- Russia made clear yesterday that it would not pull out
of the American-led coalition against terror even if the United States
launched a unilateral strike against Iraq.
-
- Igor Ivanov, the Foreign Minister, said that Moscow opposed
any US strike on Baghdad which would cause turmoil not only in the Gulf
but throughout the Middle East.
-
- In talks next week in London with Jack Straw, the Foreign
Secretary, he will remind him that Moscow opposed the Anglo-American strikes
on Baghdad in 1998.
-
- In an interview with The Times, Mr Ivanov said: "We
would hope that the US and UK do not make the same mistake again. A strike
would deal "a serious blow to the coalition. But he stopped short
of any threat to cut off Russian help for the anti-terrorist campaign,
which he insisted Russia supported.
-
- "It would not be expedient to issue any ultimatums
to say that we would withdraw from the coalition, he said. "Participation
in this coalition is not some present or gift to give to someone, but in
our own interests. We have common positions with Britain on this.
-
- Mr Ivanov said that only the United Nations was authorised
to act against any country breaking UN resolutions, and he urged Britain
and America to focus on talks to return weapons inspectors to Iraq.
-
- But he acknowledged the signs from Washington that it
was preparing to take military action. Russia was therefore now urging
President Saddam Hussein to implement all UN resolutions and allow the
weapons inspectors to return.
-
- Moscow wanted to see an end to all Iraq,s weapons of
mass destruction, but believed that the chance of a political settlement
was not exhausted. Mr Ivanov said that Russia "cannot but be concerned
by the unilateralism in US policy.
-
- Russia has been vexed by a series of US actions and statements
that have stirred up an angry public response here. He said that these
ranged from last year,s decision to withdraw from the Anti-Ballistic Missile
Treaty to the recently leaked document that includes Russia among American
nuclear targets.
-
- The Kremlin wanted to build a "partnership and predictable
relations with America. But this was hard if calls by President Bush and
President Putin for better relations were not supported by deeds.
-
- Predictability was possible only with more transparency
and mutual trust. He cited as an example, America,s dispatch of military
instructors to Georgia. This did not hurt the sovereignty of either Georgia
or Russia, he said.
-
- But Moscow was upset at not being consulted. "Taking
into account the proximity of Georgia to Russia and the fact that from
Georgia terrorists are making assaults on Russian territory; if we are
partners, then they should have let us know and consulted us.
-
- He attributed the Bush Administration,s failure to do
so to "past stereotypes and an underestimate of the sensitivity of
the Caucasus for Russian public opinion. Without naming anyone in the Bush
Administration, Mr Ivanov also denounced continued Cold War thinking, especially
on Russian relations with Nato. Moscow welcomed the proposal by Tony Blair
to give Russia a bigger say by bolstering the 1997 Russia-Nato treaty.
It wanted a consultative mechanism to be turned into a decision-making
mechanism.
-
- But talks between Russia and Nato members to underpin
this change were not going well. This was entirely due to the refusal by
some to overcome Cold War stereotypes.
-
- "These new negotiations should show whether we have
really reached a new stage in our relations or not, and whether we have
really turned the page of the Cold War.
-
- He made it clear that Russia,s opposition to the admission
of the Baltic states to Nato " likely to be approved at the Nato summit
in Prague this summer " would be modified only if Moscow was given
a real say in the way that Nato decisions were made.
-
- If agreement could be reached at Nato,s Reykjavik council
in May that would make Russia and Nato members partners " "then,
naturally, many questions of European security will be regarded differently.
-
- Mr Ivanov, who reiterated Russia,s opposition to enlargement
in Lithuania last week, said that Moscow could not ban any sovereign state,
including the Baltics, from joining this or that organisation.
-
- But he gave a warning that if there was no agreement
and Nato followed its old path of "mechanical expansion, Russia would
be forced to take measures to protect its interests. He did not specify
these.
-
- European security will be a main topic of his talks next
week with Mr Straw and also in Germany. But the acute dangers in the Middle
East are also worrying Russia. Moscow has no intention of presenting any
new peace plan. There were plenty already, Mr Ivanov said, and the important
thing was to end violence and get them implemented.
-
- For the first time he acknowledged that the presence
of a million Russian Jewish immigrants in Israel " many of whom still
retained close links with their former homeland " had increased Russia,s
influence there considerably.
-
- He wanted Moscow to use its improved relations with Israel,
while retaining traditional good links with the Arabs, as an honest broker
to encourage an end to violence.
-
- This did not mean Russia was claiming any special role
for itself in the region. It was not realistic to act alone.
-
- He cast doubt on America,s ability to act alone to encourage
a settlement in the Middle East. Moscow acknowledged Washington,s "key
role, but criticised the Clinton Administration,s efforts to keep all others
out of the picture. "We know the results.
-
- In Afghanistan Russia would not play any military role
nor send peacekeeping troops. Russian society was still far too sensitive
over past military intervention for that.
-
- But he urged the West to help the Afghans to strengthen
their armed forces so that the interim Government could assert its authority.
-
- The new American bases in Central Asia did not worry
Russia, especially as the US had promised that it would not remain there
for long. It all depended what the bases were for. If they were to help
fight terrorism, Russia supported them, as it had long been worried about
Islamic terrorist movemements in the region. But the Kremlin would not
be so supportive if there was any other motive for these bases.
-
-
- http://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/0,,13-236335,00.html
|
