Bush Fails To Win Russian Support For Tough Stance

Independent (UK) ^ | 9-21-2002 | Rupert Cornwell

[blam]

Bush fails to win Russian support for tough stance

By Rupert Cornwell in Washington
21 September 2002

Russia and the United States failed to resolve differences yesterday on what is emerging as the central issue in the Iraq crisis – US insistence that United Nations weapons inspectors cannot return until the UN has passed a stern new resolution spelling out the consequences if Baghdad fails to co-operate.

After meeting President George Bush in the Oval Office, Igor Ivanov, Russia's Foreign Minister, said merely that the two sides would pursue their exchange of views on how to make the work of the inspectors more effective. The formulation indicates that, in contrast to the US, Russia does not believe a new resolution is required after Saddam Hussein's about-face on Monday on readmitting the inspectors.

Mr Bush's meeting with Mr Ivanov, accompanied by Sergei Ivanov, the Defence Minister, was a main element of the US diplomatic offensive to win support for a new resolution. Russia, with its veto powers on the Security Council and economic ties with Baghdad, represents the biggest single obstacle in the way of that goal.

White House officials were optimistic afterwards that Russian readiness to keep talking was a sign that Moscow could be flexible. Before meeting the defence and foreign ministers, Mr Bush spoke by phone to President Vladimir Putin, pressing his arguments and, some suspect, offering promises on a post-Saddam Iraq that could win over Moscow..

If agreement is not reached, Washington will play tough. In a thinly veiled threat, the Secretary of State, Colin Powell – regarded as the spokesman of the moderates within the Bush administration – bluntly told a congressional committee that America would prevent the inspectors' return unless they were armed with a resolution spelling out the consequences if Iraq did not grant them full and unfettered access to all sites.

This reflects irritation in the White House at the speed with which Kofi Annan, the UN secretary general, accepted President Saddam's promise to readmit the inspectors without condition. Without intense additional diplomatic and military pressure, America believes, the Iraqi dictator will prevaricate.

As it is, Hans Blix, head of Unmovic, the UN weapons monitoring body that replaced Unscom, said this week that inspectors could be back on the ground in Iraq by 15 October. This would start a phased inspection timetable, including a few early requests for access designed to test President Saddam's willingness to let them work freely.

For all George Bush's threats to act unilaterally if necessary, he is acutely aware that to block the inspections would play very badly, not only abroad, but also at home and on Capitol Hill, where Mr Bush is seeking explicit endorsement of the use of force if Iraq does not make good on its existing broken promises to the UN.

Thus the importance of Russia. If Moscow can be won around, or at the minimum induced to abstain, the draft resolution Britain and America want to present to the 15-nation Security Council early next week would probably pass, before Mr Blix's inspectors start work.

But Russia for the moment remains adamant. According to the Kremlin, Mr Putin again told Mr Bush that the priority was to secure the fastest possible deployment of UN inspection and monitoring missions. The disagreement is the greatest test yet of the new rapprochement between the former Cold War superpower adversaries which grew closer after 11 September.

Speculation of a behind-the-scenes bargain is rife. US officials deny they are ready to turn a blind eye if Mr Putin moves his forces into neighbouring Georgia, said by Moscow to be harbouring Chechen insurgents, if Russia acquiesces in a US led-strike. Mr Bush was said by his spokesman yesterday to have told the Russian President that Georgia's territorial integrity and sovereignty must be respected. Another possible carrot is an assurance that Russia will be allowed its share of the economic windfall, especially in the oil sector, for foreign interests in a post-Saddam Iraq, and that it will be compensated for debts owed by the ousted regime.

As London and Washington stepped up pressure on the Security Council, Sir Jeremy Greenstock, Britain's UN ambassador, met representatives of the 10 non-permanent members, whose votes could be vital, to impress on them the need for a new resolution.

Merely to avoid a veto by Russia, America and Britain need nine votes in favour if a resolution is to pass. This means as many as seven non-permanent members might have to be persuaded.

As the diplomatic jockeying continued, the Pentagon continued its military preparations. A forward command centre is being readied in Qatar, while military exercises and the build-up of weapons and men in the Gulf region are being stepped up.

[arkfreepdom]

It would be nice to have their support but either way Saddam's going down. Who is going to stop us?

[Arthur Wildfire! March]

Bush didn't fail. Russia failed. All this talk of going back to inspectors. 'Let's go back to inspectors.' WE CANNOT AFFORD TO FAIL THIS TIME. Perhaps we could afford to fail with the inspector experiment back in the 90s. We can't afford to fail another time. The timeline is too tight now. If we use inspectors, it's like trying to make a record breaking shot with a single bullet. In other words, it would be madness to try. Freegards....

[Andy from Beaverton]

Putin will step up to the plate as soon as we let him take care of the Musli terrorist in Chechnya and Georgia.

[Common Tator]

For all George Bush's threats to act unilaterally if necessary, he is acutely aware that to block the inspections would play very badly, not only abroad, but also at home and on Capitol Hill, where Mr Bush is seeking explicit endorsement of the use of force if Iraq does not make good on its existing broken promises to the UN.

I suspect the bush approval ratings are back near the stratisphere. No congress in the US is going to come down on the side of Saddam against Bush. The Democrats don't have the guts to do it, not if they expect to have any chance at holding the Senate.

The people that write this for the English papers just make stuff up. Of course our papers do the same.

[Wait4Truth]

President Bush is back to 70%...nobody to mess with, I suspect.

[eclectic]

Let Russians invade Georgia and call it quid pro quo

[A Citizen Reporter]

Curiously, I happened to catch the Russian ministers LIVE press conference this morning on FNC. Though they were guarded in their remarks, I would not say that there is as much dissent in their viewpoint as this British print writer would choose to illuminate.

On a side note...."Unmovic" vs "Unscum"....please, could the UN employ some new rhetoric champions for their so-called "causes".....Geez!

[kayak]

From this picture, I would say that relations between the U. S. and Russia are definitely strained ......... ;-)

Russian Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov, left, Secretary of State Colin Powell, Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld,second from right and Russian Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov, right, laugh before their meeting, Friday, Sept. 20, 2002, at the State Department in Washington. The U.S. is hoping to win Russian backing for a U.N. resolution on Iraq and is aggressively courting Russia's foreign and defense ministers at intimate meetings with top aides and some personal face time with President Bush in the Oval Office. (AP Photo/Ron Edmonds)

[FranklinsTower]

In my mind, Putin will support us. He is just doin a little strategic ambiguity for overall geopolitical purposes. He cannot look like he'll just roll over for Pres. Bush. On this point I really don't blame him. Once Putin indicates he is on Pres. Bush's side, it will look like it was earned and well deserved -- that is the way it should be. He is the real loyal opposition, not the dims in the Senate. Pres. Bush plays chess as well as the Russians. We all know the press has a tendancy to make differences far greater than they really are -- that is the real story here.

[Nick Danger]

I happened to catch the Russian ministers LIVE press conference this morning on FNC. Though they were guarded in their remarks, I would not say that there is as much dissent in their viewpoint as this British print writer would choose to illuminate.

I suspected something like that, or that Putin is just trying to make sure he gets the best deal he can. Ultimately though, Putin has the same fear we do. He has his own Islamic Crazy People to worry about, and he doesn't want them getting their hands on biologicals or a nuke any more than we do.

Some of this is posturing, some of it is gamesmanship, but when it's all over Putin will be on the side of getting rid of Saddam's nukes. If the Chechens ever got ahold of one, Moscow would be toast, and he knows it.

[Robert_Paulson2]

I hope you are right.

osami bin daschle needs to be deconstructed back to minority status by a wide margin...

What is the MOST number of seats that Republicans can gain this election if EVERYTHING fell our direction in the senate?

What is YOUR estimate of LIKELY gain, or loss? You are in a position to hear... so dish it out. What's the prognosis doc... I am hoping we win 4 or more senate seats for a 57 42 1 majority....

Dreaming?

[marron]

If you have studied the subject of "coverups", and I imagine in this forum everyone has, you know that the most efficient coverup is an "investigation".

Second most efficient would be a UN inspections program without US members, US intel, and US infantry backup. If we allow this to go forward, Annan's inspectors will go in for 90 days, give Saddam a clean bill of health, and annouce the end to all sanctions.

And then, if the UN resolutions are our excuse for being there, we are done.

We must make it clear that we are going to act unilaterally, or else give it up. I'm sure Bush has planned for this contingency, but I'm worried just the same.

[harpo11]

What is all this side-show distraction? I'm thinking our President Bush will do what needs to be done irrespective of how others lament that the United States of America, the worlds greatest superpower, must met certain UN and other nations conditions and deadlines before we act.

President Bush has clearly and steadfastly charted a course to rid the world of "evil doers". A great majority of Americans stand proudly with our President and understand the reasons and why we must not back down. America will not be steered away from this course nor will she bow. Never has, never will.

[Joe Brower]

Not surprising. Russia has $40 billion U.S. worth of business on the books with Iraq.

[Mr. Mojo]

Putin will step up to the plate as soon as we let him take care of the Musli terrorist in Chechnya and Georgia.

What's been stopping us from giving Putin the go-ahead? What possible interest to we have in protecting that terrorist cesspool in Chechnya?

[Brian Allen]

Russia, with a GDP of $300 Billion -- smaller than the Netherlands -- doesn't belong in the Security Council; [Where Japan's $3.9 Trillion GDP doesn't (Like -- gimme a break!) earn it a seat!] knows it -- and has the most to lose FRom any unilateral United States Of American U.N.-irrelevance-rendering action.

Mr Putin likes the trappings of imagined importance way too much to not be at Mr Bush's side when the prizes are being handed out.

Russia is on side.

[wallcrawlr]

Bush fails to win Russian support for tough stance

The title should read

Bush doesnt cave to Russian demands so that they "support" the war

[marron]

Dead on. The journalists can sit by in total suspense but, you're right, Russia's support is a given. She must play hard to get for the sake of appearances but she was ours from "Hello".

She has $40 billion in Iraqi concessions that are worthless until after the fall of Saddam. They bought them from Saddam, but can't use them until he's gone. For a promise that her concessions will receive due consideration, she will be on board. A decision to not back us wouldd cost her big time in postwar Iraq.

Also, its important to remember, Russia has her own Muslim problems. She needs us to assure that Turkey and Saudi Arabia terminate their support for the Chechens.

Russia already knows Saddam is gone. If she is smart, she has already identified and formed ties with some of the generals who may make up the transitional government.

Russia's reticence is all for the cameras.

[Brian Allen]

<< Russia's reticence is all for the cameras. >>

Just like Helen KKKlark's.

And and the execrable Third-Way Tony Blair's [Delusional] gung-ho-ness.