Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.

Spotlight on Russian-US Relations

by Anthony Williamson Thu Apr 24th, 2008 at 12:43:19 PM EST

The Russian foreign minister did some plain talking in a wide-ranging interview with a Moscow radio station yesterday and he shed some new light on the difficulties of Russian-US relations by outlining points of agreement and disagreement between the two countries on a number of major issues. Sergei Lavrov's remarks on US plans for missile installations in the Czech Republic and Poland made some of the snags clearer than they had been. He also said point blank Russia would do everything in its power to prevent Ukraine and Georgia from being admitted to NATO, thus thwarting what he termed a "sharp deterioration" of Russia's relations with the alliance, its leading members and Russia's neighbors. All this was obvious to the White House from its contacts with Moscow long before the NATO summit in Romania. Therefore, it's all the more intriguing to try to figure out what motivated the US to take on Russia in public by forging ahead to push through membership for Ukraine and Georgia at the recent NATO summit in Romania.

Diary rescue by Migeru


Lavrov was interviewed by Alexei Venediktov, the chief editor of "Echo of Moscow," the only independent radio station in Moscow, who asked him pointed questions about the recent meeting in Sochi between the presidents of Russia and the US, Vladimir Putin and George Bush. Lavrov's answers gave some insight into what's been going on behind closed doors in the dispute over US plans for missile installations in the Czech Republic and Poland. Lavrov indicated Russia had heard a number of proposals from the US, but he said Moscow was interested in only two things: guaranteeing the constant presence of Russian officers at the American installations and reliable technical means of monitoring the sites.

Venediktov pointed out a sharp comment by a Polish diplomat in Moscow yesterday for talks who said in no uncertain terms that there would be no permanent contingent of Russian observers in Poland. Lavrov said Polish Deputy Foreign Minister Witold Waszczykowski had reiterated what Moscow had already heard from Poland and the Czech Republic, namely that they would not even consider the proposal.  Venediktor asked, "Do you mean to say that Russia and the US together can't convince the Polish and Czech governments about stationing a dozen officers? "

Lavrov indicated the last word had not been spoken yet because the US had still not signed the final agreements with Prague and Warsaw regulating operation of the sites. He expressed the opinion that the Americans would follow their usual procedure for their installations on foreign soil and they would be the ones who would be the bosses at the sites, although they might allow the Czechs and Poles a veto right. Russia's reaction, he said, would have to wait until the agreements had been signed and Moscow saw what was in them.

Lavrov went into detail about US plans for a global missile shield incorporating installations in the US and other countries, a system including Poland and the Czech Republic that would eventually form a ring around Russia.  He made it clear that Russia would not stand for NATO expansion at Russia's borders. He said we cannot "watch attempts to bring the NATO war machine right up to your borders," a development that he called a "disunifying moment in Europe." He said Washington understood Moscow's positions.

Venediktov asked Lavrov what prevented Russia from building its own missile sites in Cuba or Venezuela. Lavrov said Russian actions had to be productive and pragmatic, a search for answers that would keep Russia from being drawn into a new extravagant arms race. He said the US had offered Russia confidence-building measures and transparency, but these still had to be worked out.

Lavrov also answered questions about the possibility of a Mideast peace conference in Moscow, about relations with Iran, the situation in Kosovo and other issues. He said Washington was not opposed to a Mideast peace conference in Moscow, and Chairman of the Palestine National Authority Mahmoud Abbas would soon come to Moscow to discuss details of such a conference and he would be received by the Russian president.

Lavrov's remarks were couched in diplomatic language, but the listener still got a feeling for the difficulty of negotiations between Washington and Moscow with their different approaches to international issues.

Display:
I read an article this week about some Russian official saying that Rusians might work to divide Ukraine into two.

It was Vladimir Putin, talking to George W Bush and it was under-reported.

I wonder if I can find a link to it.

http://www.themoscowtimes.com/stories/2008/04/08/017.html

Here it is.  

by zoe on Thu Apr 10th, 2008 at 05:46:18 AM EST
I think the U.S. wanted this summit to look successful to enable Condi Rice to at least claim one semi-success so she could try for a run as vice-president.
by zoe on Thu Apr 10th, 2008 at 11:15:44 AM EST
There is some important part of this story which is not being understood. The US insists on building a "missile defense shield". This is a technology which doesn't work (and probably never will). It is, ostensibly, directed at a state (Iran) which doesn't constitute a threat. Not even the prospect of big military contracts to build this system can explain the US position.

Similarly why should Russia care if the US installs a non-functional system?

There is only one conclusion that I can draw: the stated purpose and the real purpose are entirely different. Both the US and Russia know what the real purpose is, but, for some reason, are unwilling to let the public in either country (or in the countries hosting the system) in on the secret. I've seen this type of misdirection happen before, and have never been smart enough to figure out what was really going on at the time.

I'll just to toss out a random conjecture on what might be behind this program. The US has been quietly militarizing space in violation of international treaties. The seriousness with which anti-satellite tests by China and others were met shows that something is going on. We know that the US is using satellites for command and control, but we don't know about actual weapons in space. A project like "Rods from God" which involves dropping metal cylinders from space are easily hidden.

So, with this militarization program at risk from anti-satellite system, it becomes necessary to have an alternative command and control operation. The radars and other equipment placed in Eastern Europe would be close enough to the Middle East to allow their use in controlling operations in the region, especially aerial drones and unmanned surface vehicles. Such a guidance system would change the balance of power in the region and reduce Russia's influence over Iran and other nearby states.

As I said this is only a conjecture, but I'm pretty sure that whatever is being built, it isn't an anti-missile "shield".

Policies not Politics
---- Daily Landscape

by rdf (robert.feinman@gmail.com) on Thu Apr 10th, 2008 at 12:02:08 PM EST
Good conclusion and reasonable conjecture.  I have been asking myself the same questions for some time.

I can swear there ain't no heaven but I pray there ain't no hell. _ Blood Sweat & Tears
by Gringo (stargazing camel at aoldotcom) on Thu Apr 24th, 2008 at 02:08:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Assuming they know what they are doing - a BIG assumption with this administration - it could be any number of things.

My first guess is these are bases for electronic counter-measures intended to be usable against the State of the Art anti-aircraft system Russia is building for Iran.  

A second guess is these are bases for some kind of Signal Intelligence operation, or pre-positioning for such.

She believed in nothing; only her skepticism kept her from being an atheist. -- Jean-Paul Sartre

by ATinNM on Fri Apr 25th, 2008 at 04:02:14 AM EST
[ Parent ]


Display:
Go to: [ European Tribune Homepage : Top of page : Top of comments ]