| Submit your comments on this article |
| Iraq |
| RUSSIA BARGAINS WAR SUPPORT FOR CASH |
| 2003-03-06 |
| WHILE vowing to prevent war in Iraq, and warning of global instability and the dangers of regime-change, Russia is quietly pushing for a massive cash windfall that it could claim by bowing to Washington’s will in the Gulf. Igor Ivanov, the Russian foreign minister, joined his German and French counterparts yesterday in saying they will not allow a UN Security Council resolution that "authorises resorting to force" against Iraq. In an interview with a leading Russian newspaper, he had earlier reminded the United States of the bitter taste that regime-change can leave. But while Mr Ivanov warned Washington not to jeopardise the fight against terror or the authority of the UN by launching unilateral action against Iraq, one of his chief deputies worked to soothe US tempers — and, apparently, wring maximum political and financial capital from Russia’s key bargaining position. A senior US diplomat warned publicly yesterday that "there could be costs attached" to a Russian veto in the UN. Moscow may see opportunities as well. In an interview published in Kommersant newspaper yesterday, Mr Ivanov warned of the perils of trying to "force democratic principles onto an entire people. "The Soviet Union had its own grim history of setting up ‘suitable’ regimes, and we know where that led. Unfortunately such experiments carry a heavy price, most of all to the people one is experimenting upon." Moscow’s ignominious withdrawal from Afghanistan in 1989, after desperately trying to prop up its puppet-leader, must have been prominent in his mind. The chaos that engulfed the country led to the rise of Osama bin Laden and the Taleban. Mr Ivanov’s deputy foreign minister, Georgi Mamedov, however, met the US ambassador to Moscow to "discuss possible ways to bring closer the Russian and US positions in the Security Council on the Iraq question," an official statement said. Mr Mamedov emerged from the "urgent" talks with a list of what Moscow wants from Washington in return for its support, or at least its non-opposition, to war in Iraq. He told reporters that a key treaty reducing stockpiles of strategic nuclear weapons would be placed before the US and Russian legislatures "in the coming weeks", a move which Moscow favours as it cannot pay for the weapons’ safe storage. Mr Mamedov, noting the presence of NASA’s Moscow representative at the meeting, also underlined Russia’s desire for extra US funding for its impoverished space agency. The Russian space programme, once the prize of the Soviet Union, cannot afford to build the extra Soyuz rockets needed to supply the International Space Station while the space shuttle is grounded after the demise of the Columbia. "We are still discussing financing for our launches," he said, denouncing a US law that forbids extra funding for the space agency while Russia continues to help build a nuclear reactor in Iran, part of President George Bush’s "axis of evil". "There is no link here," Mr Mamedov said. "Our ties with Iran involve nothing that breaches our international commitments. Anyway, it is an absolutely different issue, and we cannot conjure up tens of millions of dollars to increase the number of Soyuz launches." He also said Washington’s recent inclusion of three Chechen rebel groups on its terrorist blacklist should be "only the first step". The foreign ministry said Mr Mamedov and the US Ambassador, Mr Alexander Vershbow, had discussed "more effective joint opposition of international terrorism, including that in the Caucasus". Moscow has been severely piqued by Western criticism of its brutal war in Chechnya, which the Kremlin claims is financed by al-Qaeda-linked radicals. Across the city, another senior Russian minister was staking a claim for US funds. The atomic energy minister, Alexander Rumyantsev told reporters he would sign an agreement next week to close three nuclear power plants with the capability to produce weapons-grade plutonium. Washington would fund the shut-down to the tune of "hundreds of millions of dollars", he said, adding that over $200 million more was needed to secure Russia’s nuclear reactors against "terrorist acts". Meanwhile, the latest planeload of Russians flew back to the safety of Moscow from Baghdad yesterday. Many worked in Iraq’s oil industry, where Russian firms have huge contracts to exploit the country’s reserves, the second largest in the world. Moscow is also owed $8 billion by Baghdad, and is now filling its coffers with oil export money earned on a world market driven skywards by the uncertainty over Iraq. Analysts here say Washington must guarantee the safety of Moscow’s interests in Iraq before Russia will agree to cash in its chips. It will not give them up cheaply. While Mr Ivanov was in London on Tuesday, voicing his opposition to a war to the BBC, President Vladmir Putin welcomed to the Kremlin the president and vice-president of British Petroleum. BP stunned the energy world last month by buying a 50 per cent stake in Russian oil firm TNK for close to £4 billion. |
| Posted by:ISHMAIL |
| #11 I think we are portraying the wrong image. First the Turks we try to buy off and now the Russians want some money. Instead, I would suggest we portray the US as a pi**ed off, unstable and irrational lot, hell bent on taking care of business after 9/11. If we were perceived in that fashion, the whole of the civilized world would be on our team....not for financial benefit, rather, for fear of retribution if they were not....economic or militarily. If you will remember, the first resolution on Iraq after 9/11 was unanimous because the world recognized that the Americans have had enough and there was going to be hell to pay for an attack on our country. It was the same for Afghanistan...who opposed us? No one. Now we are caught up in the rational abyss of world opinion and debate which only serves to divide our country. The anti-war marches and debate will last longer than the war itself. As for world opinion, I say the more Bush is PERCEIVED as irrational, the less lip service we will get out of the rest of the world. What he should tell the NKor's is...shoot a missle and we will nuke your capitol and detroy your life as you know it. AS for Bagdad...we should have already been there. |
| Posted by: Mark 2003-03-06 15:37:10 |
| #10 Exile is not an option when dealing with Sammy. He has to go, and he has to go the hard route. That's the line, and that's what's gonna happen. We had no intention of leaving the Nazi party machinery intact in WWII, and the same awaits the Ba'athists. |
| Posted by: Rex Mundi 2003-03-06 12:05:56 |
| #9 C'mon, folks, talking about russian "principles" is just ludicrous. They've never had any principles other than self-interest, but at least they're honest about it. Putin is an ex-KGB plug-ugly - he's got less than most.... |
| Posted by: mojo 2003-03-06 10:40:48 |
| #8 my IE 6.02 has no problem with the underscore - try rightclicking and open in new window or update your IE |
| Posted by: Frank G 2003-03-06 09:00:17 |
| #7 Like I said yesterday, you're either with us, against us, or for sale. If this article is true, we know how principled Putin is. |
| Posted by: Dar Steckelberg 2003-03-06 08:52:46 |
| #6 I'm very, very doubtful of this one, since I'm not seeing any confirmation anywhere, but it was pointed out less than an hour ago so it's very fresh... A Refinery Explosion near Kirkuk is being reported by Novosti to be caused by Iraqis sabotaging their oil fields. It may be Russian news sensationalism, but taken in conjunction with my earlier cite from Raed's, maybe there's something up? -Vic |
| Posted by: vicarious 2003-03-06 07:09:15 |
| #5 All the talk of bargaining over deals like this is just a soft form of blackmail. If the US gives in, and "rewards" Russia and other states just for doing what they ought to do anyway, this just sets a precident for ridiculous horse-trading in future. It's another nail in the coffin of the UN. I'd prefer Saddam to go without a war too, but I think the worst possible post-Saddam scenarios rely on there being no coalition forces in Baghdad. You couldn't prevent anarchy, and you couldn't prevent Ba'athist puppets grabbing the reins of power. Saddam living the high life in the lap of one of his sponsor states?! Give me his head or give me the Baghdad War Trials. |
| Posted by: Bulldog 2003-03-06 07:06:59 |
| #4 Wow - if we can work out an agreement with Russia - Sadaam is gone. These are negotiations where both US and Russia could benefit from a meeting of minds. If it's true that Uday is in Russia then this looks VERY promising on the surface. Just hope Sadaam doesn't cut him a better deal. Maybe now that Russia knows Sadaam WILL be deposed, they are willing to relook at our offers. |
| Posted by: becky 2003-03-06 06:13:10 |
| #3 "The Soviet Union had its own grim history of setting up ‘suitable’ regimes, and we know where that led. Unfortunately such experiments carry a heavy price, most of all to the people one is experimenting upon." Spoken like someone whose who truly doesn't grasp the concept of a democratic government. Clueless! No point of personal reference, I suppose, for a government "of the people". The comment, "force democratic principles onto an entire people" is such an oxymoron as to be humorous. Sad that these guys can't grasp it past the "establishing" phase. We are so blessed in this country. |
| Posted by: becky 2003-03-06 05:52:16 |
| #2 More OT. IE doesn't like the underscore in Dear_Raed. Anyone else have this problem ? Any solutions besides dumping IE ? Thanks, Sorry for the OT. |
| Posted by: Anonymous 2003-03-06 05:06:16 |
| #1 Semi-OT: But Salam Pax of Where's Raed is reporting that Uday is in Russia or Belarus. A Russian reader confirms that local news is reporting that the mayor of Baghdad is in Belarus and speculation is he's attempting to secure exile for the regime. -Vic |
| Posted by: vicarious 2003-03-06 04:11:23 |