Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, center, is helped from her chair by Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, left, and U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon, as they arrive for their news conference at the State Department in Washington on Friday, February 2, 2007.
Photo: AP
|
 |
Lavrov Fails to Be Convincing
// Purpose of His Trip to the US Remains Unfulfilled
Upon returning to Moscow on Saturday from an official visit to the United States, Russian Foreign Affairs Minister Sergey Lavrov trumpeted the success of talks in Washington between the quartet comprised of Russia, the United States, the United Nations, and the European Union. The only issue on which Russia and the US hold diametrically-opposed positions is Kosovo, said Mr. Lavrov. Nevertheless, the progress of talks showed that the parties at the negotiating table are having difficulty finding common ground on many crucial international problems. This was most apparent during the quartet's discussion of the Middle East, where Moscow's calls to begin a dialog with Hamas and to bring Syria and Iran into the peace process met with sharp disapproval from the US and were eventually ignored by the negotiators.
Nothing Bad, Except Kosovo
"Kosovo is a subject on which, unlike the topics of Iran, Iraq, and the Middle East, our positions are fundamentally divergent. As yet, we do not have a general perspective on how this problem should be solved," said Sergey Lavrov in remarks summing up his visit to Washington, where he met with US President George Bush, US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, and influential members of Congress while taking part in a session of the quartet of international negotiators on the Middle East (Russia, the US, the EU, and the UN). Mr. Lavrov maintained that the question of the status of Kosovo is the only issue currently dividing Moscow and Washington, and he expressed satisfaction at the "general perspective" shared by the two partners during the recent meetings and negotiations. Commenting on his meeting with Mr. Bush, Mr. Lavrov noted, "President Bush repeated his anxiety to see the realization of agreements that have been made during meetings with Vladimir Putin." According to Mr. Lavrov, in particular George Bush promised to direct America's representatives at the Geneva talks concerning Russia's accession to the WTO "to facilitate the quickest possible achievement of an advantageous result."
On the eve of Sergey Lavrov's visit to Washington, however, a comment by Russian ambassador to the United States Yury Ushakov, in which the ambassador takes a completely different tone, appeared in the Los Angeles Times. "We are offended by the opinion, occasionally heard in Washington, that Russia can be used when it is convenient and ignored or even insulted when it does not toe the American line," lamented Mr. Ushakov, claiming that the US has recently taken to "blaming Russia first for everything." According to Mr. Ushakov, "Russia does not need special indulgence or assistance from the United States, but it does require respect in order to build bilateral relations, and it is hoped that [Russia's] political interests will be acknowledged."
Apparently, Mr. Lavrov's positive comments, coming as they did only two days after the ambassador's stinging criticism of the US, were designed to show that the foreign affairs minister has succeeded at the task of making Washington "acknowledge Russian interests."
"There Are Still Hidden Forces"
Mr. Lavrov pointed to Washington's readiness to scrap the restrictive Jackson-Vannick trade amendment in 2007, which would clear the way for Russia to join the WTO, as a clear piece of evidence testifying to a return of "respect for Russia" from the American side. "Everyone that I have spoken with has said that they see no reason to keep the amendment," he said after his most recent trip. Nevertheless, it may still turn out that this victory is only conditional: Mr. Lavrov was obliged to admit that he has not yet received a response from Washington concerning the identities of parties in the US that are expected to come out strongly against scrapping the amendment. "That means that there are some hidden forces that oppose repealing the amendment," he acknowledged.
The mutual understanding reached by the US and Russia could also turn out to be extremely conditional on another issue that figured prominently on Mr. Lavrov's agenda in Washington: the Iranian question. Apparently, the Russian foreign minister's statement that President Bush does not intend to launch a military operation in Iran is supposed to serve as a demonstration of Washington's readiness to listen to Moscow. "The American side assured us that it has no plans to go to war against Iran," said Mr. Lavrov en route from Washington to Moscow. According to Mr. Lavrov, he was told in Washington that the buildup of American military strength in the Persian Gulf "is aimed at stabilizing the situation in the region and at calming the fears of the Gulf countries." However, it should be noted that Washington and its representatives have said the same thing more than once even before Mr. Lavrov's trip to the United States, and the explanation has in no way calmed growing fears in the region that the US may take military action against Iran.
Meanwhile, Sergey Lavrov's talks in Washington did show that the American side has no intention of ceasing to introduce sanctions against Russian companies that Washington accuses of military cooperation with Iran (on January 5, for example, the US introduced new sanctions against the giant Russian arms exporter Rosoboronexport and against the Tula and Kolomensky Mechanical Design Bureaus). The introduction of sanctions even after Russia made concessions to Washington and voted in favor of a UN Security Council resolution imposing sanctions against Iran at the end of last December is seen in Moscow as an unfriendly move.
Yet another painful subject in Russian-American relations is Washington's plan to extend its missile defense system practically up to Russia's borders (into the Czech Republic, Poland, and the Baltic States). Unfortunately, Mr. Lavrov's negotiations with Washington have failed to bring the two sides any closer together on this topic. "What we have been hearing [on this topic] has not convinced us that this is an adequate answer to the real threats that exist today in the sphere of nuclear and missile proliferation," contended Mr. Lavrov after his return to Moscow.
A "Constructive Dialog" or a "Waste of Time"?
The divergent approaches of the two sides to the current problems of international politics were clearly on display during the recent meeting of the so-called quartet of international negotiators on the Middle East. In addition to Mr. Lavrov, the meeting was attended by US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, German Foreign Affairs Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier (Germany currently holds the rotating presidency of the European Union), EU High Representative for Common Foreign and Security Policy Javier Solana, and UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon.
The meeting was called to discuss ways of revitalizing the Mid-East peace process, which has been languishing in deadlock since last summer's war between Israel and Lebanon and the recent exacerbation of the power struggle between Hamas and Fatah in the Palestine Authority. Soon after Hamas won elections to take control of the PA in January of last year, the US and the EU introduced sanctions that shut off essential flows of financial aid to the region as long as the Hamas-led government refuses to recognize Israel's right to exist.
At the meeting, Sergey Lavrov tried hard to change this outlook on Hamas. In his interpretation, Moscow's position is that there can be no talk of resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict until Hamas is recognized as part of the government of the Palestinian Authority. "We are convinced of the necessity of working with Hamas, of influencing it in such a way that the movement accepts the quartet's decisions," said Mr. Lavrov.
However, the statements adopted at the conclusion of the meeting of the quartet show that the Russian idea of taking a step back from complete isolation of Hamas was rejected. Moreover, the quartet decided to continue the sanctions against the Palestinian government. Moscow has not yet aired its feelings about being forced to accept a statement that runs so counter to its opinion on the matter.
Moscow also failed to garner any support for another of its ideas: to encourage Iran and Syria to participate in the Mid-East peace process. "Iran and Syria should not be isolated; rather, they should be encouraged to participate in the peace process," asserted Mr. Lavrov in Washington. At a joint press conference with Mr. Lavrov and Frank-Walter Steinmeier, however Condoleezza Rice unambiguously let it be known that there would be no consideration of any such proposal. At a later press briefing, a senior State Department representative said flatly that drawing Syria into the Mid-East peace process "would be a waste of time."
Finally, the Kremlin's pet plan of holding an international conference on the Middle East in Moscow was once again shot down. The United States and Israel are categorically opposed to the idea, since such a conference would attract the participation of forces that are friendly to Moscow and that are, if not hostile to the US, at least not entirely loyal friends of either the US or Israel, which would unavoidably change the balance of power in the peace process to the disadvantage of the two allies.
Thus, the discussion of the problems in the Middle East was once again scuppered by the laundry list of contradictions and disagreements that characterize the "strategic partnership" between Moscow and Washington.
Sergey Tamilin
All the Article in Russian as of Feb. 05, 2007
|
|
|
