Clinton Proposes Summit Delay or Move to Moscow

President Clinton is willing to postpone his meeting with Russian President Boris N. Yeltsin or move it to Moscow if Yeltsin wants, U.S. officials said Monday. But the Russian leader has not requested a change, so the summit is going ahead on schedule in Vancouver, Canada, they said.

Clinton wants to make sure that the summit meeting will help the embattled Russian leader, who is embroiled in a struggle for power with Russia’s Parliament, and does not cause a nationalist backlash, one official said.

“But that’s Yeltsin’s call, not ours,” he said.

Secretary of State Warren Christopher and other officials repeated the Administration’s support for Yeltsin on Monday and said that the power struggle in Moscow makes it more important to move ahead with a planned package of Western aid for the reformist regime. Last week, Clinton said he wanted to shift the focus of U.S. aid toward short-term projects that will benefit ordinary Russians.

“We believe President Yeltsin has chosen a responsible course in taking the issue to the people,” Christopher said, referring to the Russian leader’s plan for a referendum April 25. “We will support him in that effort.

“The current situation in Moscow must be resolved peacefully and in a way consistent with civil liberties. . . ,” he said in a speech in Chicago. “The most important point is that Russia must remain a democracy during this period, moving toward a market economy. This is the basis--the only basis--for the U.S.-Russian partnership.”

Christopher said that he and Clinton plan to repeat that message this week to Russian Foreign Minister Andrei V. Kozyrev, who arrived in Washington on Monday evening to discuss summit arrangements.

Other officials said they hope Kozyrev will provide a more detailed explanation of Yeltsin’s strategy in the Russian power struggle, as well as his hopes for the summit meeting scheduled for April 3 and 4.

Clinton, asked by reporters about suggestions that the summit might be moved from Vancouver to Moscow, said there are “no plans to change the site at this time.”

He said that he had not spoken directly with Yeltsin since the Russian president announced that he was ruling by decree but added, “I expect I will pretty soon.”

Clinton spent most of the day in the Arkansas capital of Little Rock visiting his 81-year-old father-in-law, Hugh Rodham, who suffered a stroke on Friday and whose condition was downgraded to critical Monday afternoon.

White House Press Secretary Dee Dee Myers said that if Yeltsin suggests moving the summit to Moscow, “we’ll certainly consider that. At this point, there’s no reason to reconsider.”

“The date and the place were the Russians’ choice,” another official said. “They haven’t asked for a change.”

Some Russian experts have suggested that Yeltsin may not want to leave the country in the midst of a political showdown with his opponents for fear that they might use his absence to try to seize power. And Senate Minority Leader Bob Dole (R-Kan.) suggested Sunday that Clinton might offer to go to Moscow “to give Boris Yeltsin a boost.”

But others have warned that Clinton’s presence in Moscow might play into the hands of Yeltsin’s opponents, who have accused him of being too eager to please Western countries at the expense of Russia’s national interest.

Sen. J. James Exon (D-Neb.) ridiculed the idea of moving the summit meeting to Moscow as “the most ludicrous thing I ever heard of.” If the United States is perceived by Yeltsin’s opponents as trying to dictate the outcome of the crisis, Exon said, it would do lasting damage to U.S.-Russian relations.

Christopher said the centerpiece of the Yeltsin-Clinton meeting will be a new package of U.S. aid, “increasing and accelerating our support for Russia’s democracy.”

“Any realistic program to assist Russian democracy won’t be cheap,” he warned. “But there’s no question that our nation can afford its fair share of an international effort. We can’t afford to do otherwise.

“If Russia falls into anarchy or lurches back to despotism, the price that we pay could be frightening,” Christopher said. “Nothing less is involved than the possibility of renewed nuclear threat, higher defense budgets, spreading instability, the loss of new markets and a devastating setback for the worldwide democratic movement.”

At the same time, Christopher broached the delicate subject of what to do if Yeltsin falls: The United States should continue to support reformers even if they become the opposition, he said.

“Just as our vigilance in the Cold War took more than four decades to pay off, our commitment to Russia’s democratic development must be for the duration,” he said. “Our engagement with the reformers must be for the long haul--when they’re out as well as when they’re in.”

On Capitol Hill, several senators offered support for increased aid to Russia but added that it should be targeted carefully to help reform efforts.

Sen. Richard G. Lugar (R-Ind.), who has favored increased aid to Russia, added that if Yeltsin falls, Congress would “have a very difficult time with economic assistance to a regime that did not believe in private property.”

Senate Republicans argued that the Moscow crisis is another reason to reject Clinton’s proposal for a reduction of $122 billion in military outlays over the next five years.

Sen. Pete V. Domenici (R-N.M.) introduced an amendment to limit defense cuts to the five-year, $60-billion reduction that Clinton proposed during the election campaign. A vote on his plan is scheduled for today.

Times staff writer William J. Eaton contributed to this report.