In supporting reforms in Russia, however, Bush stated emphatically that "we cannot excuse Russian brutality. When the Russian government attacks civilians-killing women and children, leaving orphans and refugees-it can no longer expect aid from international lending institutions. The Russian government will discover that it cannot build a stable and unified nation on the ruins of human rights. That it cannot learn the lessons of democracy from the textbook of tyranny. We want to cooperate with Russia on its concern with terrorism, but that is impossible unless Moscow operates with civilized restraint."
Four months later, as the following exchange on February 16, 2000 between candidate Bush and journalist Jim Lehrer during The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer demonstrates, Bush promised to do more regarding Chechnya.
JL: On Chechnya and Russia, the U.S. and the rest of the Western world had been raising Cain with Russia from the beginning, saying "You are killing innocent civilians." The Russians have said essentially, "We're fighting terrorism, and, by the way, mind your own business." What else-what else, if anything, could be done by the United States?
GWB: Well, we could cut off IMF aid and export/import loans to Russia until they heard the message loud and clear, and we should do that. It's going to be a very interesting issue to see how Russia emerges, Jim. This guy, Putin, who is now the temporary president, has come to power as a result of Chechnya. He kind of rode the great wave of popularity as the Russian military looked like they were gaining strength in kind of handling the Chechnya situation in a way that's not acceptable to peaceful nations. . . .
JL: But on Chechnya, specifically, you think we should not-we should hold up International Monetary Fund aid. Anything else we should do?
GWB: Export/import loans.
JL: And just cut them off? GWB: Yes, sir, I think we should.
JL: Until they do what? GWB: Until they understand they need to resolve the dispute peacefully and not be bombing women and children and causing huge numbers of refugees to flee Chechnya.
JL: And do you think that would work?
GWB: Well, it certainly worked better than what the Clinton administration has tried.
JL: You mean, just using words, you mean?
GWB: Yes.
From Confrontation to Reengagement
In the first weeks of his administration, President Bush and his new foreign policy team signaled their intention to maintain a tough line on Russia and Chechnya in particular. After being named national security adviser but before taking office, Condoleezza Rice wrote an opinion piece for the Chicago Tribune in which she restated many themes of her Foreign Affairs essay from a year earlier. In the December 31, 2000 newspaper column, Rice emphasized again that "the United States needs to recognize that Russia is a great power" and therefore "U.S. policy must concentrate on the important security agenda with Russia." At the same time, she also reiterated many of Russia's domestic ills, including weak democratic institutions, half-hearted economic reforms, and corruption. She devoted special attention to the ill effects of the Chechen war and Putin's role in it: "As prime minister, Vladimir Putin used the Chechnya war to stir nationalism at home while fueling his political fortunes. The Russian military has been uncharacteristically blunt and vocal in asserting its duty to defend the integrity of the Russian Federation-an unwelcome development in civil-military relations.
The long-term effect of the war on Russia's political culture should not be underestimated. This war has affected the relations between Russia and its neighbors in the Caucasus, as the Kremlin has been hurling charges of harboring and abetting Chechen terrorists against states as diverse as Saudi Arabia, Georgia, and Azerbaijan. The war is a reminder of the vulnerability of the small, new states around Russia and of America's interest in their independence." Rice hoped that this blunt statement about Russia's problems and their impact on United States interests would stand in contrast to the sugar-coated rhetoric of the Clinton years, which, in her opinion, greatly damaged United States national security: "Frustrated expectations and 'Russia fatigue' are direct consequences of the 'happy talk' in which the Clinton administration engaged."
In spring 2001, Bush and his foreign policy team did seem determined to end the "happy talk." In March his administration ordered the expulsion of nearly 50 Russian diplomats from the United States, who were accused of being spies. Bush personally did not make any statements about Chechnya in his first months in power, but his State Department sent a loud signal of support for the Chechen cause by arranging a meeting between the Chechen foreign minister in exile, Ilyas Akhmadov, and the acting head of the State Department's Bureau of Newly Independent States, John Beyrle, the highest-level meeting ever with a Chechen government official. In this early period, Bush officials also seemed poised to maintain a tough line on Russia's relations with rogue states.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
And today, the world knows the truth......
Ilyas Akhmadov does not sound like someone who would cohort with arabian militants. Maybe it's just me...
That's one of the most depressing posts in this whole thread (#180.) While President Bush was chastising Russia for Chechnya, why was he adopting a "most intimate bed partners" relationship with Saudi Arabia - which has been *funding* the Chechnya terrorists' activities? How can someone be so *wrong* about the enemy?
After 9/11 things changed. We now know who wants to harm us. The blame lies in the past Department of State, no more.The US, GB and Russia need to make a unified pact against Terrorism and AQ. To hell with politics of the cold war, we need to unite now and stamp out this vermin. No one would call it genocide if the free world would join together now and stop the ROP.