At a background of general criticism of the administrative reform carried out by the Kremlin, support of Russia by the USA and Europe came very opportunely. Stake of the RF on participation in the global anti-terroristic coalition and its weighty status of alternative exporter of energy resources do not let western partners refuse easily cooperation with it. In its turn, it supposes some concessions and expression of loyalty. Building foreign policy strategy, the leaders of two world powers – Germany and the USA, to which the Kremlin mainly orientates itself, expressed unconditional support to Moscow.
Chancellor of Germany Herhard Schroder claimed he deliberately refused to criticize the process of Russian domestic reforms aimed at establishment of order in the country and also disproved possibility of attack on the Kremlin with respect to federal policy in Chechnya. The cause for Schroder’s claim was partly, besides his personal friendship with Vladimir Putin, gratitude for agreement of the RF to ratify Kyoto protocol.
Schroder refused criticism of Moscow long ago and just does not pay attention to the international anti-Russian campaign. He concentrates on economic cooperation and considers the RF as perspective energy partner. Now Germany imports 30% of consumed natural gas in the country from Russia, and the parties intend to increase volume of deliveries in the future.
In this connection, Moscow considers the project of Northern-European gas pipeline (NEG), which will let deliver gas directly to Germany, to be prospective. The NEG will be built, at the best, in 2007. However, Russia is interested in it because of two reasons: due to the pipeline, it will increase degree of dependence of European importers, including Germany, on its energy resources, and decrease own dependence on such traditional transit countries as Poland, Belarus, and the Ukraine.
The USA considers the RF, first of all, as a partner on the anti-terroristic coalition. During meeting of American-Russian business council (ARBC) the first deputy state secretary of the USA Richard Armitage claimed the USA admitted the government of the RF had moral right to respond decisively to attacks of terrorists. Underlining that security was one of the most important factors of stability of the world community, the American high-rank diplomat gave to understand Washington considered Moscow as an important partner in the struggle against terrorism.
Claims of Armitage, supported general mood of the White House, which was also expressed by president Bush, increase Kremlin’s weight on the international arena, because they again prove that the RF is attentively listened to regarding questions of the struggle against terrorism. Recognition by the USA of Russia’s right of response to terrorists justifies course on toughening of policy in the CIS under the pretence of the anti-terroristic struggle.
Besides, perception by influential international leaders of Russian policy with respect to Chechnya gradually changes. Moscow’s task stays the same: to achieve, finally, qualification of Chechen terrorism as international, thus smoothing over criticism of Russian policy in the republic, and simultaneously confirm its right of solution of internal political problems preventing possible intervention into domestic “Chechen” affairs.
While key figures of influential western powers express their loyalty to Russia, mutual relation of Russia with international right protection organizations continue to stay very tense. As it was expected, wave of criticism fell upon the RF triple strength at the autumn session of PACE. Kremlin’s hopes on that Europeans recognize rightness of its policy with respect to Chechnya after the terroristic attacks in Moscow and Beslan were not realized. And though the first two reports on Chechnya concerning situation with refugees and political situation in the republic did not cause particular objections of Russian delegation, it had prepared its own opinion and offered series of amendments regarding the third, however, almost all of them were voted down.
Deputies from the RF considered Rudolf Bindig’s report on situation with human rights in the republic to be insulting. Bindig (one of the authors of the “Chechen dossier”) did not refuse favourite wordings of European right protectors, for example, armed boeviks were called as “groups of rebels”. Moscow is accused of violation of human rights, freedom of speech and choice. Bingig’s opinion is not single. Resolution on his report was approved by 75 votes against 18.
Additional “blow” for the Kremlin was claim of Andreas Gross, the second author of the “Chechen dossier”, who called pro-Kremlin president of Chechnya Alu Alkhanov to be illegitimate. Wish of PACE to the Council of Europe that it had to help the president and government of the RF to protect human rights and strengthen democracy was absolutely inadmissible for Moscow.
Criticizing Moscow, the EU countries traditionally follow tactics of double standards, secretly or evidently supporting Chechen separatists thus discrediting policy of the federal center in Chechnya. So, the site of Chechen separatists “Caucasus center” again started its work in Lithuania, and Denmark’s ambassador was summoned to the Russian Foreign Ministry for explanations of public statements of accomplices of terrorists on the Danish territory. The former prisoner of Guantanamo, citizen of Denmark Slimane Abderakhmane claimed intention to come to Chechnya for struggle with Muslim brothers against Russia. Danish police put him under observation after the tough reaction of the RF Foreign Ministry. However, activization of Chechen “refugee” Usman Ferzauli, who calls himself “plenipotentiary of Aslan Maskhadov” continues to worry Moscow.
Despite support of leaders of states, dissatisfaction with Russian policy – both internal (concerning regions and human rights) and foreign (first of all, with respect to the very EU) grows in the European Union in general. The EU officials claim more often that they do not let Moscow skim the cream off: before it urges the EU on profitable agreement for it, Russia, firstly, should carry out duties on questions of policy in Chechnya, observance of human rights and building of legal state in the RF.
In the context of formation of four common spaces, on the threshold of summit “Russia-EU” in the Hague, European officials intend to insist on valuable carrying out of agreements on creation of “space of freedom, security, and law” based on democratic values, which, according to Europeans, are developed weakly in the RF. Moscow, most likely, as usual, will ignore the attacks focusing on bilateral economic relations with western powers and counting on relations with influential world leaders, who are loyal to it.
Russia, counting on struggle against terrorism as an instrument of strengthening of its own positions, has begun realization of its plans. Moscow offered establishment of alternative organization for struggle against terrorism, which, according to its plan, has to promote “collection” of the CIS countries under its command, and also increase its image characteristics in opinion of leading powers of the world community.
Constituent conference of Eurasian group (EAG), new organization for struggle against cleaning up of money and financing of terrorism, took place in Moscow. It is remarkable that the RF initiative caused interest of such international organizations as the UNO, World Bank, Europol, Interpol, Council of Europe, European commission, and FATF (international organization on struggle against cleaning up of capitals, which served as prototype of EAG), which representatives visited the conference.
Readiness of Russia to bear expenses of Secretariat of EAG is evidence of its interest in creation of such organization. The government of the RF will give 2 million dollars for financing of activity of EAG in 2004-2005. Five CIS countries – Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Belarus, Kirghizia, Kazakhstan, and also China will join the new Eurasian group.
Now these countries, except the RF, which is a nominal member of FATF, are not members of any international organization dealing with cleaning up of “dirty money”. Moscow takes a function of rendering consultation services on bringing to international standards of legislations in the sphere of counteraction to cleaning up of profit taken in criminal way, and creation of authorized bodies of financial intelligence service.
Membership of Georgia and Moldova was under question till the moment of creation of EAG. They did not become members of the new organization because of clear reasons. However, representatives of Georgia, and also the Ukraine and USA, expressed a wish to be observers in it.
Tension in relation of Russia and Latvia was expressed in decision of the Supreme Court of Latvia on “Kononov case”, which revolted Russian Foreign Ministry. The Supreme Court of Latvia left verdict of former Soviet partisan Vasily Kononov, 80-year-old citizen of the RF, without change. According to Russian side, Kononov participated in liquidation of Latvian accomplices of Nazism. In contemporary Latvia he was convicted, first, of military crimes, and later the wording of the verdict was changed to “gangsterizm”. As a whole, he has already been trying for about six years.
Moscow insists the “Kononov case” is fabricated in he context of course of the official Riga on revision of results of the World War II. In Latvia, in all, ten veterans of the Great Patriotic War, in the first place, employees of the PCIA (NKVD), were convicted on accusation of commitment of military crimes. In this connection, the RF Foreign Ministry called prosecution of veterans on political motives to be amoral. It is evident that trials on events of semi-centennial remoteness were provoked by difficult relations between Moscow and Riga, and this decision can only deepen growing tension.
The worsening situation with Russian-speaking population in Latvia proceeds to worry the Kremlin. The Latvian Seim approved amendments to the Main Law of the country by majority. Now citizens of the EU that have lived for several months on the territory of the country get the vote at local elections. Foreign voters do not need to pay taxes, know history of the country, and speak Latvian.
To all this, in Latvia, “non-citizens” that is Russian-speaking population, making more than 37% in the country, do not have the vote. Initiative of opposition deputies to achieve the vote for “non-citizens” failed as always. Moscow’s calls for the EU to pay attention to violation of human rights in Baltic states are still ignored.
Presidential elections in Afghanistan do not suppose even indirect Russian participation in view of active influence of the USA on the situation in the country and, partly, because of unused potential of bilateral relations. At a background of 16 presidential aspirants, Khamid Karzai, actual head of administration, the US protégé, was considered as the most probable winner from the very beginning. Field commander Abdul Rashid Dustum and former minister of education Yunus Kanuni were considered as competitors of Karzai, however, the US support is the most important resource at the elections in Afghanistan.
The advantages of Karzai are that the USA stands up for him, because he is a guarantor of their interests in Afghanistan. As Karzai became the head of the state at once after the regime of Talibs was defeated, his election at the first democratic elections has to mean rightness of the US course in Afghanistan, which will increase popularity of presidential aspirant George Bush on the eve of the elections in the USA.
Russia, for which Afghanistan is not the prior direction of foreign policy in view of more important problems, practically did not realized economic and political potential of mutual relations with this state including the questions of post-war restoration of the economy. Also evident advantages of Washington in dialogue with local administration prevent strengthening of Moscow’s positions. The USA will hardly allow considerable strengthening of Russia’s influence on Kabul. Karzai does not conceal his absolutely pro-American orientation, having claimed two years ago, “Afghanistan, like everybody, prefers to be friends with the strongest powers in the world” that is with the USA.
Relations of Moscow and Kabul are more than neutral. The last meeting of the presidents of the RF and Afghanistan took place in March 2002. Ambitious projects concerning oil cooperation, electrification, and road-building are realized inertly. In spite of the fact that then Karzai called Russia to restore economy of his country, the RF share of participation in this process is extremely small. Meanwhile, Russian specialists could carry out repair and building works, because many objects of Afghan economy were built under Soviet participation.
Russian technique and arms are in demand in Afghanistan. Building of armed forces of this state was traditionally conducted according to the Soviet model. Kalashnikov’s machine carbines, tanks T-62 and T-72, armoured troop carriers BTR-60 has been used since the end of 70’s, when Soviet troops were brought in Afghanistan. Since October 2001 the RF has resumed deliveries of arms to the forces of the Northern Alliance in Afghanistan stopped according to agreement with the USA in 1991. Besides, Kabul needs deliveries of helicopters Mi-8MT and Mi-24, tanks T-62, BTR-70, BMP-2, artillery systems “Hail” and “Hurricane”, mortars, machine-guns, machine carbines, and means of communication.
Perhaps, the only thing in which the Kremlin is interested in Afghanistan is absence of Islamic threat for the CIS southern neighbours of Russia. But the US and NATO forces situated in Afghanistan and the regime in Kabul, supported by them, cope with this task relatively successfully. However, the alliance has not solved the problem of reduction of drag traffic trough northern borders of Afghanistan, and it is partly overcome by Tajik and Russian frontier guards.
