MOSCOW, March 18 (RIA Novosti) Russian, U.S. officials smile politely, won't budge an inch / No news at Russian-U.S. missile-defense talks in Moscow / Russia, United States seem unable to overcome differences / Iran ties Russia to its geopolitical strategy / Political prejudices increase Europe's energy risks / Mikhail Kasyanov's aides to pay for campaign forgery
Vedomosti
Russian, U.S. officials smile politely, won't budge an inch
The U.S. and Russian officials have met in Moscow for yet another round of talks on international security issues, characterized by the pointed hospitality of the hosts and the extreme politeness of the guests. President Vladimir Putin looked happy that two of President Bush's most senior Cabinet members, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Defense Secretary Robert Gates had lost no time in flying to Moscow, and both sides appeared hopeful to reach agreements on most disputed issues.
However, this meeting, just like many before it, will hardly see Washington make any major concessions on the Pentagon's plan to install 10 missile interceptors in Poland, linked to a missile tracking radar in the Czech Republic, the most sensitive issue for Moscow.
All of Russia's protests notwithstanding, the radar will cover part of Russia's territory, which can be barely justified by defense needs. The U.S. also plans to complement its East European "shield" by more tracking radar stations in Turkey. It would be difficult to find strong enough arguments against building such stations in a country bordering on Iran.
In addition, Russia is currently devoid of effective tools for pressuring Prague and Warsaw. Moscow's December 2007 demarche, its unilateral withdrawal from the Treaty on Conventional Forces in Europe (CFE), which limits deployments of conventional military forces, failed to produce the desired effect then.
However, Russia can assume a positive position without damaging its own interests. The U.S. wants Russia to back it up on the Iranian nuclear program, supporting the Afghan government and curbing drug trafficking from that country. By steadily supporting Washington on those issues, Moscow could negotiate a permanent observation of the projected military bases by Russian military officials. This could prevent the U.S. from expanding the application of the facilities, for example, by deploying regular assault missiles which could be used on Russia, instead of interceptors.
Finally, the Russian government has two very reliable allies - time and the current political situation in the United States. If the Democrats win the upcoming elections, they could revise the missile defense program. In the fall of 2007, the U.S. Congress they control cut the allocations for the Polish and Czech bases from $310 to $225 million.
Vedomosti
No news at Russian-U.S. missile-defense talks in Moscow
President-elect Dmitry Medvedev has inherited numerous unsolved problems in Russian-U.S. relations from Vladimir Putin, including the East European missile defense system and the START-2 treaty.
Experts said the problems were unlikely to be solved in the next few years.
A source close to the Russian Foreign Ministry said President George W. Bush had sent a letter describing his vision of U.S.-Russian relations to Putin. The U.S. leader said it was necessary to extend bilateral agreements, including the START-2 treaty aiming to eliminate heavy intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) and all other multiple-warhead (MIRVed) ICBMs by December 2009.
Although Moscow wants a legally binding agreement stipulating verification and control mechanisms to replace START-2, Washington advocates a vaguer document that could usher in another round of the arms race.
In his letter, President Bush discusses the projected deployment of a missile defense system in Eastern Europe.
The source said the U.S. side did not make any new proposals on the issue, and that it had merely assured Moscow of the project's safety.
Nor has Washington replied to Moscow's proposal on using the Gabala early-warning radar in Azerbaijan and a new radar in Armavir in the North Caucasus to assess the Iranian missile threat.
Contrary to Moscow's expectations, U.S. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, who arrived in the Russian capital on Monday, did not bring any new proposals on the East European missile defense system, a Defense Ministry source told the paper.
Viktor Kremenyuk, deputy director of the Institute of U.S. and Canadian Studies (Russian Academy of Sciences), said the United States had decided to deploy the National Missile Defence (NMD) system and would go ahead with it, regardless of the Russian position.
Yevgeny Myasnikov, an expert with the Center for Arms Control, Energy and Environmental Studies, Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology, said the Bush administration did not want to compromise, and that all U.S. presidential candidates regarded nuclear disarmament as unimportant.
He said both sides were therefore unlikely to conclude new arms-control agreements pending the expiry of START-2.
Mikhail Barabanov, an expert with the Moscow-based Center for Analysis of Strategies and Technologies, said the United States was spending more on the modernization of its nuclear-missile arsenals than Russia, and that Moscow was therefore more interested in signing new strategic arms reduction agreements.
Kommersant
Russia, United States seem unable to overcome differences
The Russian and U.S. foreign and defense ministers will meet in Moscow on March 17-18 to discuss strategic stability, joint non-proliferation initiatives, cooperation in the civil nuclear sector, the fight against terrorism, and pressing issues of international and regional security.
This is a major agenda, breeding high expectations, writes a Russian expert. However, Russia and the United States are unlikely to attain a breakthrough in the issue of settling their differences because of political instability at home.
Fyodor Lukyanov, editor-in-chief of the Russia in Global Affairs magazine, writes in the business daily Kommersant that the Bush administration is one of the lamest ducks in political history. It has no political resources to attain historical achievements at the end of its term, because the world is openly getting ready for a change of power in Washington. The international community also increasingly doubts America's ability to help stabilize the world's currency and stock markets.
The system of power in Moscow has already changed, and the country will need time to adjust the new mechanism, Lukyanov writes. Its foreign policy will be very cautious, so as not to disrupt the fragile balance between continuity and innovations. The two Russian leaders will act with due regard for each other's actions and for many other external and domestic factors.
This breeds suspicion of the partners' actions and is not a good environment for radical change.
According to the analyst, the main task in the next few months will be to avoid an open conflict, especially in view of the fragile international situation. The situation in Kosovo and around it, the agenda of the NATO summit in Bucharest in April, the advance of missile shield systems in Europe, and developments in post-Soviet countries could dramatically worsen the general situation. As a result, the new Russian and U.S. leaders will be tied hand and foot by the previous governments' moves.
Washington's goal is to ensure leadership in the changing world, where new powerful economic and political centers are developing. Its ideological attraction has weakened and global control institutes have been undermined by the sides' concerted efforts.
Lukyanov writes that Moscow also needs to reinforce its international stance in the changing world, where the success of a country with a shrinking population heavily dependent on raw materials is not assured.
There are no signs pointing to a possible change in their positions, as an agenda based on confrontation seems to be more comfortable, although it is becoming increasingly detached from global developments.
Nezavisimaya Gazeta
Iran ties Russia to its geopolitical strategy
Tehran has refused to participate in the six-nation negotiations on its nuclear problem. Russia has thus fallen into the category of states with which Iran is not willing to discuss and, even more so, coordinate the development of its nuclear program. This is being done despite the fact that Moscow has always supported the idea of granting Iran the right to develop its nuclear sector under the IAEA guarantees.
The impression is that, by playing on Iran's side until the last moment, Moscow has been seeking to attach a strategically important southern neighbor to Russia. Hence Russia's continued assistance in building the Bushehr nuclear power plant despite U.S. pressure, a proposal to set up international uranium enrichment centers in Russia, and Russia's stubborn striving to develop the sale of modern weapons to Iran (it became known at the end of last year that Iran will buy five S-300 missile systems from Russia worth about $800 million).
It has turned out in the end however that Russia is more tied to the geopolitical strategy of its Islamic neighbor than Iran is to Russian nuclear technology, and that this neighbor is not going to sacrifice its interests for the sake of "friendship with the great Russian people."
In the case of Iran, competition for the market of nuclear technology is also important. France and the United States are much more tolerant of those regimes in the Third World to which they supply their nuclear technology. The independent development of their nuclear potential by India and Israel under the U.S. supervision has not led to any international turmoil.
Iran has placed Russia in a very complex situation by its closed policy of non-cooperation. How to combine Russia's strategic and commercial interests is a far from simple task for the Russian leadership now.
Vedomosti
Political prejudices increase Europe's energy risks
Russia often sees the West as something highly rational, which is not quite true. The religious way of thinking, which does not depend on a specific confession, is extremely active there and amounts to the priority of belief over facts. And beliefs vary, from belief in God to belief in "green energy" or some invisible force, writes a Russian analyst.
Konstantin Simonov, the head of Russia's National Energy Security Fund, writes in the popular daily Vedomosti about examples of religious mentality among European bureaucrats. In particular, he writes that Brussels firmly believes that its energy security can be attained only if it reduces its dependence on Russia.
There are many rational arguments against this belief, the analyst writes. Alternative fuels are considerably more expensive than hydrocarbons, the use of coal will inevitably affect the environment, nuclear power generation is impossible without uranium, which Europe lacks, and terrorists may use the growing number of nuclear power plants for their unseemly purposes.
Norway and Northern Africa cannot supply as much as half of the additional gas requirements, and the LNG market has become so crowded that Europe cannot push back the United States. Its alternative suppliers are Russia or Iran.
Simonov writes that the promotion of "green energy" has not cut the consumption of oil and gas but rather increased the demand for biofuels. More maize for biofuel is being sown, pushing back grain crops in arable areas and spurring the growth of food prices.
There are many facts to prove this, but Jose Manuel Barroso, president of the European Commission, refuses to believe them. He has put the blame on China, which, according to him, has recently converted from a hungry to a sumptuous diet.
Most European energy companies describe the third block of energy reform initiatives as expropriation. But Brussels waves off their concerns, thus increasing energy risks for the EU.
A recent example is Ukraine, which is openly siphoning off gas from main pipelines. The deplorable state of its gas pipelines threatens Europe's, rather than Russia's, security. Yet Brussels is supporting Ukraine, which is allegedly promoting democracy, in the fight against Russia's "imperial complexes" and "energy weapons."
As a result, Ukraine has been admitted to the World Trade Organization and is considered a civilized state.
All countries, including Russia, which has its measure of mystics and advocates of Slavic Brotherhood, should pay more attention to rational arguments. Jesus kicked traders out of the temple, saying that it was a place to pray and worship God, not buy and sell things. The time has come now to drive political fundamentalists from the global exchanges, Simonov concludes.
Gazeta.ru
Mikhail Kasyanov's aides to pay for campaign forgery
With the presidential elections long over, the momentous campaign involving lawsuits against candidate Mikhail Kasyanov's signature collectors is gaining momentum. Suits have so far been filed in 11 Russian regions, and police investigators have visited his elections headquarters. Kasyanov's team is now expecting high-profile federal level proceedings.
Kasyanov's team members deny all forgery charges, claiming political motives are behind the accusations.
Konstantin Merzlikin, head of Kasyanov's election headquarters, said the campaign was aimed at "showing the public that a lack of loyalty in politics should be punished." The second goal, according to him, is to discredit Kasyanov by proving that the signatures were bought and could not be evidence of any real voter support. Finally, the third goal is to fabricate a lawsuit. The longest sentence under the relevant Article 142 of the Russian Criminal Code is three years in prison, Kasyanov's aide added.
Merzlikin believes that the Federal Security Service initiated the series of lawsuits on a direct order from the Kremlin.
Lawyer Vadim Prokhorov said Russia's law-enforcement agencies had become involved in politics way too much in the past few years. Their decisions often depend on government orders rather than on the legal context. In this case, the "culprits" will probably receive suspended sentences and that will be it, he said. The poor signature collectors will become the scapegoats in a show trial aimed at intimidating the public and Kasyanov's team, the lawyer raged.
Political analyst Dmitry Oreshkin agreed with the lawyer. "The Kremlin is cruel toward its real opponents. They are primarily trying to cover themselves against all possible trouble - to intimidate Kasyanov, for example. It is the underlying principle of this power vertical, which dictates its own rules and abhors any alternatives," he said.
RIA Novosti is not responsible for the content of outside sources.
