#11
From: "Stanislav Menshikov" <menschivok@globalxs.nl>
Subject: PUTIN AND BUSH IN ONE FOX-HOLE
Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2001
"MOSCOW TRIBUNE", 16 November 2001
PUTIN AND BUSH IN ONE FOX-HOLE
But written IOU is needed
By Stanislav Menshikov
While showing the Russian president around White House grounds George W. Bush mentioned that Putin was the kind of guy he liked to have in one foxhole. This was not a hollow compliment. The love story that started last June in Slovenia is bearing good results.
In a Joint Statement signed in Washington both sides have proclaimed a new relationship for the 21st Century founded on commitment to democracy, free market and the rule of law. Neither country regards the other as an enemy or threat. They will work together against terrorism, proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, militant nationalism, ethnic and religious intolerance and regional stability. Due regard is given to the role of the United Nations, restructuring relations with NATO, economic and human rights issues. Sounds like a fine declaration similar to the Atlantic Charter signed sixty years ago which laid the first stone of what would later become the framework of the post-war world. If this new relationship lasts, it could help change to the better the whole global perspective for the next few decades.
But whether it does last depends on many issues that have to be solved today. One is how to proceed in Afghanistan. The crumbling of Taliban is good news. Also encouraging is the common view taken by Bush and Putin on the Northern Alliance movement into Kabul. The TV pictures of its population greeting the end of Taliban terror seemed to convince Bush that prophecies of Alliance-organised massacres were overblown. Also significant is the joint statement on Afghanistan that leaves no place for Talib participation in the future government. Instead of unilateral attempts at setting up that government both countries are now working together within the "six plus two" format suggested by the UN. Hopefully, this newly borne common policy will hold in the days to come.
Much was achieved on strategic armaments, at least in promises. Bush promised to reduce US active long-range nuclear warheads from 7,000 to 2,000 or less in the next decade. Putin reciprocated with promising to reduce threefold or more Russia's warheads from the current 5,800 to 2,000 or less. Bush says he does not need more to guarantee US security. Putin says his figure is in line with maintaining global stability. The formulas are different, but that hardly matters. The mutual promises to have less nuclear bombs aimed at each other are certainly welcome. If the countries are not enemies probably even less warheads will suffice. But bomb reduction needs money and time to accomplish. So let's leave it at that.
Where the two leaders disagree is on the need for a formal agreement on these matters. Bush believes his word is enough, while Putin wants things to be put on paper. Bush is right when he says that formal agreements take a long time to work out. But how would the other side be sure that warheads are actually being reduced, if no time schedules and control procedures are envisaged? As one US think-tank put it, "today's verbal agreement can become tomorrow's misunderstanding". Particularly when the terms of the current leaders expire and their heirs find that they are not really bound by oral promises. Misunderstandings on nuclear arsenals could easily lead to a break-up in the new relationship. For that reason the careful Putin needs a written and certified IOU. And Bush seemed to finally agree. It remains to be seen how this understanding works out.
Predictably, the ABM side of the equation could not be resolved that easily. The Russian side seems willing to permit certain NMD tests within the framework of the 1972 Treaty provided that their nature and limits are agreed upon and do not lead to deployment of a "thick" US anti-rocket shield designed to operate against Russia. But the US side so far does not want any formal limitations on tests or deployment. Plans worked out in the Clinton years provided for protection against tens of incoming missiles, not hundreds or thousands. These systems are known as "thin" protection. But new plans developed under the Bush administration could go beyond these goals, and Russia wants to know from its new superpower friend what to expect. Now Bush has promised to keep Russia informed on the tests provided that Putin switches on the green light.
But Putin is afraid that at some point he will be forced to counter US plans with measures that deflect resources from economic growth and improving living standards. He particularly wants to avoid costly ABM systems that he feels are not really necessary at this time. If they are at all needed, he prefers jointly managed international systems which would be more efficient and less costly. Obviously, breaching that US-Russia divide is not easy.
Economic issues discussed in Washington merit a separate column. As to political and military issues, the summit was a step forward. But keeping on the right track will be difficult despite sitting together in the same foxhole. There is too much sniping from different quarters to beware of.
Next Article