Thursday, December 19, 1996
NATO: 'NOT GOOD PROSPECTS FOR TALKS WITH RUSSIA'
Russian Defense Minister Rodionov's harsh warning yesterday
against NATO enlargement--marking his first visit to the
Alliance's headquarters--moved European observers to ponder
the difficulties inherent in persuading Moscow to accept
the Alliance's admission of former Soviet bloc countries
into its fold. Most analysts were pessimistic about
anticipated talks with Moscow on the issue, from German
national radio Deutschlandfunk's assessment that Moscow's
attitude offers no "good prospects for the talks" to left-
of-center Delo of Ljubljana's conclusion that "one can
doubt that the process (of enlargement) will be an easy
one." Moscow's reformist Segodnya informed its readers
that "a member of the Rodionov team told an INTERFAX
correspondent in Brussels that Russia's negative attitude
toward NATO's plans remained unchanged, and he indicated
that there was not just a consensus but an 'absolute
consensus' in the Russian leadership on this matter."
Commentators also warned the Alliance against making too
many concessions to Russia in an attempt to smooth its
ruffled feathers. Relieved that the foreign ministers in
Brussels had turned down a suggestion to refrain from
deploying foreign NATO troops in new member states (after
offering to abstain from deploying nuclear weapons in new
Alliance territory), Budapest's influential, liberal Magyar
Hirlap stressed, "If at the very beginning of the talks
Brussels is ready to make two such major concessions to
Moscow, then what are they going to bargain about in the
future?"
JCS Chairman General Shalikashvili's suggestion at the
Brussels gathering that an international police force be
established to arrest war criminals in Bosnia was noted by
the European press. Support for the idea was lukewarm,
with some expressing skepticism that the project--"still to
be defined"--was "inadequate." There was agreement,
however, on the need to bring indicted war criminals to
justice. There was no editorial comment on the expiration
tomorrow of IFOR's mandate in Bosnia.
This survey is based on 22 reports from 9 countries, Dec.
17-19.
EDITORS: Mildred Sola Neely and Diana McCaffrey
NATO: 'NOT GOOD PROSPECTS FOR TALKS WITH RUSSIA'
GERMANY: "Not Good Prospects For Talks With Russia"
Ruediger Clement told his audience on national radio
Deutschlandfunk of Cologne (12/19): "Again and again, it
is always the same play: Russia's foreign minister is
responsible for the more friendly tones, while the defense
minister makes tougher statements. Obviously, this does
not even change when the people in Moscow change.... It is
again the old tactical game of how the ice can be melted
once the negotiations about the new charter have begun.
The question is whether NATO was well-advised in clearing
some problems already in the preparatory talks, since the
Russians made concessions in all previous processes only
if there was no way out. The lessons from the '80s are
still valid. Only after the deployment of medium-range
missiles was Moscow willing to seriously discuss their
elimination. It would be sad if the talks gained in
substance only if NATO has accepted new members.... With
this charter, Moscow pursues a different aim than NATO.
Moscow wants to push back NATO into the second row of the
European peace order. But these are not good prospects for
the talks."
"Two-Class-NATO As A Sweetener For Moscow"
Josef Joffe said in an editorial in centrist Sueddeutsche
Zeitung of Munich (12/19) under the headline above
regarding a suggestion by German Defense Minister Ruehe
that NATO offer not to deploy conventioanl forces in new
NATO countries: "If NATO is now committing itself to not
deploying new forces in Poland and other new member
states, then it will create a two-class NATO. On the
Western side of the Oder, security is guaranteed by U.S.
forces, but on the Eastern side it is guaranteed by
Western paper. On September 1, 1939, the Poles learned
how much this paper is worth: Nothing. Countries that
cannot count on the loyalty of the Alliance are not
reliable partners. A two-class-NATO will be a NATO of
secondary importance."
"Shalikashvili's Suggestion"
Centrist Der Tagesspiegel of Berlin (12/18) concluded,
"With the suggestion to set up a special task force to
arrest war criminals such as Radovan Karadzic and Ratko
Mladic Shalikashvili is reacting to growing unease in the
public. It is becoming increasingly difficult in the
United States to explain why the 31,000 IFOR soldiers are
to safeguard peace in Bosnia while the war criminals
continue to be at large. So far, pragmatists have
guaranteed security to the killers of Srebrenica and
Sarajevo.... The time for a reassessment of the (IFOR
mission) may be favorable, since Karadzic and Mladic are
slowly losing significance. In addition, the people are
weary of the war and the secret support from Belgrade is
also in trouble. Nevertheless, it is unlikely that Pale
would accept a police action against the symbols of
Serbian nationalism..... For the time being, the
tactician Shalikashvili only tried to take away his
soldiers' responsibility for the arrest of war criminals.
But he also tried to build politics and the law a bridge.
However, obviously nobody is willing to go over this
bridge."
"Relaxed NATO"
Gisbert Kuhn penned the following editorial for centrist
General-Anzeiger of Bonn (12/18), "Rarely has a NATO
ministerial taken such an unspectacular and relaxed course
as this defense ministers' meeting. There was nothing to
decide and the coming months must show whether NATO's great
concepts of its enlargement and a reshaping of its
relationship with Russia will succeed. The Alliance did
its homework, and this happened because of massive
pressure, mainly from the Germans.... It has been clear
long since that this enlargement to the East will happen
anyway...but it is not the real aim to make NATO bigger but
to create a new security system in Europe. And this
cannot be done without Russia."
FRANCE: "The War Of The Toast"
Under the headline above, Michel Leclercq filed this AFP
dispatch (12/19): "In the last few months Franco-American
conflicts in matters of diplomacy, the economy and
cultural issues have abounded.... But it is over NATO
that the two nations are battling, with the risk of
blocking the renovation process of the Atlantic
Alliance.... Dominique Moisi of the French Institute for
International Relations comments: `These tensions can be
explained by the new international context which prevails
since the fall of the Communist bloc: There is no longer a
common enemy to force us to work together.' As the only
superpower, the United States has difficulty in accepting
the fact that its supremacy might be questioned."
"Final Agreement Or Nothing"
Baudoin Bollaert said in right-of-center Le Figaro (12/18):
"Everyone seems to agree on one point: The final agreement
(on NATO) will be global or there will be no agreement at
all. In other words, it appears that the internal
renovation of the Alliance, with the emergence of a
`European pillar,' cannot be separated from its
enlargement to the East."
"France And U.S. At Odds"
Jean-Claude Kiefer remarked in regional Les Dernieres
Nouvelles d' Alsace (12/17): "Why is there this tension
between Paris and Washington? Not because of a little
snub...but because Europe is reaffirming itself and its
voice is France. Why is there misunderstanding? Because
of Europe's emancipation? The Euro will upset the
dollar...the EU will have a joint European foreign policy.
In the end, it will have its `European pillar' within
NATO, because Europe wants to get rid of the label
`political dwarf'."
ITALY: "NATO Superpolice For Bosnia"
Left-leaning, influential La Repubblica (12/19) observed,
"An international police force will seek and arrest war
criminals in the former Yugoslavia. The project, which is
still to be defined in its operational aspects, was
discussed yesterday in Brussels by NATO defense ministers.
According to American sources, the project `did not meet
opposition, at least not in principle.' But while the
Americans place the emphasis on the arrest of war
criminals, the Europeans (and mainly the Italians and the
French) point out that, at least for the time being, the
future international police `does not have among its tasks
the seeking out of war criminals.'... Americans were
generous with leaks about the future international police,
which would depend on NATO and would not be part of SFOR
which, beginning tomorrow, will replace IFOR for the next
18 months."
RUSSIA: "Moscow: 'Absolute (?) Consensus' On NATO"
Vladimir Abarinov commented in reformist Segodnya (12/19):
"A member of the Rodionov team told an INTERFAX
correspondent in Brussels that Russia's negative attitude
toward NATO's plans remained unchanged, and he indicated
that there was not just a consensus but an 'absolute
consensus' in the Russian leadership on this matter.
Funny, this brings to mind a story by a famous Russian
author whose hero claimed he had drunk not just Veuve
Cliquot but a vintage Veuve Cliquot."
"Primakov: Russia Is No Second-Rate Nation"
Russian Foreign Minister Yevgeny Primakov said in an
interview for official government Rossiyskaya Gazeta
(12/17): "Yes, we are against NATO enlargement; no, we have
no right of veto to stop it, nor do we claim this right.
But we must protect our interests in this difficult
situation. We insist on our negative attitude toward NATO
enlargement, as we believe that it
conflicts with our interests, and this is certainly not
unfounded. We favor a dialogue with NATO because we
realize that this organization is a real factor, to be
reckoned with, and we need to maintain relations with NATO.
In the course of the dialogue, we aim not just to maintain
some kind of relations with NATO but actively seek to have
our concerns assuaged and the negative effects of NATO's
activities minimized.... There is no solving European
security problems without Russia being involved. Our view
is that priority in this matter must be given not to NATO
but a broader organization, the one which was set up to
deal expressly with European problems. It is the OSCE.
The future rests with it."
HUNGARY: "What Would Be Left?"
Influential, liberal Magyar Hirlap (12/19) commented, "Last
week, NATO foreign ministers made a gesture to Russia: They
stated that the Alliance does not wish to deploy nuclear
arms on the territories of new members. For some days it
seemed that this ' sentence' wouldl be concluded by the
defense ministers in Brussels yesterday, by stating that
NATO does not want to deploy foreign troops in the new
member states. NATO finally decided not to do this favor
to the Russians and it is easy to understand why. If at
the very beginning of the talks Brussels is ready to make
two such major concessions to Moscow, then what are they
going to bargain about in the future?"
LATVIA: "Baltics' Gloomy Prospects Tied To Money"
Janis Freimanis wrote for centrist Diena (12/18), "Recently
there have been a number of discussions on an international
level on Baltic inclusion in NATO and, in as much as can be
concluded by the West's gradual 'surrender' to Russia's
pressures, our prospects of getting what we want are
becoming ever gloomier. It turns out, for example, that
NATO's problem with the Baltic states...is not so much
Russia's valiant opposition but money--little green pieces
of paper that are accepted in all countries.... The
security of the Visegrad countries alone will cost $125
million; part of that sum will have to be covered by the
former Warsaw Pact countries, but the largest portion--by
everyone else!...
"As long as Western diplomats are able to talk to
Russia...about its 'peaceful' intentions and
'understandable' geopolitical interests, for strictly
financial reasons Baltic inclusion in nato expansion will
not happen. Realistically, the Baltics as an economic area
for the West are much less important than the Visegrad
countries.... Therefore our desire for NATO (membership)
must be defended with economic, not military arguments."
THE NETHERLANDS: "NATO In Favor Of Police Force To Hunt
War Criminals"
Centrist Algemeen Dagblad observed (12/19): "NATO defense
ministers are in favor of establishing an international
police force to hunt war criminals. An interesting idea,
but still no more than that. A little more inventive idea
would not have reflected badly on the officials in
Brussels. For the theme is not a brand new one. Ever
since the Dayton accords, it has been clear that peace
cannot be complete as long as there are war criminals
walking free. It is mainly the fear of retaliation against
the soldiers and relief workers that is an obstacle.
However, the establishment of an international police force
cannot remove that fear. But it is still necessary to
track down the war criminals. It is not very satisfying
that the NATO ideas concerning this issue are not adequate;
nevertheless it seems worth it that these ideas be carried
out as soon as possible. For what is important is to
remove every obstacle on the way to peace."
POLAND: "Russia Is Angry And Threatens"
Brussels correspondent Malgorzata Alterman filed for
center-left Gazeta Wyborcza (12/19),
"Russian Defense Minister Igor Rodionov vehemently opposed
yesterday [December 18] the enlargement of NATO to the
East. Alliance representatives were surprised by his sharp
note, so different from Yevgeny Primakov's pragmatism
shown recently on this issue.... (He repeated that)
Hungary, Poland, and the Czech Republic are too important
a buffer zone to lose. Should NATO enlarge, Moscow will
have no other choice but to take appropriate political,
military and economic measures. Rodionov did not specify
what these measures would be. He did not rule out,
however, difficulties in ratifying the already signed
disarmament treaties [START II], and possible problems
with new treaties [CFE]."
"A Yalta Group"
Political/analytical Polityka newsmagazine (12/21)
commented in an article by Marek Ostrowski, "At the start,
Warsaw lost a game. A petty but important one. Prime
Minister Wlodzimierz Cimoszewicz loudly and courageously
suggested: 'First an enlargement of NATO, then a special
NATO charter with Russia.' Today, it is already known that
the sequence will be the reverse.... 'We will be closely
watching NATO's negotiations with Russia. We will demand
that we be informed about the course of those negotiations
so that a game resulting in a new Yalta will not be played
again. There is no danger of a new Yalta,' said Foreign
Minister Rosati. Perhaps there is no danger, but the
Yalta group does exist and it has successes. One of the
successes is that part of the Brussels communique which
says that nuclear weapons will not be deployed on the
territory of new member nations.... Undoubtedly, it is a
bow to Russia.... The real success of the Yalta group,
however, is the intensification of voices in America that
an enlargement of NATO is a bad idea. Obviously, these are
not Bill Clinton nor Defense Secretary William Cohen's
voices. Yet Warsaw will not arrange the admission to NATO
with Clinton or Cohen, but--in its final stage--with the
American Senate, where, as we once calculated, the
proponents of Poland, the Czech Republic and Hungary can
be in a short supply."
SLOVENIA: "Enlargement Won't Be As Easy As You Think"
According to left-of-center Delo's Brussels correspondent
(12/19), "NATO speaks a lot about its increasingly good
relations with the Partnership for Peace members...but it
would above all prefer to have better relations with
Russia.... Although it has been said that (NATO) will not
consider anyone else's opinion--not even Russia's--the
present situation is far from simple. Conversations with
the Russian ministers of defense and foreign affairs
(reveal)...that (Russia) cannot tolerate the process of
NATO enlargement because there are other means of
maintaining peace and cooperation in Europe...such as OSCE.
As long as the interlocutors are on two separate banks of a
river as wide as the discussion of security in Europe, no
quick answers may be expected.... (NATO) defense ministers
keep stressing the importance of their decision to hold a
summit in Madrid.... Nevertheless, considering the
statements by the Russian Defense Minister ... one can
doubt that the process (of expansion) will be an easy one--
even if the newly confirmed negative viewpoint of Russia is
disregarded.... Some of Russia's arguments will be hard to
refute."
##