At the rostrum of the press center, Putin and Blair looked almost like twins - they were young, dynamic, and clearly happy to know each other. On the eve of the news conference, Blair and his wife accepted Putin's invitation to see a new opera version staged in St. Petersburg. Blair obviously wanted to become the first Western instructor of the new Russian President. Putin appreciated an opportunity of having the British Prime Minister as a partner with modern mentality, and without Russophobic stereotypes.
Six years have passed since then. Today, the British press has sunk in the quagmire of these stereotypes, blaming Litvinenko's death on everyone in that wretched Russia with its permanent lack of freedom, the KGB gang in the Kremlin, serving tea with a strong polonium flavor to its enemies, and, finally, President Putin himself.
Importantly, accusations like that are being made by Whitehall top rankers. Three days after Litvinenko's death, when Scotland Yard did not have a clue about the causes of this tragic event, British MP Peter Hain started making generalizations. The politician said that President Putin's successes in achieving stabilization in Russia have been overshadowed by encroachments on individual freedoms and democracy. He put the murder of journalist Anna Politkovskaya in the same category as Litvinenko's death, and called it a very shady case.
Today, Hain would find it interesting to learn that there is tangible progress in the investigation of Politkovskaya's case.
Haste makes waste - his imprudent statements have also contributed to the current condition of Russian-British relations, which may be destroyed because of the man who had never been a serious critic of the Kremlin, and did not represent the Russian opposition by any stretch of imagination. Polonium may become a factor in world politics.
This is very sad, especially considering that bilateral relations have seen more achievements than disappointments in the years between the amiable news conference of the two leaders, and the current polonium trouble.
Britain is the fifth biggest foreign investor in Russia after the Netherlands, Luxembourg, Cyprus, and Germany. In recent estimates, British investments run into 10 billion dollars. Russian oil amounts to almost a quarter of BP profits.
Moscow and London have long been working together against international terrorism and drug trafficking. The joint working group on anti-terror, set up in 2001 at the initiative of Putin and Blair, has done much for building up trust between secret service professionals of both countries. None of the Scotland Yard detectives now working in Moscow on Litvinenko's case has complained about any obstacles during the interrogation of six witnesses, members of their families, and their doctors.
But some irritants have marred this generally positive picture of bilateral relations. Iraq was the first cause of these. London assumed the role of an Ambassador at the Washington court, and undertook to teach the U.S. to display restraint, and recognize the key role of the UN in Iraqi affairs. But the mission fell through. Iraq has become a curse for the political careers of both Bush and Blair.
Some differences between Moscow and London are directly linked with Litvinenko's case. This is London's surprising lack of scruples in extending hospitality to people that will abuse it by definition, and without thinking of British interests.
Runaway oligarch Boris Berezovsky has been publicly urging Putin's overthrow, but has received not only political asylum in the UK, but also a passport in the assumed name of Platon Yelenin. Russia has accused former Chechen militant Akhmed Zakayev of forming bandit detachments, committing murders, and keeping hostages, but the British court has helped him to avoid extradition seven times. About two dozen emigres, whom Russian Prosecutor's Office is seeking through Interpol, are buying real estate in Britain, engaging in profitable businesses, and educating their children at prestigious schools.
This reminds me very much of the situation which existed in the late 1990s, when London took so much delight in political correctness, and displayed limitless tolerance towards Islamic radicals. For years, the British authorities preferred to turn a blind eye to the collection of funds in London's mosques, or the training of British and foreign young people for the war in Chechnya. Local newspapers wrote almost daily about events in mosques and the sheiks that organized them, and portrayed Russia as the main enemy of this London-based "army." British police high rankers remained mysteriously silent.
Their tacit position was clear enough - Chechnya is not our headache. It does not make sense to sacrifice the reputation of the UK as a kingdom of tolerance, political correctness, and many cultures in order to help solve someone else's problem.
This policy ended on July 7, 2005 when explosions shook the London underground and wrecked a red double-decker, this symbol of steady British life.
In a sense, Litvinenko's tragic death is a similar explosion of the critical mass of dubious Russian emigres in London - these thievish newly rich that lost access to the Kremlin with Yeltsin's departure, their servants that laid their hands on criminal millions, and fanatical separatists, whom the Chechens have started forgetting about.
It seems that London deliberately keeps them just in case it wants to exert unofficial pressure on Moscow. This group is a small but convenient lever for British diplomacy.
London is not likely to grant asylum and passports with assumed names to former Enron executives who stole billions of dollars from tens of thousands of American shareholders. But a deal with conscience is justified when it comes to swindlers from Russian Yukos.
Regrettably, by importing people that hate the Russian authorities for different reasons, Britain is also borrowing their morality. They are ready to sell a test-tube of polonium, or their own mothers - you name it - provided the price is right. They tend to see a way out of any predicaments through the Makarov barrel. If London gives them shelter, it should be prepared to what happened at the Millennium Hotel, and what can be repeated in any part of the UK.
But no matter how tragic such episodes may be, they should not be allowed to spoil Russian-British relations. Let's not forget that our history has many glorious pages - common victory over Nazism, British polar convoys bringing relief to the Soviet Union, and centuries-long exchange of cultural values between our great countries.
