But the Zionist-controlled media always present them as the Big, Bad Bear:
"Stark Differences on Arms Threaten U.S.-Russia Talks" by THOM SHANKER and STEVEN LEE MYERS
WASHINGTON, Oct. 9 — Growing disagreements over how to carry forward arms control treaties threaten to bog down meetings in Moscow this week between top-level Americans and their Russian counterparts that are intended to seek a compromise on missile defense.
The talks, in Moscow, are becoming both the latest indication of the troubled state of relations between the White House and the Kremlin and one of the last opportunities for President Bush and President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia to overcome the deepening distrust that has strained the relationship.
Mr. Bush is sending to Moscow his two most powerful cabinet members, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates. It is a sign of the seriousness of Mr. Bush’s intent to repair relations that have threatened to rupture over a nuclear arms treaty, another treaty restricting conventional forces in Europe and a new missile defense system meant to guard against a possible Iranian ballistic missile attack.
“We have tried to convey that our instructions from our senior leadership are to try and do everything we can to establish some basis for a cooperative approach with Russia,” said a senior administration official involved in planning the talks this week. The official, like another, spoke on condition of anonymity under standard diplomatic ground rules.
“That is the big strategic factor in dealing with Iran: the two of us working together on what we feel is a serious, developing threat,” the official said.
Respected voices on foreign affairs, even in the Republican Party, have urged an American diplomatic initiative toward Russia in Mr. Bush’s final months.
“To many, it will seem counterintuitive to make major policy pushes in the final months of a presidency,” Senator Richard G. Lugar of Indiana, the ranking Republican on the Foreign Relations Committee, said Monday at the Brookings Institution in Washington. “But the strategic choices legitimized by Presidents Bush and Putin will shape the behavior and policies of successors for years to come.”
The Bush administration’s approach, part of a legacy of disdain for formal binding treaties negotiated over years, gives the administration what it contends is greater ability to maneuver to forward its national security interests.
Russia has demanded a legally binding accord to formally replace verification requirements in the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty, or Start, which expires in 2009.
The Bush administration is offering only to preserve some parts of the nuclear accord to guarantee inspections and verification of the nuclear weapons reductions it set in motion — but in a still undermined format far less formal than a major treaty.
One senior Bush administration official referred disdainfully to Start as a “telephone-book-size document” that both sides now considered outdated. “It’s not surprising that there are some parts of it both sides would not like to continue,” the official said.
The Russians see it differently.
“Unfortunately we have very serious disagreements,” Anatoly I. Antonov, an arms-control official at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, told the official Russian Information Agency last month. “They concern the essence of the future accord. We have not agreed yet on the nature of the accord either. We have not yet succeeded in convincing the U.S.A. that the new document must be legally binding."
Missile defense remains the most divisive issue for the two countries. High on the agenda of the talks will be American proposals for placing 10 antimissile interceptors in Poland and radar in the Czech Republic. Although the two systems are described as a modest hedge against the risk of a ballistic missile attack on NATO allies or the United States by Iran, the plans have threatened relations with Moscow.
Mr. Putin this year countered with a proposal for the United States to drop its plans and instead use Soviet-era early warning radar in Azerbaijan. While promising to consider the idea generally, American officials rejected the specifics of Mr. Putin’s offer, saying the old radar was incapable of the precise tracking required by the interceptors.
The Americans have proposed that the Russians drop their objections to the bases in Poland and the Czech Republic and become a full partner in a pan-European missile defense system, linking the Azerbaijan radar to the system for shared defense.
“In fact, we find the Russian proposals quite interesting, forward looking, and they open the possibility of serious strategic cooperation on missile defense,” said Daniel Fried, the assistant secretary of state for European and Eurasian Affairs.
The 10 interceptors to be placed in Poland are hardly a threat to the Russian arsenal of thousands of warheads, but Kremlin officials are believed to fear that the system in Central Europe will lead to a more advanced missile defense that could blunt the Russian nuclear force — and they certainly are still angered at the Bush administration’s decision to abrogate the Antiballistic Missile Treaty and move ahead with missile defenses.
Russian officials have threatened to direct their missiles toward Europe if the United States proceeds with the system. They also have said they will suspend participation in a separate treaty limiting the deployment of conventional forces in Europe. That will be on the agenda in Moscow, too.
With progress stalled on this range of strategic issues, it may require talks by Ms. Rice and Mr. Gates with their Russian counterparts — a session with President Putin is scheduled, too — to find a way forward.
Broadly answering Russian criticisms, the Bush administration defends its record on treaties by portraying itself as one of the most effective administrations at reducing the number of nuclear weapons.
As tensions between Moscow and Washington escalate, American advocates of arms control argue that legally binding treaties offer both sides the kind of certainty that guarantees stability.
Daryl G. Kimball, executive director of the Arms Control Association, said the administration’s policies, especially its refusal to accept binding limits on the number of nuclear weapons, have heightened Russia’s distrust of American intentions.
“This is what feeds Russia’s paranoia,” he said. “The United States is going to maintain the capability to field more nuclear weapons, and they are going to build a missile defense system that will ultimately threaten the Russian strategic forces.”
All PART of the PLAN!
