From The Discussion Boards Of "Russia Today"

Subject: Russia- USA - NATO.
Author: Ivar
Time: 30 Apr 2000 12:53 GMT
Stratfor com says:

Russia -USA-NATO-Putin

Ivar:"The Western media has chosen to focus on Moscow’s conciliatory gestures and is missing the wild crosscurrents in Russian foreign policy. Those crosscurrents are far from random. To the contrary, they make a great deal of sense. Putin would certainly like to achieve some sort of solid reconciliation with the United States. He understands two things. First, he understands that he will get nothing from the United States unless he positions himself to bargain. Yeltsin could not deal effectively with the United States because he neither controlled his negotiating apparatus nor created levers for effective negotiation. Yeltsin’s successor does not plan to repeat that error.

Second, Putin understands that no reconciliation may be possible with the United States; American interests and Russian ones might simply be too far apart. The United States does not want to have its military operations limited by the U.N. Security Council. Russia does not want to be frozen out of decisions. The United States has major financial stakes in the Caspian region and wants a degree of political influence to guarantee those interests. Russia does not want to see U.S. client states created within what it regards as its sphere of influence. Russia does not want an American national missile defense deployed.

Therefore, if Putin’s first priority is to create a firm relationship with the United States, his second goal – if his first fails – is to position Russia effectively in the event of a collapse of relations. Putin does not want to recreate the situation from 1946-49 in which the United States was able to portray the Soviet Union as the prime culprit for the Cold War and use that perception of Soviet aggression and duplicity to create a hostile alliance. If U.S.-Russian relations collapse, Putin wants to create a clear record of American responsibility.

Putin is trying to reach three audiences. First, domestically, he will be in a position to further undercut liberal, pro-American elements. Second, and more important, he will position himself for the inevitable attempt to drive a wedge between Europe and the United States, by showing that Washington, in pursuing its narrow strategic interest, jeopardizes Europe’s interest in good relations with Russia. Finally, Putin is addressing an American audience, which to the extent that it is cognizant of foreign policy at all, does not want to see a return to the Cold War.

From the Russian point of view, the same policy must be pursued whether the goal is reconciliation with the Americans or preparation for a breach. The best hope of reconciliation – on terms acceptable to the Russians – is to convince the United States that Russia is capable of threatening American interests. Therefore, it is necessary to make conciliatory gestures while simultaneously undertaking diplomatic initiatives that lay the groundwork for challenging the Americans. This may persuade the United States to be conciliatory. Should that fail, it positions the Russians to pursue their national interest.

The ultimate audience is in Europe and, to a lesser extent, Japan. Leaders there do not want to see a return to even a mini-Cold War. The Germans in particular, with their heavy financial exposure in Russia, do not want to see this happen. More than anyone, Putin understands the Germans. He is now carefully laying out, very publicly, both his willingness to work with the United States, and the consequences should that fail. Putin wants to have a neutral Europe or, at the very least, a neutral Germany. The new president’s conciliatory moves are quite real. They are also crafting the structure of the world, if conciliation fails."

Vigorous: This is a useful and valuable perspective. Thanks for the contribution. It is to be borne in mind as we progress out the piece somewhat. I have a knawing feeling that, unless he refutes in short order what Jesse Helms is saying, if George Bush Jr. is elected President of the United States of America, there may be a protracted period of US Russia misunderstanding none of us except US defence contractors can afford.

Atossa: So, is Putin a Nationalist?  Where will he direct Russia?  What about the oligarchs? Is Putin going to do anything about them?

Ivar: Alossa:So, is Putin a Nationalist? Answer:In the sense that he wants to preserve Russia, Yes. In the derogatory sense: No. I think he is plain old fashioned patriot, who sees that Russia is a tremendous rich country with too many poor people. Alossa:Where will he direct Russia? He will tell us on the inauguration day. One thing he will not do, is to fall prey to another US grain scheme, preventing Russia from exporting food.

What about the oligarchs? Is Putin going to do anything about them?

If he fails to disembowel the guts of the oligarchs, Russia is doomed. But the oligarchs are only part of the problem. Recently the electric power oligarch closed down the power lines to a Siberian Hospital for lack of payment, without notice. This Oligarch should have been prosecuted for attempted murder.

The real problem is the widespread tax fraud and "black work". I estimate that 50% of the taxes are lost The tax police need a lot more power, and they need to pursue a strict audit system, forcing the regions to pay their due taxes. I think Putin will invest in a tight tax control.

Also faked import invoices is a problem he is expected to deal with. This because of corrupt custom officials.

Some doctors have not been paid their wages for 5 or six months.

Ivar: Take your pick from the list below:

1) The Communists are marginal. Even in Ekaterinburg "The Mass Meetings" on Lenin Square in front of the statue never gather more than 100 people.

2) The Interior Ministry is appointed by Putin. We have to wait another week to see who will be in charge. The Duma seems to follow Putin without oposition. But I don't like the idea of relocating the Duma to St. Petersburg,

3) The Military of Russia is loyal to whoever is in charge in Kremlin

4) The Mafia must be crushed or Russia is doomed. But you see, there are many "families" in this Mafia. "Russia Today" has many links to a variety of publications, some even owned by Oligarchs, like Komersant. Read them and be enlightened.

5) The "Nationalists" (derogatory term( is led by Zhirinowskij, who everybody believes to be a clown. But he was right when he criticised one of the candidates for extravagant campaign spending.

6) Don't you know that Putin was Chief of KGB, and that he kept his apparat intact? Also Putin is the Chief of FSB, controlling all and everything? Putin runs this show.

Ivar: USA never paid any attention when Putin, only three days after the elections, in a meeting in Snezhinsk gave the keywords in just three words. This was his very first public statement in Oblast Chelyabinsk:

"Military Industrial Complex"

A few days later a contract of 300 tanks to India was reported.

USA cannot afford this missile rat race. And they have still not reacted to the Eastern alliance on counterterrorism.

Europe is too busy muddying the waters on the Chechnyan issue, having no idea what it is all about: If Chechnya falls, we'll have a terrible domino effect.

Vigorous: Yesterday, the US announced a precedent-setting identification of a shift of the centre of terrorism to the south Asia area. Perhaps you missed my posts here. I hope this goes some way toward solving your difficulty with the US.

As for the Military-Industrial complex in Russia, I don’t fear that so much as I do understand that is had been a strength in the Russian workplace and that the military is poorly equipped. Put this together with the fact you have third party customers the idea that in order to create jobs, and you have a viable jump on getting wages into people’s pockets quickly.

Ivar: Sorry I missed your post. A US shift to South East Asia is most welcome, and I agree with you.

As for Putin's "Military - Industrial - Complex" I agree that it is more a job creation and business idea than a military. Actually that was one of reasons for his victorious Chelyabinsk and Sverdlovsk elections, as these are the regions to profit most. As for the military equipment it was way below par during the last Chechnyan war, but today this situation has changed radically to the better. The troops are well fed, and with adequate equipment.

I do not know how the 160 000 new conscripts will be equipped.

Russia has more than 10 000 missiles, and there is no need for more. Actually Russia wants to get rid of them as well known.

Also I think Putin will evaluate the northern regions now the ice is disappearing. Huge quantities of natural resource products can now be shipped from new ports along the North/East Passage.

This is also the main reason for the necessity of a New NATO Northern strategy, which could benefit both USA and Russia.

Vigorous: by any other name.

We have the CANDU reactor here in Canada to burn up the warhead plutonium. It’s installed in other places too; I think India.

Last time I checked, Boris Yeltsin was saying he wanted to be paid for this plutonium while Jean Chretien said we’re doing you a big favour by getting rid of it for you and we have the small problem of the environmentalists we have to pay for. There is a lot of room for negotiation.

After this, there’s lots of work in the Aral Sea cleanup and so forth. It was estimated that Kyoto protocols would create 10 million jobs in Europe alone so there’s a future in cleaning up. Many businesses are aware of that and. Lord knows, there’s a lot of cleaning up to do in Russia.

They can run these new military conscripts through a training program and make excellent employees out of them in one heckuva hurry, equipment or no.  You can have a range of training from high-academic to skilled worker to Joe-jobs person as long as the discipline is there. I think it’s excellent.  Also, I see room for a kind of global hit squad to go to places we can all agree on to keep the combatants apart. Russia could get paid for this.  Russians love to travel and have the airships for it. Now all we need are the money, the conscripts, and the training.

I kept telling posters when George Robertson came to town after the election - Sir George is your best friend! - Get used to it. Few bought my line :-/

Ivar: These attacks on Putin are in complete compliance with the agendas of CIA and extremist war mongers in the Republican party.

As for CIA they are nothing but a bunch of clowns, having watched too many action videos. CIA started to disintegrate when they meddled in the "Bay Of Pigs" affair, not even informing the President that Soviet knew all about it several weeks in advance.

Dulles, then Chief of CIA said in a secret hearing, now disclosed that CIA should never be involved in paramilitary actions. Dulles was the first person to claim that CIA was a bunch of clowns.

Vigorous:I fininshed the book ”Secrecy” by former NY Senator DP Moynihan. He says much the same thing. He says the cult of secrecy set back relations between Russia and the US by decades and lays a lot of the blame at the feet of the CIA, which I think he thinks should be done away with entirely.

Ivar: Thank you for extremely valuable feedback. I'll get the book!!!

A lot of US politicians and commentators claim that they don't understand Putin. Therefore they have "reinstated" a sociopathological scenario delivered by CIA. This scenario suits the European state feminists, who without exception are Marxist Utopists and/or completely corrupt.

They were happy with Yeltsin, and regarded him as a harmlees, drunk clown (I will never forget last New Year's Eve when on state television he asked to be forgiven by the Russian people. In the end he showed true leadership by admitting his shortcomings in public and leaving the command to a strong and uncompromised, noncorrupt leader).

Their problem is that Putin understands them all too well. And he is neither a clown nor a harmless drunkard. He is of course fully aware of (and familiar with) every trick in their book of desinformation.

So now they are trying to install a light version of the "Good Old Days". And they don't know how to play chess, the Russian favorite game.

Vigorous: I think you’ll find this book, ”Secrecy” very interesting and confirm a lot of what you already knew.

I have another interpretation of the ”expertise” we seen brought to bear on Putin. Some of it is to sell newspaper and TV time; some of it is to make sure the commentators continue to be hired to commentate and they recognize that controversy sells experts’ time. In any case, you have to look behind the interests who are ”selling” something, including opinion, to determine what’s in it for them.

When you see a man like Gorbachev swimming against this tide of opinion by saying we have nothing to fear from Putin, I’d buy his opinion over anything I heard from people who have it in for him, including some idiot the CBC here in Canada hired (a Russian out of Washington who was a former military or KGB man who was fired by Putin and is now a ”consultant”) who completely veiled Putin in the darkest shroud imaginable for the Canadian (and American) listening audience. You see, the harder this man makes it appear to do business in Moscow, the easier it is for him to sell his services at a high price. PT Barnum: ”There’s a sucker born every minute.”

There is another old joke: ”What have you got when you have two Russians meeting on a street corner?” Answer: ”An argument.”

No leader of Russia will stand the scrutiny of his own people for very long if he badly trips up. Further, when you owe as much money as Russia owes, the bankers want you to do well, not poorly. Germans in particular have a tremendous investment in Russia they need protected. They will only stand for so much Russia-bashing before they quietly tell their mouthpiece politicians to back off. Meanwhile, it is just so much grandstanding. Not that these people don’t mean well. Their principles in wanting Russia, for example, to become more honest in business dealings and to take better care not to offend basic liberties like freedom of the press cannot be seriously questioned.

I look at it this way: The onus is clearly on Russia to do better. In turn, as Russian leader, Putin attempts to put some of that onus on the people to work with him to improve conditions for everyone. At the same time, a lot of Russians are like lost sheep needing a shepherd. Putin will serve that post well, in my opinion. He has a lot on his plate but he has a free hand, unbound by some of the niceties of democracy, to get things done.

The democracy part will grow but it will take some time and a lot of refinement. Not a day goes by where I cannot spot some article somewhere in the Russian media showing that Putin or some force revolving around him like the Duma parties taking us where we want to go both in the economic and democratic senses. Putin goes by the same credo Clinton once espoused ”It’s the economy, stupid.”

By Putin’s acts, we shall know him. So far so good. The Euros can babble and harp away all they want. Goodness knows, they have their own political challenges to deal with. Some of them may want to take political heat off themselves by speaking to Russian issues.