6314
#1
Moscow Times
June 18, 2002
Russia May Reap Policy Dividends
By Nabi Abdullaev
Staff Writer
Russia could assume a key role under U.S. President George W. Bush's planned "strike first" defense doctrine, providing crucial intelligence information and acting as a go-between with so-called rogue states to deter conflict, experts said Monday.
However, they said Moscow must also pragmatically strive to derive as many benefits as possible from its cooperation with the United States while defending its own interests -- such as the billions of dollars owed by Iraq, which is clearly first on the U.S. target list for preemptive action.
"We must cooperate with the Americans in fighting terrorism to the extent of joint intelligence and military operations, but only if the United States gives Russia what it needs," said Sergei Markov, a Kremlin-connected political analyst.
Chief among Russia's needs, he said, are U.S. assistance in isolating Chechen rebels in the international arena and the lifting of an informal ban on sales of Russian weapons to NATO member states.
Other analysts named debt relief and entry into the World Trade Organization as priorities.
For the Kremlin to get what it wants, its best bet is to provide passive support for the U.S.-led coalition to counter terrorism, said Vyacheslav Nikonov, head of the Politika think tank.
By doing that, it will be less likely to alienate traditional allies such as Syria, Libya, Iran and North Korea, which Washington considers rogue states, while at the same time reaping the benefits of being a partner with the West, he said.
"Today is the best period of Russian-American relations, and in this new climate Russia can expect more concessions from the United States in regards to its entry into the World Trade Organization and the negotiation of Russian debt," he said.
The litmus test that could define Russia's role in Bush's new doctrine -- which envisions taking pre-emptive action against states and terrorist groups the United States accuses of trying to develop weapons of mass destruction -- is shaping up to be Iraq.
Moscow, which has close ties with Baghdad and has pressed Washington not to launch an attack as part of its war on terrorism, has also indicated it would not drop out of the counterterrorism coalition should strikes take place.
Markov said the Kremlin needs to provide political and military support to the White House in its declared goal to topple Saddam Hussein -- but only if it is allowed to participate in the formation of a new Iraqi regime that will honor previous obligations to Russia.
Nikonov said joint military action was out of the question because all diplomatic avenues have not been exhausted, but he agreed Russia needs to look out for its interests in Iraq.
"We must pursue Iraq's debt to the Soviet Union and the contracts it has with Russian oil companies," he said.
Russia is eager to collect some $6 billion to $9 billion in Soviet-era debt from Iraq and safeguard lucrative contracts to explore the country's oil-rich southern region. Oil fields there are estimated to be worth some $70 billion.
By playing its cards correctly, Washington would likely accept Russian demands for debt repayment and oil, Nikonov said.
"Whether or not an offensive [against Iraq] takes place doesn't depend on Russia, and raising a clamor would be silly to say the least," said Ivan Safranchuk, head of the Moscow office of the Washington-based Center for Defense Information. "Washington would not force any country to join it in a strike against Iraq. All it wants is neutrality ... [and] Russia must use this to its advantage."
He said Russia's influence in the Arab world would probably not be damaged if it adopted a passive role, largely because Moscow has long had a stronger presence in the region than the United States. Also to its advantage, he said, is the fact that Russia has kept closer informal ties with Arab leaders and gathered more intelligence information on the region than the United States.
Meanwhile, Nikonov said Moscow could do a lot of good as a mediator in conflicts that challenge world security, a role that the framework of the Bush defense doctrine gives to Russia, Europe, China and Japan.
"In some cases, Russia has more chance of influencing disputing sides than the United States," he said, pointing as an example to President Vladimir Putin's recent effort to defuse the India-Pakistan conflict.
Safranchuk, however, warned against overestimating Russia's diplomatic weight, saying government officials would have to watch their step if they ever tried to act as mediators with traditional allies Syria, Libya, Iran or North Korea.
"These countries have respected Russia as a counterbalance to the United States," he said. "They would never listen to Moscow if it spoke on behalf of Washington. We are in danger of losing our diplomatic potential any time we are given a chance to display it."
Back to the Top Next Article
- Back to the Top -