09/29/94 -- (C) 1994 The Washington Post (LEGI-SLATE Article No. 213306)
THE FIFTH in a now ever-more-routine series of meetings between Bill
Clinton and Boris Yeltsin marked an ironic reversal. Once all but written off
as a would-be reformer who had failed, the Russian president came to
Washington hailed for having calmed the political storms and made progress in
privatizing and fighting inflation. It was mostly the American president,
who's in deep water politically, of whom it could be said that he "needed" a
summit. That goes too far, but Mr. Clinton did make good use of this one.
He and Mr. Yeltsin bore down on the right place - on expanding economic
ties. Earlier notions that Russia would launch a market revival from a
platform of Western public aid have yielded to a more realistic emphasis on
increased private foreign investment. This does not spare the Russian people
the human costs, of Great Depression dimensions, of the new Russian
revolution. But meanwhile it offers Americans, especially oil investors,
large opportunities. No other American president has worked harder and more
openly, as Bill Clinton promised he would, to carry the banner of business
abroad.
In the non-job-related parts of policy, Washington continues to have
problems in dealing with Moscow. Not Cold War-sized or -shaped problems but
differences of outlook on regional issues that persist and must be dealt with
seriously. This time the two leaders treated their tensions over Bosnia,
where a risk yet exists of a deepening proxy war, and Iran, where a formula
was drafted to cut back Russian arms supplies to this outlaw state.
Still troubling, however, is the Azerbaijan-Armenia war, which Russia has
made a test case of assertiveness in its "near abroad." One case where the
Clinton team ought to have more of a problem with Moscow is NATO membership
for East European states. Washington has sometimes not been attentive enough
to the anxieties of these new democracies.
Their giant remaining nuclear stockpiles compel both countries to keep
making their arsenals less threatening and, in Russia's case, more secure
too. Mr. Yeltsin, expressing Russia's claim to remain a global player, had a
whole clutch of new disarmament proposals. It's fine, to take one, to set a
deadline of next year's 50th anniversary of the United Nations for a
comprehensive nuclear test ban treaty. The prompter nuclear reductions
announced yesterday are also fine. But the higher priority is for Moscow to
make good on its big reductions pledges of the past. Airy declarations of
intent were the frequent and disappointing stuff of diplomacy in between
bouts of Cold War confrontation. They should have no place in the new era of
"pragmatic partnership."
-----No. 2 of 5-------------------------
09/29/94 -- (C) 1994 The Washington Post (LEGI-SLATE Article No. 213316)
U.S., Russia Reach Variety of Pacts as Talks Focus on Economics
By Ann Devroy
Washington Post Staff Writer
President Clinton and Russian President Boris Yeltsin ended two days of
talks yesterday with a burst of bonhomie and a flurry of agreements aimed at
speeding up the destruction of nuclear warheads, ending Russian arms sales to
Iran and broadly improving economic ties between the two nations.
In a boisterous final news conference, Yeltsin, unwilling to part with
the microphone, threw the ornate East Room into titters of laughter and
outright guffaws as he raced through a lengthy list of items he and "Bill"
had covered in their discussions.
"You can't think fast enough?" Yeltsin asked his translator, who kept
pausing to catch his breath. Announcing "here we go," Yeltsin launched into a
stream-of-consciousness rap on the American West and the Russian-American
relationship, interspersed with asides, chuckles, arm-waving and other
dramatic touches.
Clinton, who could compete with virtually anyone in a talkathon, was no
match for Yeltsin. When he got a few words inedgewise, Clinton announced
that the two sides had agreed to accelerate the timetable by several years
for the destruction of warheads under the 1992 Strategic Arms Reduction
Treaty. Once that agreement is ratified by Congress and the Russian
Parliament - still a major stumbling block - each side must reduce its
stockpiles to between 3,000 and 3,500 warheads by 2003.
Under the new agreement, rather than phasing in that reduction over seven
years, each side will immediately begin removing the warheads from missiles
and begin the process of destroying them. That, officials said, would mean
saving two or three years.
Clinton also managed to "clarify" part of Yeltsin's speech, noting that
the Russian announcement that no further contracts would be signed with Iran
for the sale of arms was an agreement in concept only. A senior U.S. official
said later that the United States is unclear on what Yeltsin meant in saying
that Russia will "service" its current contracts, and is unclear on how long
the contracts run.
Russia sells Iran about $1 billion a year in arms, including submarines
and other conventional weaponry. The United States considers Iran a pariah
nation because of its support for terrorism, and has sought to halt Russian
arms sales to Tehran since the Bush administration.
Despite the arms announcements, yesterday's talks focused on normalizing
economic relations and helping Moscow to establish financial and investment
systems that would reduce the risk and uncertainty for Americans putting
their money into Russian ventures.
The two leaders signed a "partnership for economic progress" agreement
that lays out an agenda for establishing a normal trade relationship. They
signed aid and trade deals amounting to more than $1 billion in U.S. private
investment in Russia, and reached a number of agreements on U.S. assistance
in helping the republic establish a tax code and other structures of a stable
business environment.
Senior officials described discussions with what Yeltsin called U.S.
"captains of industry" in which the Russian was bluntly told that investment
in his country cannot move beyond minuscule levels as long as there is
substantial uncertainty about laws, taxes, trade barriers and official
reaction to deals. Chairmen of General Motors Corp., U.S. West and Dresser
Industries joined the two presidents for discussions of Russian's barriers to
investment, including new duties imposed on a variety of industries.
Clinton and Yeltsin decided in the first hours of their talks on Tuesday
to make this a "one-on-one" summit, so the large groups of aides normally
part of such talks were left out over several hours yesterday and Tuesday.
Despite the wide agreements, the two leaders continued to disagree on
Bosnia, with Yeltsin saying Russia firmly opposes lifting an arms embargo on
the Bosnian Muslim government as Clinton proposes. Asked if Russia would veto
a United Nations resolution to lift the embargo, he said, "In six months,
we'll take a look and see."
Yeltsin also put aside a U.S. concern that it was asserting a sphere of
influence on former Soviet republics along its borders, describing its
actions as "helping our neighbors."
The United States has been anxious about Russian involvement in several
former states, as Moscow has sent troops to Georgia and Moldova, and received
requests from the Armenians to get involved in the bloody dispute in Nagorno
Karabakh.
In the economic talks, the two leaders and their senior advisers
emphasized the common goal of continuing the long, difficult effort of
privatizing the Russian economy.
That transformation is the foundation of a U.S. policy built on a belief
that successful change from a communist to capitalist system will ensure a
partnership rather than the adversarial relationship of past decades.
Over the past three years, the U.S. effort has begun a shift from direct
aid to government support of private investment efforts, matched with U.S.
and international prodding of Yeltsin to take the trade and other steps that
would make Russia a less risky investment.
Commerce Secretary Ronald H. Brown said Tuesday, "What we're seeing here
is a turning point from a government-framed dialogue to a private sector
framed dialogue." He called this summit, Yeltsin's third with Clinton, "the
trade and investment summit." Officials have projected that, with the right
conditions, the $4.7 billion in U.S.-Russia trade could double by 2000.
Yeltsin, recalling his first summit in the United States when George
Bush was president, also noted the shift. The "operative word" then, he said,
was "help." Russia, he said, does not need help in the form of direct aid, it
now needs investment.
"Let's trade. Let's engage in major projects. Let's create conditions for
the investors so that they could invest and operate in Russia," Yeltsin said
he told Clinton.
-----No. 3 of 5-------------------------
09/29/94 -- (C) 1994 The Washington Post (LEGI-SLATE Article No. 213317)
New Agreements Intend to Quicken Shrinkage of Both Nuclear Arsenals
By Thomas W. Lippman
Washington Post Staff Writer
The security agreements announced yesterday by President Clinton and
Russian President Boris Yeltsin will accelerate the shrinkage of both
nations' nuclear arsenals and promise a Moscow-Washington partnership in
upcoming arms negotiations, but they leave difficult issues unresolved.
In the aggregate, administration officials and independent analysts
said, Russia and the United States are now in a position where they have
agreed to reduce their arsenals further, have committed themselves to share
information that used to be among the world's deepest secrets and have said
they will work together to prevent freebooting - the theft and diversion of
nuclear materials - in the rest of the world. But they are far from agreement
on exactly how these goals will be reached.
For example, administration officials said, nothing done at the summit
will accelerate Russia's fulfillment of an earlier agreement to stop
operating three reactors that still produce plutonium usable in nuclear
weapons.
Nor did the two leaders make an effort to reach agreement on how to define
a defense against short- and intermediate-range missiles that would comply
with the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty. Clinton and Yeltsin settled for
an agreement to instruct subordinates to resolve this issue, one of the most
arcane and controversial on the current arms control agenda, "in the shortest
possible time."
In the biggest surprise of the summit, the two presidents agreed that once
the START I arms reduction treaty is in effect and the START II treaty
ratified, they would remove enough nuclear missiles from active service to
get down to the weapons level specified in START II without waiting until
2003, as that treaty provides.
This would remove 5,600 Russian warheads and about half that many U.S.
warheads from "active duty" years ahead of schedule, a senior Defense
Department official said. Removing the warheads from missiles would not
achieve the "irreversibility" called for in START II, which provides for
dismantling the weapons and their launch silos, but would take them off line,
like a gun from which the bullets are removed, the official said.
But there is a catch: Russian implementation of the START I treaty is to
begin only when Ukraine - formerly a part of the Soviet Union - accedes to
the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty as a non-nuclear state. This is a step
Ukraine repeatedly has pledged to take since gaining independence from
Moscow.
"I am optimistic that Ukraine is ready," a senior Pentagon official said
yesterday. "My hope is that (Ukraine's parliament) will accede to the NPT in
the next two months."
He said Ukrainian President Leonid Kuchma will be told in strong terms
when he visits Washington in November that Ukraine's place in the world
community will be measured by its performance on this issue.
All previous arms reduction agreements between Washington and Moscow have
focused on strategic, or long-range, weapons. The Clinton administration's
strategy going into this summit, senior officials said, was to persuade
Russia to begin reducing its tactical, or shorter-range, arsenal as well.
The objective was to convince the Russians that the reductions in delivery
systems recently announced by Defense Secretary William J. Perry - cutting
the U.S. nuclear bomber fleet and eliminating the nuclear capability of the
surface Navy - should induce the Russians to undertake a similar unilateral
commitment.
According to the joint communique, this initiative may succeed. "The
presidents agreed," it said, "that each side would independently consider
further unilateral steps, as appropriate, with regard to their respective
nuclear forces."
U.S. officials said this is an urgent matter because Russia's arsenal of
tactical weapons is scattered at scores of military sites controlled by local
commanders rather than by Moscow, increasing the danger that weapons or
nuclear materials could be stolen or sold. This "loose nukes" threat is
regarded by U.S. officials as a more serious threat to world peace and U.S.
national security than the possibility of a nuclear attack by Russian
strategic missiles.
Part of the problem, several officials said, is that nobody in the United
States knows the size of Russia's tactical arsenal. But that should soon
change because Clinton and Yeltsin agreed to "exchange detailed information
... on aggregate stockpiles of nuclear warheads and on their safety and
security."
They also agreed to "improve confidence in and increase the transparency
and irreversibility of the process of reducing nuclear weapons." This is nuke
speak for reciprocal inspections and verification.
Past agreements, such as one negotiated last spring authorizing inspection
of each other's plutonium storage facilities, have run aground on traditions
of secrecy and legal obstacles to sharing secret data.
The new commitment, combined with a new U.S. law allowing some classified
data to be exchanged with Russia, "goes much further than we have before in
that regard," a senior official said.
-----No. 4 of 5-------------------------
09/30/94 -- (C) 1994 The Washington Post (LEGI-SLATE Article No. 213348)
Yeltsin Travels West to Woo U.S. Business Community
Russian Leader Aims for 'Pragmatic Partnership'
By Gary Lee
Washington Post Staff Writer
SEATTLE, Sept. 29 - Armed with a hearty smile and the promise of
partnership, Russian President Boris Yeltsin yesterday wooed one of his
country's toughest critics: the American business community.
In a whirlwind tour of this booming port city, Yeltsin held three
meetings with local business leaders, including managers of Boeing Co. at its
aeronautics plant.
"Russia offers a huge market," he told a luncheon crowd of 700
entrepreneurs. "The opportunity for trade between us provides a chance for
creating new jobs in America, too."
Sometimes criticized at home for relying too heavily on Western aid and
investments, Yeltsin was quick to stress he did not come to the United States
hat in hand.
"As I have said before, I'm not coming with an outstretched hand," he
said. "What we have to do is establish a pragmatic partnership, a
relationship of equal members... . Is it not time for us to have a free trade
zone between Russia and America?"
For Yeltsin, Seattle was the last stop on a four-day U.S. trip that
included meetings in New York and Washington, D.C. His stay here was designed
to underline the links between the western part of the United States and the
Russian Far East.
Russia recently opened a consulate here. And several Washington state
based companies, including Weyerhaeuser Co., a forest products firm, are
pursuing investments in the far eastern part of Russia.
When he travels abroad, Yeltsin frequently ventures out to meet locals.
On previous U.S. trips, he visited garment workers in New York and farmers in
Kansas.
Yesterday, too, the burly silver-haired Russian waded into middle
America. En route to lunch, he stopped to shake hands with onlookers gathered
in front of a downtown hotel. Later, he toured Seattle harbor with a group of
American and Russian entrepreneurs. Before flying to Moscow, he stopped for a
chat at the home of a Seattle family.
"As I worked the crowds I could see that in the West there are more
smiles and in the East there is more stress," Yeltsin said.
But he spent most of his day seeking to overcome widespread reluctance
among American business executives to invest in Russia. Out of approximately
$6 billion in total annual foreign investments there, less than a third come
from U.S. companies.
Executives cite Russia's convoluted tax code as the main obstacle to
investments. Organized crime and political instability are also impediments,
they say.
In his luncheon speech, Yeltsin responded directly to such concerns.
Russian inflation, once in the double digits, is now down to 4 or 5
percentage points, he said.
In two years, 70 percent of previously state-owned property has been
privatized, he said.
Joking that American businessmen no longer come to Russia with 15
bodyguards, Yeltsin acknowledged that "combating crime is a something we have
to work together on."
Yeltsin also sought to allay Western fears that right-wing leaders may
wrest power from him. Communists in St. Petersburg recently asked for a hall
for a rally of 10,000, he said, but only 10 people showed up.
"We have entered a new stage of political stability," he said. "You can
be certain that you are investing in a reliable country."
During his tour of Boeing's sprawling plant in nearby Everett, Yeltsin
saw the production line for three wide-body jets and held a brief closed-door
meeting with Chairman Frank Shrontz.
Although Boeing estimates Russia and neighboring countries will need $60
billion in airplanes over the next 20 years, Boeing and Yeltsin did not
conclude any deal for purchases.
The Clinton administration is also doing its part to give U.S. business
interest in Russia a boost. Today Commerce Secretary Ronald H. Brown, who
flew with Yeltsin to Seattle, pledged to help several companies train Russian
executives.
Ruth R. Harkin, president of the Overseas Private Investment Corp., also
announced plans to provide $525 million in government support for U.S.
companies seeking to do business in Russia.
Business leaders in Seattle gave Yeltsin an effusive welcome. They
provided more than $100,000 to cover the cost of the visit and gave the
Russian president five standing ovations during his luncheon speech.
"What we're hoping is that Yeltsin's visit will help us create a gateway
to the Russian Far East," said Weyerhaeuser spokesman Frank Mendizabal.
-----No. 5 of 5-------------------------
10/03/94 -- (C) 1994 The Washington Post (LEGI-SLATE Article No. 213558)
Behind The Bear Hugs
By Jim Hoagland
Behind the facade of smiles and bear hugs exchanged by Bill Clinton and
Boris Yeltsin the termites of doubt have started to bore into the structure
of U.S.-Russian relations.
The relationship is still outwardly solid. The warm feelings between the
two energetic, extroverted presidents buttress it. The muted discussions on
Bosnia during Yeltsin's state visit, which ended Thursday, bear witness to
the willingness of both leaders to limit the damage that disagreements can
inflict on the most important political partnership in the world.
But Yeltsin and Clinton today resemble a couple who find they do not have
time just for themselves anymore, although neither has made a conscious
decision to lessen the commitment. In policy terms, the absolute priority
once given the Washington-Moscow romance by each capital is now crowded out
by other more "urgent" affairs of state.
Haiti has to be dealt with now, Yeltsin visit or no. Russia has to honor
its arms contracts with Iran, even if that causes heartburn in Washington.
Both agree that a new international system of restricting exports of arms and
high technology to dangerous countries is a good idea. But they disagree on
which countries are dangerous.
Not surprising, and not particularly disturbing. Both America and Russia
are global powers with distinct and at times diverging interests. The
differences that surfaced in Washington do not spell a renewal of strategic
confrontation.
But there is a growing area of doubt and misunderstanding over each
other's intentions that will eat away at this crucial relationship over time
if that doubt is not addressed honestly and resolved.
The doubt is largely a matter of Russian self-doubt. The depth and
strength of the need of Yeltsin's Russia to be treated like a great power,
even if (or perhaps because) that is not true, did not seem to register with
the Americans this time as clearly as in past summits. That, at least, is the
impression carried away from Washington by Yeltsin and his able foreign
minister, Andrei Kozyrev.
Unlike their Soviet predecessors, the Russian leaders who came to
Washington made no effort to exploit the landing of U.S. troops in Haiti for
global propaganda purposes. Kozyrev was upset by Haiti - but only because it
exemplifies a double standard that he thinks Washington is applying to
Russia.
A senior Russian official says Kozyrev was chagrined to see Secretary of
State Warren Christopher go from the summit to the United Nations to seek
approval and financing for a 6,000-person peace-keeping force that would
replace American forces in Haiti next spring. In principle, that arrangement
is fine with Kozyrev - so fine that he wants the same arrangement blessed by
the United Nations for Russia's rebellious neighbor to the south, Georgia.
But the United States opposes the United Nations paying for a Russian
dominated force in Georgia, despite widespread impressions that Christopher
and Kozyrev had struck a deal last summer when the Russians agreed to vote
for a Security Council resolution that authorized American military action in
Haiti.
American officials deny there was a deal on peace-keeping in Georgia and
cite good reasons why the United States will not go along with the Russian
proposals. They omit the kind of reassuring music that would have gone with
such lyrics a year ago.
The same all-words, no-music approach surfaces in American pressure on
Russia to halt arms deliveries to Iran. The Russians argue that Saudi Arabia,
a major American arms client, is as active in spreading Islamic
fundamentalism abroad as is Iran. Russians recall that the Saudis financed
the fundamentalist forces of the Afghanistan resistance campaign against
Soviet troops and still support fundamentalist movements in Central Asia.
Yet America will not accept international restrictions on the transfer of
U.S. arms to Saudi Arabia. Clinton's strong demand for an informal arms
embargo on Iran will be difficult for Kozyrev to explain to Russian public
opinion.
Yeltsin and Kozyrev made it clear to the Americans they met that they
still desperately want Russia to be integrated into the institutions of the
West - GATT, NATO, the IMF, Group of Seven, the new Cocom, et al. They have
staked their careers on pursuing this integration. But they become frustrated
- "alienated" is their own word - as the road to integration proves to be
longer and rockier than they had hoped.
This summit left the Russian side unsettled and wondering whether the
Clinton administration understands the depth of Yeltsin's political problems
at home - or, alternatively, if the Clintonites have decided that those
problems are so serious that Yeltsin's future is no longer worth a strong
American push. Both suspicions are exaggerated. But in them is the silent
music of termites boring within, not the lush strings of big-power romance
and a new era of global harmony.