Advertisement

Ties That Terrorism Transformed

Share
TIMES STAFF WRITER

As a light snow fell at dusk, Secretary of State Colin L. Powell showed up at the busy subway station on Pushkin Square here to place a bouquet of red roses beneath a plaque marking the spot where a suitcase bomb killed 13 and injured dozens Aug. 8, 2000. Powell bowed his head as Russian TV cameras filmed the scene.

The brief ceremony last December contrasted sharply with President Clinton’s visit here barely a month after the attack. Clinton never went near the site. It was Powell’s first stop on his maiden visit here as secretary of State.

“It’s showing solidarity with the Russians,” Powell said. “It’s showing that this kind of violence exists in many forms--not just in America.”

Advertisement

The Pushkin Square tribute reflected a far-reaching consequence of the Sept. 11 attacks--a transformation of relations between Russia and the U.S.

At the dawn of the 21st century, the two countries are fighting the same war. Half a century of superpower rivalry gave way to awkward coexistence in the 1990s and has become a strategic partnership.

“Not only is the Cold War over, the post-Cold War period is also over,” Powell said as relations between the countries warmed last fall.

Russia quickly became one of America’s most important allies in the campaign against the Al Qaeda terrorist network. Moscow provided political support and technical assistance for U.S. military operations in Afghanistan and paved the way for an American military presence in the former Soviet republics bordering the war zone.

The new spirit also lent impetus to changes that were in motion before Sept. 11.

Russia’s New Stature Among NATO Nations

With strong American backing, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization took the historic step in December of establishing formal cooperation with Russia. The alliance and Russia will now meet regularly in a new council to “pursue opportunities for joint action,” according to a NATO communique crafted largely by U.S. officials.

In addition, Moscow and Washington have agreed to a new framework for strategic relations, including steep reductions in their nuclear stockpiles. An agreement on arms reductions may be signed as early as May, when President Bush is scheduled to visit Moscow for talks with Russian President Vladimir V. Putin.

Advertisement

The two countries still have their differences. When Bush announced tariffs on foreign steel imports last week, Russia retaliated by banning imports of American poultry. And when Bush suggested that the U.S. might extend the war on terrorism to Iraq, Putin declared that he saw no justification for such a move.

But such disputes now fit into a broader picture of U.S.-Russian accommodation. The change is widely viewed as historic. “No Russian leader since Peter the Great has cast his lot as much with the West as Putin has,” said Sen. Joseph R. Biden Jr. (D-Del.), chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

The rapprochement is just one element in a broad realignment in U.S. foreign policy sparked by Sept. 11. Overnight, priorities were redefined, resources reallocated and troops redeployed. The war against terrorism has taken precedence over all other foreign policy issues, even the promotion of democracy and free markets.

Bush, the former Texas governor who made just one foreign policy speech during his presidential campaign, now finds himself prosecuting a global war against terrorists from Somalia to the Philippines.

Still, “the most far-reaching geostrategic effect” of Sept. 11 is likely to be the change in U.S.-Russian relations, said John L. Helgerson, chairman of the National Intelligence Council, which provides intelligence estimates to all branches of the U.S. government.

Helgerson said Russia’s realignment is comparable to “the historic post-World War II change, when Germany became solidly anchored into the European and North Atlantic communities.”

Advertisement

Many of the tensions that defined U.S.-Russian relations after the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991--such as Kremlin worries over American plans for a missile defense shield and Moscow’s fears about NATO expansion into Eastern Europe--have subsided.

The new tone was set Sept. 11 when Putin phoned Bush to offer condolences, using the hot line left over from the Cold War. It was the first sympathy call Bush received from a foreign leader.

The warming grew, in part, out of a pragmatic realization that the two nations needed each other. The American interest in closer ties was obvious: Better than any other nation, Russia knew the rough Afghan terrain after its 1979-89 occupation of the nation. Moscow also had influence in its former Central Asian republics, which have airfields and military bases near the Afghan war front.

For their part, Russian leaders were pleased to see Washington giving top priority to terrorism, a long-standing problem on many fronts in Russia. After Sept. 11, the U.S. immediately eased pressure on Russia over its suppression of the separatist rebellion in Chechnya.

The new sense of common cause was evident at the NATO meeting in Brussels in December, where the alliance and Russia agreed to create a council for joint action on issues ranging from terrorism to missile defense.

Russian Foreign Minister Igor S. Ivanov co-chaired a meeting with his counterparts from NATO’s 19 member countries around the same conference table where Western military strategists plotted for decades against the Soviet Union and its Warsaw Pact satellites.

Advertisement

“We have turned an important corner in NATO-Russia relations,” Ivanov said. “What we are talking about is a mechanism that will enable us to draft and adopt decisions together on the crucial issues of security that will correspond to the spirit of the age.”

The U.S.-Russian partnership is visible in Central Asia and its predominantly Muslim countries of sweeping steppes, rugged mountains and ancient trading centers along the old Silk Road. The Soviet empire’s southern flank until 1991, it is still a region Moscow considers distinctly within its sphere of influence.

Before the terrorist attacks, Central Asia was emerging as a source of friction between Washington and Moscow. During talks in Powell’s office at the State Department last summer, Ivanov expressed concern about heightened U.S. interest in a region that for decades was not even on the American diplomatic horizon.

“Igor was saying, ‘I really don’t like it when I see you guys doing things,’ ” Powell recalled in an interview. “I said, ‘What is it you’re bothered about?’ He says, ‘Well, we just know you’re meddling around down there and that’s not good. That’s our realm of influence.’ ”

Sept. 11 dispelled such worries.

“Along comes this crisis, and within a few weeks the Russians are comfortable about us being there,” Powell said. “Now we’ve got bases in Uzbekistan. We’ve got guys running around Tajikistan. We’ve got guys all over the place, and all I have to do is call Igor and coordinate. He’s OK.”

During his visit to Moscow in December, Powell brought up Central Asia again to explore how Russia and the United States might expand their collaboration beyond the war on terrorism. Ivanov outlined his government’s worries about instability in Central Asia--its concern that illegal immigration, smuggling and drug trafficking could cause problems in Russia.

Advertisement

Powell immediately saw an opportunity. “We can help you with those problems more than you can help yourself,” he told his Russian counterpart. Among other things, he said, the United States could encourage American investment to help create jobs and stabilize the new independent states.

Now Central Asia is an arena of cooperation between the two countries.

“It’s not quite ‘Let’s tiptoe through the tulips together,’ ” Powell said. “There will be tension. But if you had suggested this to a Russian foreign minister a year ago, there would have been quite a different response.”

Putin Terms U.S. Plan for Georgia ‘No Tragedy’

The new spirit was evident in the Kremlin’s reaction to a U.S. plan to arm and train an anti-terrorist force in Georgia, a former Soviet republic. When Russian politicians protested this month at what they saw as American meddling, Putin quieted the uproar by pronouncing the U.S. plan “no tragedy.”

The scope of change in a mere six months has been clear in the most contentious issue between the two nations: the Antiballistic Missile Treaty crafted during the Cold War.

From the moment he took office, Bush raised the possibility of amending or withdrawing from the 1972 treaty, considered the cornerstone of nuclear arms control. With equal determination, Putin insisted on keeping it, pointing out that it had helped keep the peace between the countries for a generation. The dispute created fears of a new arms race that might expand to include China and India.

But as Bush prepared to announce America’s withdrawal from the treaty in December, Putin felt sufficiently secure in his new relationship with Washington that he lodged no serious protest.

Advertisement

Indeed, Powell and Ivanov quietly choreographed the U.S. announcement and the Russian reaction to minimize the appearance of discord.

There is now a firm consensus among American conservatives and liberals alike that the new bonds are genuine and enduring.

“The hallmark of the 20th century was the great power rivalry,” said Richard Haass, chief of policy and planning for the State Department. “At the beginning of the 21st century, we’ve ensured that it’s now over.”

*

Researcher Robin Cochran contributed to this report.

Advertisement