| JRL HOME | SUPPORT | SUBSCRIBE | RESEARCH & ANALYTICAL SUPPLEMENT | |
Old Saint Basil's Cathedral in MoscowJohnson's Russia List title and scenes of Saint Petersburg
Excerpts from the JRL E-Mail Community :: Founded and Edited by David Johnson

#8
Nezavisimaya Gazeta
December 8, 2001
NATO AVOIDING REVOLUTIONS
NATO is in no hurry to give Russia equal rights in discussions

Author: Marina Kalashnikova
Source: Nezavisimaya Gazeta, December 8, 2001, p. 6
[from WPS Monitoring Agency, www.wps.ru/e_index.html]

ALTHOUGH THERE HAS BEEN A LOT OF TALK ABOUT THE POSSIBILITY OF RUSSIA GETTING AN EQUAL VOTE IN NATO, AT THE VERY LAST MOMENT NATO AUTHORITIES DECIDED NOT TO MAKE "REVOLUTIONARY DECISIONS." THUS, RUSSIA WILL PARTICIPATE ONLY IN NATO'S DISCUSSIONS OF PEACEKEEPING OPERATIONS.

At the recent session of the NATO Council in Brussels the intrigue of giving Russia rights equal to other NATO members was resolved. At the very last moment the authorities of the NATO decided to refrain from giving Russia the right to participate in making consolidated decisions. As the communique of the session states, it was decided "to refrain from revolutionary decisions. NATO should retain its prerogative to resolve the main issues related to duties and responsibilities by the narrow circle of 19 members. The foundation of the 'Group of the Twenty' should be postponed until better times. Russia should be allowed to participate in discussions of some separate issues."

Participants of the session expressed opposite opinions on these issues. For instance, French Foreign Minister Hubert Vedrine is convinced that the time for resolution of any issues, including construction of the European missile defense system, by the Group of the Twenty has come. Other diplomats, vice versa, showed Russia "the back door" and suggested that it be given access to the NATO table only during discussions of peacekeeping issues. The majority came to the decision that the initiatives of British Prime Minister Tony Blair were too premature.

Although it is Americans who initiated this discussion a few weeks ago, they finally dotted the i's in this discussion. Despite America's gratitude to Russia for its readiness to help the US in the anti-terror campaign, it is too early to thank Russia by giving it an equal vote in NATO.

Thus, America's intrigue envisaged several steps. As the Russia- NATO Basic Act created a friendly atmosphere before the first wave of NATO's expansion, the US decided to repeat this success by giving Russia a sort of compensation. For the first time it was announced in the communique of the session that in November 2002 the treaty organization will accept nine new members. Thus, US President George Bush and other "grads" will have the right to call themselves the great remakers of Europe.

At the very last moment some forces in the US protested against closer relations between Russia and NATO. The Pentagon and Congress were against because Russia would allegedly "stir up trouble," i.e. violate the basic principle of NATO: the consolidated nature of making decisions. Besides, Russia's demand that NATO should change its position on the Chechen issue was considered too bold. NATO leaders were also annoyed with the fact that Moscow tried to interpret their announcements regarding Chechnya in Moscow's favor. And the intensive landing of the Russian Airborne Troops in Kabul was viewed nearly as a repetition of the notorious landing of Russian forces in Pristina. The American administration views this action as a sign of Russia's intention to act separately. This independence does not appeal to the NATO collective.

(Translated by Kirill Frolov)

Back to the Top    Next Article