Hmmmmm... I'm wondering what do you mean? Toes?
Posted on 03/05/2006 12:19:17 PM PST by lizol
U.S. Report Says Russia Is Not a Reliable Partner
By George Gedda The Associated Press
WASHINGTON -- Russia's emergence as an increasingly authoritarian state could impair U.S.-Russian ability to cooperate on key international security issues, according to an analysis by a major U.S. foreign policy organization released on Sunday.
Continuation of Russia's drift away from democratic norms under President Vladimir Putin "will make it harder for the two sides to find common ground and harder to cooperate even when they do," said the report, which was issued by the Council on Foreign Relations.
It warned that some critical problems cannot be dealt with effectively unless Moscow and Washington cooperate.
"If Russia remains on an authoritarian course, U.S.-Russian relations will almost certainly continue to fall short of their potential," it said.
The report was co-chaired by Jack Kemp, a former Republican presidential candidate, and John Edwards, the Democratic candidate for vice president in 2004. Kemp formerly served in the House, Edwards in the Senate.
Release of the report was timed to coincide with Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov's visit to Washington, his first as foreign minister. He is due to arrive Monday and will meet the next day with President George W. Bush and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice.
The report urged that the United States preserve and expand cooperation on dealing with the threat posed by Iran's nuclear program and on coping with the risk of Russian nuclear materials falling into the wrong hands.
On the whole, though, the report said relations were headed in the wrong direction.
"In particular, Russia's relations with other post-Soviet states have become a source of significantly heightened U.S.-Russian friction," it said.
It urged that Washington counter Russian pressures that undermine the "stability and independence" of its neighbors by helping to secure the success of those states that "want to make the leap into the European mainstream."
The report was especially critical of the Kremlin's energy export policy, accusing it of turning "a prized asset of economic relations into a potential tool of political intimidation."
Ukraine, it said, "has been the most shocking and coercive application of this view to date, but others may lie ahead."
The report recommended that the United States go beyond mere expressions of concern about the rollback of Russian democracy. It urged that Washington step up support for organizations committed to free and fair parliamentary and presidential elections in 2007 and 2008, respectively.
"Russia's course will not -- must not -- be set by foreigners, but the United States and its allies cannot be indifferent to the legitimacy of this process and to the leaders it produces," the report said.
Among many setbacks to Russian democracy in recent years, the subordination of the judiciary to executive power received particular importance in the study.
"Under President Putin, power has been centralized and pluralism reduced in every single area of politics. As a result, Russia is left only with the trappings of democratic rule -- their form, but not their content," the report said.
Lavrov, speaking to U.S. journalists in Moscow ahead of his trip, called for "clear and honest" relations. He implied U.S. officials had aired the two countries' problems through the media instead of using quiet diplomatic channels.
"We can't believe in official, public diplomacy when some concerns are flagged throughout the media, very often without proper justification, very often based on wrong assumptions," Lavrov said Friday, speaking in fluent English.
He did not specify which media reports he was referring to, but may have been responding to U.S. newspaper reports last week that said the White House was "recalibrating" its policy toward Moscow due to concerns that Russia's democratic institutions had been weakened by Putin.
Lavrov said that "direct dialogue, a clear and honest raising of concerns and the receiving of clear and honest answers is ... something the state of modern Russian-American relations deserves."
Aha I knew it!
Ping
ping
Geeeee, ya think?
And how much of my money did the govt. spend to determine this?
How many hours of intellegance operatives work was involved to determine this?
How absolutely domb can our govt. be?
Is the Russian Wives/Veteran Club supporting our President on this?
Don't know yet.
But soon we're going to see one of them (the one from "X...-files") saying, that Condie Rice wouldn't agree with it. :-)))
Did you know that our closest ally, Israel, sells high tech weaponry to the Russians?
The putinists are not saying anything.
And what could they say? :-)))
Some people would get a whole basket of apples on their heads, and still wouldn't accept the law of gravity.
I think you know who I mean.
Russia's tricky in many aspects.
After WWII America got control of the Atlantic and Pacific. During the Cold War, of the Arctic and Indic (Alaska and Israel becoming states ).
I am not sure about the intentions of Russia regarding Iran. Even if the islamofascists dont succeed in their nuclear program, what about all the nuclear heads missing after the fall of the USSR?
If Russia and its peripheric CIS allied with Iran, that would form a continous block with access to the four oceans.
Also, both the Russian Cyrilic and the Persian Farsi alphabets are as much useful as the deseret one... lol. So they have something (to lose) in common during Globalization.
Let's not forget about the tremendous government-sponsored anti american propaganda that's still going on in these days.
And what about 'Yamantau'?
The coming (or already initiated) ''third'' (I cannot emphasize the '' enough ) world war has eurasiafrica as the target (arabs belong to an afroasian linguistic group) and Islam is almoast by definition the intend of cultural continentalization of Africa and Eurasia.
Now Hamas says the chechnya issue is an internal Russian confrontation. haha. That's double speech and could bring Russian Nationalism and Islamofascism toghether> nice prospect...
Russia as pro American-led globalization? hopefully but HARDLY.
If you read the article, the answer is zero.
duhhhhh
"The putinists are not saying anything."
And who might be these so-called "Putinists" be? Care to put your money where your mouth is? I'm going to ask you again not to refer to me, if you are doing so, as a "Putinist" or any such label that besmirches my loyalty AND my on-going service to country.
I'm amazed you guys can't actually see what this report is going to be used for - Slamming Bush and the Republicans on Foreign Policy issues for the 2006 Congressional elections and then the 2008 Presidential elections. Kemp has provided plenty of ammo for John Edwards AND the DNC to use on the campaign trail. He's painting Bush as weak and inept on Russia. Goes to show some will latch on to any report that depicts Russia as bad no matter who wrote it and to what end they wrote it. (Having said that, there are some truths in the report)
I guess you guys won't be minding the 'Rats beating up on the Republicans about this on the election trail? Anyone want to wager a guess who long it will be before Howard the Duck Dean starts quoting from this report?
My views on the Russians and Hamas? Another misstep in their foreign policy and a sign that Primakov still pulls some of the strings over there. However, the Russians will no longer be able to caterwhaul when a Western country talks to any of the Chechens (which would be a mistake). They've also lost their ability to take the moral high-ground vis-a-vis the Chechens and terrorism. Once they extended the invitation to Hamas they lost that right. And the next terrorist attack sponsored by Hamas in the ME Russia will "own responsibility" for. (And with Hamas selling the Chechens out I'd also be expecting another terrorist incident in Russia in the near future.) The State Dept, on the other hand, has called the Moscow talks "useful." Regardless, it was a huge gamble for the Russians to take and I'm betting it's not going to pay off for them.
Thunder90, you're becoming quite adept at not answering questions posed to you. Earlier you said NATO should be sent in if Belarus' doesn't have a free and fair election (which they won't). You are a college-aged young man and able to join the military. When I felt the Soviet Union should be stopped, I joined up. Part of that "stopping them" included learning everything about them, their history, their culture, their language, their strengths and weaknesses. Luckily, the military provided me that opportunity. I didn't want to sit on the sidelines while my country was opposing an evil enemy.
We're at war against terrorism, and you also think we should be doing more to counter Russia. There is no better way than doing that by serving your country. It's a lot more tangible than fighting the "battles" in the ethernet. And, btw, I was in college when I joined up. I'd be interested in knowing why someone who is so fervently patriotic hasn't made the logical next step. I know a couple good recruiters up your neck o' the woods. Personally, I can't think of anything more rewarding than serving our country.. That's why I wonder why you haven't heard the calling yet.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.