-off Russia, he acted in a way that is peculiarly
American. Being sincere and open will win you the world. Putin has earned the
trust of even the U.S. congressmen, perhaps the most conservative group of
Americans. Many members of the 'Capitol Club' disliked Russia and Yeltsin's
successor himself. It turns out that even hard core ill-wishers can reform....
Many important issues have remained unresolved. But given the will to cooperate
shown by both presidents, the situation must change for the better pretty
soon."
"A Fly In The Ointment"
Boris Volkonskiy remarked in reformist business-oriented Kommersant (11/17):
"The events in Afghanistan couldn't have happened at a better time for both
presidents. The triumphant blare of trumpets has somewhat silenced talk about
differences between Russia and the United States in the defense area. A fly in
the ointment, mentioned in many comments, is that the positions of the two
countries have remained unchanged on issues such as ABM and NATO."
"Old Standards Don't Work Anymore"
Vadim Markushin commented on page one of centrist army Krasnaya Zvezda
(11/16): "Grueling talks, endless 'consultations,' and the diplomacy of
mistrust and suspicion are ineffective, as well as dull. All that, however,
seemed justified in Cold War years because of ideological enmity and commitment
to parity. Today, with Russia and the United States having a common enemy, old
standards, including in the area of arms control, need to be reviewed. The
change is good for Russia--it faces too many economic problems. At the same
time, Russia's nuclear potential is enough to deter any threat of aggression.
The president's statement that Russia is ready to slash its warheads to a third
of their number is evidence of greater trust between Moscow and Washington and a
balanced approach to how many strategic weapons this country really needs these
days."
"Russia A Superpower Again"
Tatyana Malkina filed from Crawford for reformist Vremya Novostey (11/16):
"It looks as if the two presidents of the superpowers--in the eyes of the
Western community, Russia has made a comeback to regain its old status--have got
together to discuss what to do next with the world they own. The two bears have
finally decided to live peacefully in the same lair and help each other improve
their common home."
"Putin, Bush Have No Ideological Differences"
Yelena Ovcharenko and Andrey Kabannikov contended in reformist,
youth-oriented Komsomolskaya Pravda (11/16): "The two days spent with the
Bush family at the Texan ranch have shown that there are no ideological
differences between Putin and Bush."
"They Could Use More Trust"
Aleksandr Budberg remarked on page one of reformist, youth-oriented
Moskovskiy Komsomolets (11/16): "Despite the benign atmosphere and obvious
rapprochement, you can feel that the talks are tough going, with the sides
bargaining hard to secure their interests. Admittedly, they still don't trust
each other 100 percent."
"Lack Of Progress"
Sergey Guly said in reformist Noviye Izvestiya (11/16): "As the two
presidents talked in Washington and Texas, the warm personal relationship they
had developed has been of little help in resolving the issue of the ABM treaty.
The statement on the United States' planning to cut its strategic arms
radically, timed for the summit, hasn't had the desired effect either. This
means that the striking personal partnership between the two presidents is
beginning to conflict with the strategic plans of the Republican
administration."
"Handshake Is Not Enough"
Vitaliy Dymarskiy commented on page one of official government Rossiyskaya
Gazeta (11/15): "Starting in Europe, 'Putinmania' seems to have crossed the
ocean to reach the Americans and our compatriots who are living and working in
the United States.... This is all very well, but both Russia and the United
States are democracies, and their presidents will not be in office forever.
Relations between two nuclear powers in the area of strategic stability cannot
be built for four or eight years, even less so on the basis of their leaders'
personal likes (or dislikes) alone. Besides, a handshake, no matter how firm and
friendly, does not lend itself to ratification by parliament. People in
Washington must realize that."
"Russia Joins Western Community"
Sergey Chugayev wrote in reformist, youth-oriented Komsomolskaya Pravda
(11/15): "The results of the Russian president's visit to the United States
do not seem all too impressive. But then, nobody was expecting historic
breakthroughs. What matters is that the joint statements that have been made
attest to the mighty impetus the West and Russia have received these days as
they have been moving ever closer together since the breakup of the Warsaw Pact
and August of 1991. The West has actually recognized Russia as part and parcel
of the (Western) community, as well as a partner. Russia, for its part, has made
it clear that it is determined to give up vainly searching for a 'special path'
and follow a well-trodden and time-honored road as a democracy and market
economy."
"New Positions On Many Issues"
Svetlana Babayeva pointed out on page one of reformist Izvestiya (11/15):
"There have been changes in positions on many issues, from Afghanistan to
investments in Russia.... You wouldn't call the summit revolutionary. But it
will give a major impulse to solving a host of issues that have been on the
agenda for decades. Symbolically, Putin is the first foreign leader to visit the
U.S. president's ranch in Texas. This is evidence that relations between the two
leaders have really gone beyond formal protocol."
"White Noise"
Tatyana Malkina reported from Washington for reformist Vremya Novostey
(11/15): "The content of all statements was known before the summit. Such
statements might have surprised someone a couple of years ago. Today they sound
like 'white noise.' The whole thing looks dull, but this, better than anything
else, shows that the Cold War is really over."
"Accords Live Up To Expectations"
According to Artur Blinov of reformist Vremya MN (11/15): "Overall, the
accords reached have lived up to expectations."
"Compromise On ABM Likely"
Vladimir Urban noted on page one of reformist Noviye Izvestiya (11/15):
"The nuclear arms cuts promised by the U.S. president are good for Russia's
security.... As for ABM, given the present state of relations between Russia and
the United States, a compromise is most likely."
"Lack Of Rapprochement"
Sergey Guly argued in reformist Noviye Izvestiya (11/15): "While there
is no problem with the declaration on combating terrorism, the documents on the
basic issues of strategic stability, it seems, are designed merely to camouflage
a lack of substantial rapprochement. As declared, the United States and Russia
are not enemies anymore. But they have yet to learn to be friends."
"Dreaming About Russia"
Vitaliy Portnikov commented in reformist business-oriented Vedomosti (11/14):
"Now Moscow and Washington have a common ideology.... Even so, with Russia,
NATO's enlargement is a security risk rather than a feast of freedom; Iran is a
strategic partner rather than a potential enemy of Western civilization; the
Northern Alliance is a legitimate government rather than a coalition of ethnic
minorities. But the idea behind Russian-American cooperation is that all those
differences do not matter--you can list just as many examples of divergence
between the United States and the EU or between the United States and Canada.
The main thing is that the United States, EU, and Canada follow the same road of
development, have common notions of a market economy and democracy, and share
the same values. After 9/11, the West conceived the idea (dream?) that Russia is
a country just like the United States, Germany or Britain. So the success of
Putin's visit depends more on whether that notion holds than on whether he and
his U.S. colleague come to terms on specific points of the agenda."
"Trip To Ranch Worth A Dozen Rounds Of Official Talks"
Andrey Kabannikov filed from Washington for reformist youth-oriented
Komsomolskaya Pravda (11/14): "When George invited Vladimir to come see him
in the Texan prairie for a glimpse of his private life, he meant to have their
personal sympathy grow into a deep human relationship to help them get over
political formalities in the future. As Putin strives to learn more about
America and Americans, this trip to George's ranch is probably worth a dozen
rounds of official talks."
BRITAIN: "Seeking The Beef At The Barbecue"
The independent Financial Times offered this lead editorial (11/19):
"Vladimir Putin and George Bush want to be the best of friends. Of that
there can be little doubt after their summit meetings and neighborly barbecue in
Texas last week. But putting solid substance into the cheery style is a tougher
proposition. Mr. Putin is not going to be a pushover. His military advisors
remain suspicious of Washington and its allies. But he has cast his die for the
West. It is up to Mr. Bush to respond. Going slow on missile defense is part of
it. Another way is to bind Moscow more closely to NATO. A third way is to
accelerate the membership process for Russia in the world economic system--and
the [WTO] in particular. Tackling these questions will require close three-way
collaboration between the U.S., Russia and the rest of Europe. Mr. Bush must
counter the suspicion that he wants his European allies to embrace Russia more
closely--and pay for it--to enable him to go ahead with missile defense at home.
He must invite his partners to the barbecue, too."
A Touching Of Fingertips"
The independent weekly Economist observed (11/17): "The most striking
result is that both sides have agreed to make deep cuts in their arsenals of
nuclear warheads.... These reductions are significant, partly for the glow of
goodwill that surrounds them, and partly for the way in which they were decided
upon.... The other feature of this week's announcements is their curious mixture
of unilateralism and cooperation. Bush said he was cutting America's stockpile
regardless of anything Russia did.... Still, if this was unilateralism, it was a
most unusual kind: cooperative unilateralism.... The parallel reductions have
already broken a diplomatic stalemate. They also show a mixture similar to the
1950s in which negotiated agreements support unilateral moves.... The test of
this new way of organizing the two sides' dealings is already under way:
blurring the ABM Treaty so that America can test a [MD] system.... At Crawford,
the two sides had hoped to reach an understanding pretending that the ABM Treaty
does not limited the tests America wants to perform.... Still, an abrogation has
at least for the moment been averted, and the two sides still seem willing to
try to inch closer together. If a deal can eventually be reached, the
administration will get its anti-missile tests, and the Russians will keep a
ghost of an ABM Treaty.... Of course, Putin's decision to move closer to the
West after September 11 is intended to get something in return. The missile cuts
are one part.... And he will get help on the economic front too.... The Crawford
summit was a complicated business. But it seems to open the door to a new
relationship between Russia and America."
"Bush, Putin At Odds Over Missile Treaty"
In the centrist Independent, Washington correspondent Rupert Cornwell noted
(11/16): "Despite three days of backslapping and bonhomie in Washington and
Texas, the presidents...have failed to strike a deal on the future of the [ABM]
Treaty.... [However,] the two leaders made clear they would not let disagreement
over the ABM Treaty spoil a summit which has otherwise sealed a new
rapprochement between Washington and Moscow--with promises by both countries to
slash existing nuclear arsenals by up to two-thirds, and of unstinting Russian
support for the U.S.-led campaign against terrorism."
"Putin Secures The Spoils Of War"
The centrist Independent declared (11/15): "High on the list of national
leaders to emerge with credit from the catastrophic events of 11 September is
Vladimir Putin. In managing simultaneously to support the United States, promote
his country's interests and protect his own political back, the ex-KGB operative
has proved a deft operator with a shrewd grasp of political realities. He is
reaping his reward in America this week, where he is the first Russian (or
Soviet) leader for many a year to meet his American counterpart on something
like equal terms.... Among other tangible prizes, Mr. Putin has now won a
public--and unilateral--commitment from a Republican president to slash the U.S.
nuclear arsenal. He has also elicited an undertaking from the same president to
try to get the Jackson-Vanneck amendment lifted.... It hardly matters whether
Mr. Bush can fulfill these promises. Just placing them on the public record,
while leaving the vexed question of missile defense open, allows Mr. Putin to
return to Moscow in triumph.... Thanks to an economy that now registers the
highest growth rate in Europe, Mr. Putin's domestic critics have been steadily
falling away. His U.S. summit will thin their ranks still further."
"Putin Wins New Great Game"
Foreign editor Bronwen Maddox judged in the conservative Times (11/15):
"President Putin could not have planned it better. He has the missile deal
he wanted from Bush, and, in Afghanistan, he has backed the winning side,
extending Russia's influence in the way his country has wanted for 150 years....
Putin has shown since September 11 a clarity that America's need for partners
can be turned to his advantage.... Putin has seen Afghanistan transformed in
just five days from a country hostile to him, still gloating over its success in
driving out Soviet forces, to one in which his side has won an astonishing
victory.... But Russia's backing counts for something, and will have bought it
some influence over Afghanistan. That is just what Putin's forebears, playing
the Great Game against Britain 150 years ago, sought to gain."
"A Kaleidoscope Moment"
The liberal Guardian opined (11/14): "The three-day summit...has the
makings of a truly historic event, marking a possibly radical new departure for
both countries.... Closely linked to this pact is a prospective compromise on
U.S. plans for national missile defense.... Putin has softened his earlier
opposition and hinted that he may agree to amend or tactily ignore the 1972
[ABM] Treaty.... In return, Mr. Bush will drop, for now at least, his threat to
withdraw unilaterally from the ABM treaty and may offer a technology-sharing
arrangement... There remain clear differences over how best to address these
issues. The U.S. objects to Russian arms sales to Iran; Russia opposes U.S.-led
sanctions against Iraq. And both sides offer conflicting definitions of
terrorism: what for Mr. Bush are Chechen freedom-fighters are for Mr. Putin a
despicable foe. But these concerns are easily outranked, for example, by
Russia's importance to the U.S. as a counterweight to a strengthening China and
its potential as a major, non-Opec oil supplier; and by the modernizing Mr.
Putin's need to reduce Soviet-era debt, increase western investment, entrench
market reforms, and obtain entry into the World Trade Organization.... But if
Mr. Bush is serious about this root-and-branch new beginning, a bigger leap of
faith, imagination and plain common sense is required. It is time to invite
Russia to become a full member of NATO. More than a decade after the Soviet
Union imploded, the alliance has still to find a convincing global role.... As
Mr. Blair might say, events have shaken the kaleidoscope. Now what is needed is
a clear vision."
FRANCE: "Barbecue And Country Music For Putin"
Pascal Riche judged in an article in left-of-center Liberation (11/16):
"Despite the absence of any major breakthrough on MD, the Russo-American
summit in Crawford is a spectacular diplomatic success, symbolizing the final
burial of the Cold War. Since September 11, relations between Russia and the
West have improved and anything seems possible today, including bringing Russia
into NATO. The Russian president has understood that in the current state of
crisis the time is now or never to secure the help of the United States."
"Bush, Putin Set Out To Win Each Others' Friendship"
Patrick Saint-Paul had this to say in right-of-center Le Figaro (11/16):
"The emphasis was on folklore and friendship to hide the absence of any
agreement on the MD question.... In order to seal their friendship, the two
leaders nevertheless agreed to reduce their stock of nuclear warheads. This
long-awaited reduction...would have been perceived as a major success if the
shadow of the [MD] shield had not darkened the picture."
"The Tsar And The Cowboy"
Left-of-center weekly Le Nouvel Observateur contended (11/15-21): "The
day after taking office, George W. Bush was so sure of the might of his country
that he felt free to do anything. The attacks changed all of that and forced him
to find allies and, especially, to listen to them. Meanwhile Putin, who needs
America and Europe to bring Russia into the global economy, could not pass up
such an occasion."
GERMANY: "Building Bridges"
Klaus-Dieter Frankenberger commented on the front-page of right-of-center
Frankfurter Allgemeine (11/19): "If Russia continues to make progress with
respect to civil rights and stops maintaining relations with 'rogue states,' the
United States and its allies will investigate how much Russia should be part of
NATO's decision-making process and whether there is a need for new institutional
links. The Russia-NATO Council, this much seems clear, has not turned out to be
very effective.... One argument against involving Russia too closely in
NATO...is that it would change the character of NATO as a defensive alliance. In
addition, Russian NATO membership would probably mean a shift in the alliance's
power structure, reducing the influence of western European countries in favor
of U.S.-Russian concerns.... The new bridges leading into Russia must stand on
solid foundations. And the more solid the foundations, the more daring the
architects [of security policy] can be."
"Tentative Relations"
Center-left Sueddeutsche Zeitung of Munich pointed out in an editorial
(11/17): "There was no full agreement and unity at the end of the Bush-Putin
meeting. Both sides kept underlining that much work remains to be done.
Nevertheless, the meeting was a success. After all, Bush and Putin--who both
ironically were derided in Europe after coming to power--have agreed to put
relations between their two countries on a new foundation. If they succeed in
doing so, all other disagreements begin to pale in comparison."
"Disarmer"
Klaus-Dieter Frankenberger opined in center-right Frankfurter Allgemeine
(11/15): "Only a few months ago, forecasts on the future of disarmament
policy were somber.... The advocates of doom were totally wrong when they
declared the ABM Treaty a jewel of disarmament policy. The U.S. missile defense
project is now turning into a lever for strategic disarmament. The agreement
between Bush and Putin breaks the sterility of disarmament negotiations, but
will also dramatically accelerate the reduction of strategic arsenals.... This
does not mean that the dispute over the ABM Treaty is over, but Bush and Putin
have now shown a way to it resolve it."
"On The Path To Partnership"
Jochen Siemens opined in left-of-center Frankfurter Rundschau (11/15):
"Following the September 11 attacks, President Putin resolutely seized the
opportunity to recommend himself as a reliable partner in the fight against
terrorism.... Putin is now expecting support for this country's accession to the
WTO and closer relations with NATO. With confidence and a broadly-based
partnership [supplanting] dogmatic fixation on treaties, the new terrorist
threat is promoting alliances between countries who were opponents during the
times of the Cold War."
"Russia's Return"
Michael Stuermer noted in right-of-center Die Welt of Berlin (11/15):
"Up to September 11, Russia was nothing but a toppled global power and
Putin the architect of a crumbling house.... Russia is no longer a superpower,
but Putin and his followers are once again players on the global political
stage.... The United States has caught a glimpse of hell and had to learn that
old allies count and new ones are needed--and none more urgently than
Russia."
"Once Controversial, ABM Treaty No Longer Plays Role"
Regional radio station Hessischer Rundfunk of Frankfurt aired the following
commentary by P. Krueger (11/14): "The interests of both sides are obvious:
Bush needs Russia for the multinational coalition that fights terrorism, while
the Russian president needs good relations with the West...for a halfway stable
situation at home. The willingness of the U.S. president to make a big leap
forward on disarmament is based on his wish to get concessions from Putin
concerning the U.S. [MD] project.... Differences of opinion remain, but the
basic willingness for a partnership is obvious. That is why the ABM Treaty,
which was very controversial a few months ago, will soon no longer play a role.
Washington and Moscow will forge their anti-terror alliance, because they are
dependent on each other. International crises always produce strange
bedfellows."
ITALY: "A 'Nyet' Will Not Stop The New
Axis"
Ugo Tramballi penned this analysis in leading, business Il Sole-24 Ore
(11/16): "The new cooperation between the United States and Russia is so
active and profound that it seems to be a new global political directorate....
In the (global) framework that suddenly changed after September 11, during which
China also entered the WTO...and stands side by side with Russia in the U.S.
struggle against terrorism, (and) exactly because the world is expanding
eastward, Russia now seems to be closer...no longer a Euro-Asian empire, but
more and more a Western country. This is the message that Vladimir Putin has
taken to the United States."
"Bush, Putin Explain New Alliance To Students In Texas"
Washington correspondent Ennio Caretto remarked in centrist, top-circulation
Corriere della Sera (11/16): "We were expecting a turning point, and we
received a show instead: with Bush as the cowboy protagonist, and Putin--showing
his unease, to tell the truth--as his co-star.... Instead of a compromise on the
1972 ABM Treaty...the two presidents announced another summit in Moscow and St.
Petersburg.... And instead of an exchange-reduction of strategic warheads and
missile defense systems, they offered the world their commitment to eliminate
bin Laden and the Taliban. The summit has not achieved its objectives, but its
protagonists have concealed that with jokes and an exchange of courtesies."
"Bush, Putin Divided Over 'Space Shield'"
New York correspondent Stefano Trincia commented in Rome's centrist Il
Messaggero (11/15): "Nuclear warheads, the future of Afghanistan, NATO
expansion eastwards, bio-terrorism.... Bush and Putin are discussing the fate of
the world, Moscow-Washington relations, and the prospects of a new strategic
accord in Texas. There seems to be full agreement on the situation in
Afghanistan.... But the nuclear chess game is the issue that still dominates the
talks on the second day of Putin's visit to the United States."
"America Launches The Reduction of Nuclear Arsenals"
Prominent commentator Franco Venturini in centrist, top-circulation Corriere
della Sera judged (11/14): "The news about ten thousand nuclear warheads
fewer is good for all humanity. It is also a credible sign that points to a new
strategic friendship between Russia and the United States. However...with regard
to the rest (of the issues), the White House summit has not met several
expectations... In fact, there has been no agreement on the ABM Treaty,
therefore, the 'mutual, great agreement' linking the reduction of offensive
arsenals and the legality of defensive systems didn't occur.... It has been
decided to provide as much cover as possible for the head of the Kremlin (Putin),
thus allowing him to go back to Moscow with his own 'success'...and consolidate
the basis for a rapprochement between former foes, who next Spring might be able
to reach new objectives, during a summit which could be held in Russia."
"Bush And Putin Agree On The Future Of Kabul"
With a bold sub-headline "Washington Offers A Drastic Reduction Of (Its)
Nuclear Arsenal," Maurizio Molinari observed from New York in centrist,
influential La Stampa (11/14): "At the White House, the two leaders talked
to each other as friends and allies; they...assessed their success and looked
ahead together.... Russia and Washington look at the next objectives of the war
against terrorism together. Bush announced that 'We have created a joint team of
experts in order to avoid allowing terrorists to purchase and use weapons of
mass destruction, (including) chemical, biological and nuclear arms.' The
military aspect is the pivot of any political agreement, which would lead Russia
as close as never before to the Atlantic Alliance."
BULGARIA: "Bush And Putin Look For New Rules of
Co-Existence"
Left-leaning Monitor commented (11/14): "In the sprit of Bush's new
course of unilateral action, now behind the mask of a global coalition against
terrorism, the U.S. will probably pull out of the ABM Treaty and will attempt to
build systems in violation of this treaty. The Kremlin, despite the opposition
of its military, will opt for changes in the strategic field, allowing the U.S.
to bolster its defenses against rogue states.... In the current negotiations,
however, Putin will have to look for a compromise that paves the way for Bush's
demands for shunning the Cold War schemes, but at the same time does not allow
the United States to enforce unilaterally its plans in the strategic, military
and space fields."
FINLAND: "Unexpectedly Good Friends"
Liberal, Swedish-language Hufvudstadsbladet observed (11/15):
"Cooperation in the anti-terrorism coalition has brought the United States
and Russia closer together. Chemistry between Bush and Putin appears to be
working well. Nevertheless, it is surprising that Russia and the United States,
appear to be so smoothly headed toward an agreement which would reduce the
number of nuclear weapons in the world in a decisive way.... One of Russia's
goals is to regain its role on the international scene. That requires positive
economic developments in the country and it also requires that some burying of
hatchets. This is what Putin is looking for during his visit with Bush. Arms
control talks take time regardless of the goodwill but, optimally, we could see
already next year an agreement which will make the world a little safer
place."
HUNGARY: "The Spy Who Came In From The
Cold"
Senior columnist Janos Avar judged in influential, left-leaning Magyar Hirlap
(11/19): "It is a paradox, but nothing better reflects the fundamentally
different nature of today's U.S.-Russia relations than the lack of the
obligatory movement that is otherwise typical at such high level summits. It was
a summit of two successful men, two presidents after 9/11. A theatrical and
'fruitful' summit was not in the interest of either Bush or Putin."
"Putin's Metamorphosis"
Senior columnist Tibor Varkonyi judged in left leaning, influential Magyar
Hirlap (11/14): "Putin made the Western leaders accept that the Chechens
are also a tool in Osama bin Laden's hands and he (Putin) is the protector of
civilization in Grozny. Confidential sources in Moscow claim that the Russian
president has worked out his new concept of siding with the West entirely on his
own, without consulting his aides. Apparently, he acts often without their
approval. What complicates things is the fact that the Russian internal
situation, the economic crisis, does not improve. Homeland Russia follows the
international 'performance' (of Putin) with great difficulties. At the same time
Putin has slightly but surely 'swung back' Russia, and himself, into mainstream
international politics."
IRELAND: "Putin In The Limelight"
The conservative, populist Irish Independent's editorial observed (11/17):
"Out of the fog of the Afghan war, the leader of a battered former
superpower has emerged with increased power, influence and international
standing.... Reportedly against the advice of generals and officials, the
Russian leader stood firmly by the United States.... And now he has had his
reward in the form of a summit meeting with Bush which has succeeded to an
extent unimaginable during the Cold War or under the regime of Yeltsin.... But
he (Putin) has brought some order to a country which had tumbled into
near-chaos. He has begun to repair the economy. And now he has shown his
strategic hand. It is a hand far stronger than anyone could have imagined. It
has been, and will be, played by a formidable operator."
"U.S. Still Has Way To Go In Convincing Russians On ABM"
Patrick Smyth wrote in the liberal Irish Times (11/15): "The real prize
for the Americans is the abandonment of the ABM [Treaty], or at the very least a
willingness for the Russians to turn a blind eye for the time being to its
prohibition on the testing of missile defense systems.... Yet Russia, if no
longer a rival of the United States, still has strategic interests and Mr. Putin,
despite his enthusiastic rallying to the United States following September 11th,
must not be seen at home to roll over and play dead for the Americans. Russia
still has superpower ambitions, a reality reflected in Mr. Putin's somewhat
contradictory stances at home and abroad. The United States still has some way
to go to persuade him to accept ultimate deployment of the system, if, that is,
it ever works. Some Russia watchers, moreover, still remain to be convinced at
the sincerity of Mr. Putin's commitment to the West."
MOLDOVA: "Political Configuration of Tomorrow
World is Being Decided
Petru Bogatu argued in popular, Christian Democratic Party's Tara (11/16):
"The first news that we are getting from the U.S. is confirming the
suppositions whereby Bush's ranch could be another Malta, where more than a
decade ago the current president's further made a historic compromise with the
Russians, after which the face of the world changed. The price that Washington
is ready to pay to make Moscow give up some of the Soviet Union's old spheres of
influence, thus smoothing the path for the western expansion to the East, is
taking shape.... Bush declared, by the way, that his country will substantially
reduce its nuclear arsenal to 1700 warheads. In other words, the Russians have
been made an extraordinary concession. Due to this fact, they will finally be
released from the unbearable burden of the military expenses. The agreements
made in Texas will be the basis for the re-launch of the Russian economy and for
the consolidation of the Free World's position in the fight against
terrorism."
THE NETHERLANDS: "Home On The Ranch"
Influential independent NRC Handelsblad had this editorial (11/17):
"However satisfied Bush again shows himself to be about Putin's character,
Russia is still far from being the partner that the United States, and, more
broadly, the West would like to see. The Putin government wants to make Russia a
full partner in political and economic globalization; no doubt about that. But
it is at present not able to meet all the necessary requirements. That, in the
long run, will make Bush vulnerable to criticism about the new friendship."
"Bush And Putin: A Summit Without Drama"
Centrist Haagsche Courant noted in its editorial (11/17): "What was held
as impossible twenty years ago; drastic nuclear arms reduction...now is no more
than a gesture of goodwill. Imperceptibly we have taken leave of the paradigm of
mutual deterrence between major powers. What was never achieved by massive
demonstrations in European capitals, now looks to be simple to arrange. The
threat of war comes from opponents who do not want to make their weapons known.
Whether a missile shield helps against that remains to be seen. The doomsday
machine seems to be able to take on the guise of an envelope with some
powder."
POLAND: "Good Omen"
U.S. correspondent Krzysztof Darewicz observed in centrist Rzeczpospolita
(11/16): "Even though the talks between the U.S. and Russian presidents had
not brought a breakthrough on modifying the ABM Treaty the Americans expected,
the Bush-Putin summit turned out to be a triumph of pragmatism all the same. It
augurs well both for the future of American-Russian relations and for the
prospects of strengthening global stability."
"Bush Shares With Putin"
Krzysztof Rak wrote in right-of-center Zycie (11/16): "[Vladimir Putin]
has made Russian politics more realistic, tailoring it to the size of a regional
power--and this began to bring success. The prescription was simple: Russia must
realize that its interests are not against, but in line with those of
America."
"Cowboy And Bear, Side By Side"
Wieslaw S. Debski opined in leftist Trybuna (11/16): "Both countries are
at last beginning to understand that any further rivalry between them, in
particular in the military area, does not make much sense in the current
situation. The September 11 events showed that the number of ballistic missiles
did not determine the security of a country. New threats require completely new
methods of struggle.... Both presidents also understood that no country would
secure its own safety by itself."
"Putin's Pragmatism"
Bronislaw Wildstein opined in centrist Rzeczpospolita (11/14): "Putin is
a cold pragmatic. Russia's tough position toward the United States did not bring
results, but it led instead to the escalation of tension with the West. Not only
did Moscow's objection to NATO enlargement fail to block this process-it in fact
reduced Russia's range of political and diplomatic actions. Therefore, Putin
decided to take the chance that the role of an important U.S. ally gives
him."
ROMANIA: "The Main Obstacle"
Nicolae Lupu wrote in opposition Romania Libera (11/20): "The main
obstacle which must be overcome is the discrepancy between the position of the
American Congress, which asserts there can be no (NATO) expansion without
including the Baltic countries, and Putin's opponents, from the high military
and Russian political circles, who believe that including the Baltic countries
would be a threat to Russia's security. Obviously, Putin could make use of the
argument that, since Russia is now a partner and not an enemy, such a thesis
becomes absurd."
SLOVENIA: "Brothers In Weapons"
Foreign editor Boris Jausovec opined left-of-center, independent Vecer
(11/15): "A chemistry of personal magnetism has been felt [since they first
met] which has held out hope to the world. The two presidents...have already
agreed about a two-thirds reduction of the number of nuclear warheads.... The
international community should be satisfied. The situation has changed after the
end of the Cold War.... The time of mutual partnership has begun. The terrorist
threat and the anti-terrorist campaign in Afghanistan have to a certain degree
forced the presidents to this point.... However, reasons for the decision on the
reduction of the number of nuclear warheads are not exclusively humanitarian.
The Russians have agreed to it also--or primarily--because the maintenance of
their nuclear arsenal...is too expensive. The United States, on the other hand,
keeps repeating its story about missile defense.... The problem is that the
Russian president does not want to renounce the ABM Treaty.... At Bush's ranch,
the presidents are expected to reach a strategic--or a gentlemen's--agreement
about this subject."
SPAIN: "Bush, Putin And The War"
Centrist La Vanguardia noted (11/15): "Before 9/11 Bush insisted on NATO
enlargement in Eastern Europe and did not hide his determination to implement
the old idea of a missile shield.... The war against terrorism was a turning
point. Putin offered the U.S. his help and knowledge about Afghanistan.... Now
Putin is awaiting the reward. Bush announced his intention of reducing by
two-thirds the U.S. strategic nuclear weapons and Russia will proceed
accordingly.... Everything hints that there are new ideas about missile defense,
which would satisfy Putin. In any case, the treatment provided to the Russian
president shows that the United States is now willing to facilitate Russia's
return to the international arena. Thanks to the war, Putin has regained part of
what he had lost since the end of the Cold War."
"A New Relationship"
Left-of-center El Pais commented (11/15): "It is clear that Bush's
intention is to leave behind the excessive nuclear armament on which the
obsolete balance of terror of the Cold War was based.... The meeting between
Bush and Putin in Washington and Texas should be useful to generate more
confidence between both leaders."
TURKEY: "The Bush-Putin Summit"
Fikret Ertan wrote in Islamic/intellectual Zaman (11/14): "Apparently
this time the summit will definitely produce some results and Putin will not go
back empty-handed.... The reduction in strategic nuclear weapons is something
the U.S. also seeking.... Therefore that part is the done-deal portion of the
Bush-Putin agenda.... Putin is also going to ask U.S. support for its WTO
membership. After all, both sides will benefit from this summit."
YUGOSLAVIA: "A Historic Opportunity"
Foreign-owned, centrist Blic (11/20) carried a commentary by columnist and
former Tanjug U.S. correspondent, Dusan Miklja: Why is the shift in the
U.S.-Russian relations so educative for us? Because it offers a historic
opportunity to the FRY to enter a period of the best relations in a century with
the biggest world power. This conclusion stems from the fact that pragmatism,
which has always been the main characteristic of the U.S. policy, is now more
than ever favorable for us. The fact that the two statesmen (Bush and Putin),
who in their talks were focused on the struggle against international terrorism,
had found time to discuss the Balkans--more precisely Kosovo--leads us to a
conclusion that there has been a shift in the so far one-sided approach to this
volatile region. So, it seems almost unnecessary to point out that this is a
historic opportunity for us to start seeing the international community as our
ally rather than our opponent. Those who due to their bitterness or political
blindness cannot do so will find themselves in an absurd, even tragicomic
situation when they realize that in their anti-Americanism they cannot rely on
Russia any more, simply because Russia is on America's side."
EAST ASIA AND PACIFIC
AUSTRALIA: "Shrinking The Nuclear
Stockpile"
An editorial in the liberal Melbourne Age stressed (11/16): "The black
market in nuclear material is the shadow lying behind the announcement in
Washington this week that the United States and Russia have agreed to slash
their arsenal of nuclear warheads.... Mr. Bush's pledge to reduce the U.S.
nuclear stockpile is an encouraging sign, however, that a new era of cooperation
between the former Cold War enemies is under way.... Proliferation experts have
warned that the threat of terrorists obtaining such weapons is real. Russia and
the United States have much to gain by cooperating on this issue. Having devised
weapons of mass destruction, they have a heavy responsibility to try to keep the
genie in the bottle."
CHINA: "ABM Treaty Will Not Last Long"
Xue Fukang wrote in intellectually-oriented Guangming Daily (Guangming Ribao,
11/19): "The most important achievement of the Bush-Putin summit is that
the U.S. and Russia are to establish a new type of strategic relationship that
surpasses the post-Cold War era. This development will make the two countries'
discussions on the ABM Treaty lose their original significance, and indicates
that the treaty will not last long.... The summit has resulted in a qualitative
upgrade of U.S.-Russia relations, a signal that the post-Cold War era is
over."
"What Has Made The U.S. And Russia Come Closer?"
Lu Yi commented in the official Beijing Youth Daily (Beijing Qingnianbao,
11/15): "By gradually approaching the United States, Putin wishes to lead
Russia to make another comeback to the international stage."
HONG KONG SAR: "Reduced Firepower"
The independent English-language South China Morning Post said in its
editorial (11/17): "There was a time when a summit between the leaders of
the U.S. and the then Soviet Union would grab world headlines. The recent
meeting between George W. Bush and Vladimir Putin in Washington and at the U.S.
President's ranch in Texas has barely caused a ripple in the imagination.... The
decision by both presidents to reduce their long range nuclear arsenals by
two-thirds is a long overdue move, even though it will take a decade to achieve.
Hopefully it will be followed by further reductions. In the case of Russia, the
cuts in weapons has the added advantage of reducing the money that it needs to
spend on maintaining and safeguarding its nuclear arsenal. The agreement to
reduce the U.S. and Russian nuclear powers should also act as a spur on the
three other countries with significant nuclear arsenals, France, Britain and
China, as well as the two recent entrants to the nuclear club, India and
Pakistan, to think about reducing their weapons. These huge nuclear stockpiles
are remnants of a bygone era, and have no place in the modern world."
"Reducing Missiles Conducive To Building New U.S.-Russian Strategic
Framework"
Pro-PRC, Chinese-language Macau Daily News commented in its editorial
(11/17): "Bush and Putin issued several joint declarations after their
meeting. However, these declarations are just about the new U.S.-Russian
relationship, cooperative efforts against bio-terrorism, hitting at drug
smuggling and the situation in Afghanistan and the Middle East. Not one
declaration is about NMD or amending the 'anti-missile pact.' The only positive
message regarding strategic weapons is that Bush and Putin announced they would
reduce the number of present warheads by two-thirds. Russia insisted on the
importance of investigation and supervision but the U.S. rejected the
suggestion. On the issue of whether or not to amend the 'anti-missile pact', the
U.S. and Russia still have a lot of differences.... In brief, the results of the
U.S.-Russian summit are really limited."
JAPAN: "A Positive Step Toward Nuclear
Disarmament"
An editorial in top-circulation, moderate Yomiuri observed (11/15): "A
joint statement issued following the White House meeting between Presidents Bush
and Putin confirmed the nuclear superpowers' intention to slash their strategic
nuclear arsenals. We view the announcement as highly significant because it will
give a new boost to efforts to reduce nuclear arms, which are the most visible
legacy of the Cold War era.... However, President Putin...made clear that there
would be no change in Moscow's position favoring the continuation of the ABM
Treaty.... We hope the cooperative relationship between the two countries, which
has deepened rapidly since the September 11 terror attacks...will help smooth
future bilateral security consultations."
SINGAPORE: "Russia Looks West"
The pro-government Straits Times said in its editorial (11/19): "Despite
the surface fuss, the summit can be deemed a success. The absence of rancor was
an indication of the extent to which Russia now looks West, and of U.S. desire
to accommodate that tendency. With China to its east, and Muslim nations to its
south, Russia has obviously decided its future lies with Europe and America,
strategically and economically. Bush recognises this fact--thus his kid-glove
treatment of Putin on ABM--but will continue to insist that Russia's absorption
into the West will be on U.S. terms. The question Asians will have to ask
themselves is this: Where does all this leave China? Bush might ask himself that
question too."
SOUTH ASIA
INDIA: "The U.S.-Russia Consensus"
The centrist Hindu opined (11/19): "Bush and...Putin seem eager to
downplay divisive issues that can only cloud their joint commitment to combat
international terrorism. This explains their apparent move to place on the
backburner a highly sensitive question regarding the future of the...ABM
Treaty.... With the ABM irritant off the radar screen for the present, the two
countries have identified new priorities: the ongoing anti-terror campaign and
the oft-repeated pledge to prevent the proliferation of nuclear weapons and
ballistic missiles."
MIDDLE EAST
SAUDI ARABIA: "Putin Takes a Calculated Risk in
Aligning With U.S."
The Jeddah-based, moderate Arab News featured this op-ed by Hassen Tahsin
(11/19): "Putin went to Washington with few choices...either to remain
aloof and risk a confrontation with the United States and the West, or to agree
to be part of the international coalition against terrorism. Putin chose the
second option.... Putin tried, by this sharp shift in policy, to project his
country as a major player in refashioning the world political map.... The
opposition is fierce, especially when it comes to Washington's presence in
Central Asia.... The Russian military top brass fears that allowing the United
States to use the air space and bases of Central Asia would be interpreted as
handing over this region to Washington.... Putin is not ignoring such fears or
concerns. He is cautious over strategic issues.... The question political
observers in Russia ask is if things don't turn out the way Putin wants or
hopes, will the Russian president change course?"
WESTERN HEMISPHERE
CANADA: "Missile Ententes Matter"
The liberal Toronto Star wrote (11/18): "The Russians, like most of us,
hope that over time the Americans will come to regard their dream of achieving
invulnerability through missile defences as too costly, too controversial, too
technically iffy and too destabilizing to be worth the effort. That is what the
ABM drafters believed three decades ago. They haven't been proved wrong yet.
Well-crafted ententes still matter."
ARGENTINA: "'Come On, Let's Be Friends'!"
Gabriel A. Uriarte, leftist Pagina 12's international columnist, commented
(11/16): "If you ignore the inevitable photo-op...we can say that the
summit was remarkable for what it did not achieve. 'Bush and Putin agree on many
topics, but not on ABM,' confirmed the always optimistic New York Times. The
description could extend to other pending issues between the two countries,
including the future of Afghanistan, the policy towards Iraq and Caspian Sea
oil, and the conclusion is identical: there was an agreement on all issues,
except on those where there was none. Above all, we must emphasize that the
reduction in the arsenals of the two countries is not a concession but rather a
big 'non-concession' for both. Bush and Putin wanted to reduce their strategic
missiles, and for very similar reasons. Both wanted to save money.... But the
issue is much less urgent than everybody believes. The United States is years
away from deploying a 'strategic' anti-missile system, and until it is able to
do so, its only problem with ABM is the degree to which it will ban preliminary
tests.... In fact, ABM is not a priority for Putin. It is only a piece of
exchange to obtain concessions on a much more disturbing issue for post-Soviet
Russia: oil.... All their other bilateral conflicts have future dates [of
reckoning]. At present, Bush and Putin have reasons to ignore them in favor of
operating together on issues such as terrorism. They do not wish to discuss
their true differences without any urgent reason to do so."
"Washington And Moscow, Increasingly Close"
Ana Baron, Washington-based correspondent for leading Clarin, commented
(11/15): "The impressive reduction in nuclear armament agreed upon...does
nothing but confirm the turnabout in the relationship...since the September 11
attacks.... Due to those ironies of history, Afghanistan--one of the hottest
scenarios during the Cold War--has now allowed for a rapprochement between the
United States and Russia.... While there is still serious disagreement about
missile defense...both leaders are making an effort to overcome it and there has
been a political as well as personal rapprochement between them."
BRAZIL: "Accord Without Treaty"
An editorial in liberal Folha de S. Paulo read (11/16): "The fact that
the [U.S.-Russia nuclear arsenals reduction] accords are to be established on
the basis of mutual confidence reinforces the climate of cooperation between
Bush and Putin. The problem is in the precariousness of the settlements. Without
laws to anchor the negotiations, it is much easier for each side to regress.
Those who will succeed Bush and Putin, or even the current leaders themselves,
might allege they have changed their minds.... This system tends to work out
while both nations' interests remain the same, as it happens now. In the not at
all impossible hypothesis of diverse interests, the damage in the relationship
between the planet's two largest nuclear superpowers may be great."
CHILE: "Summit Of Superpowers"
Leading, independent La Tercera ran this editorial (11/19): "Bilateral
relations between the United States and Russia have acquired a new dynamic after
the September 11 attack.... The new international scenario...has brought these
two countries closer together in the sense that the two have identified
terrorism as the greatest threat the world faces today.... Bush's decision to
not unilaterally abandon the ABM Treaty and Putin's improved disposition to
discuss it, show the good standing of diplomatic ties between the two nations.
The improved relations between these two powers is positive, as long as it gives
the new international scenario greater stability in the aftermath of September
11."
Back to the Top
November 22, 2001:
#5560 #5561
Back to the Top • JRL Home • CDI Russia Weekly • Iraq War: RW 2003 • CDI Home