Bush And Putin Fail to Resolve Missile Differences
By REUTERS Filed at 6:41 p.m. ET
SOCHI, Russia (Reuters) - U.S. President George W. Bush and Russia's Vladimir Putin ended their last face-to-face meeting as heads of state on Sunday with warm words for each other but no solution to their row over missile defense.
With Putin to step down next month and Bush in the twilight of his presidency, both leaders stressed the strong personal rapport which they say has helped keep relations between their countries on an even keel.
But differences over U.S. plans for a missile defense shield in eastern Europe, which have helped drive diplomatic ties to a post-Cold War low, meant their summit on the Black Sea coast ended with no firm agreements.
A top Bush aide implied that no agreement would be agreed until the inauguration of new presidents in both countries. That would delay progress until early next year.
"This is an area we've got more work to do to convince the Russian side that the system is not aimed at Russia," Bush said after a morning of talks with Putin at the Russian leader's vacation retreat in the resort of Sochi.
Keen to leave a positive legacy, the two leaders signed a document setting out a "road map" for future ties after they leave office and said they would keep working to reach a compromise on the shield dispute.
Washington had hoped to make substantial progress toward a deal at the two-day summit in the resort of Sochi but the vaguely-worded declaration fell short of that.
In preparation for when Putin steps down on May 7, Bush also held talks with Dmitry Medvedev, the Russian leader's protege who will take over as president. Bush said his first impressions were "very positive. A smart fellow."
Seven years ago Bush said he had peered into Putin's soul and found a man he could trust. Since then relations between their two countries have been soured by disputes over Iran, Kosovo, the missile shield and NATO enlargement.
Still, the two leaders paid warm tributes to each other after their talks and Bush joined Putin on stage to dance with a Russian folk ensemble at an informal dinner on Saturday.
"I always appreciated his (Bush's) superior human qualities: honesty, openness and an ability to hear a partner. This is worth a lot," Putin told a joint news conference.
'INTENSIFY DIALOGUE'
Washington wants to station interceptor missiles in Poland and a radar system in the Czech Republic to protect against missile strikes from what it calls "rogue states," specifically Iran. Russia says the plan threatens its security.
In their declaration, Putin and Bush said they would "intensify dialogue" to find a compromise. They said that could involve Russia and the United States working together on a joint missile defense system, but there were no details.
"I want to be understood correctly. Strategically, no change happened in our ... attitude to U.S. plans," Putin said at the joint news conference with Bush.
He added that NATO's plans to offer eventual membership to ex-Soviet Ukraine and Georgia -- a step strongly backed by Washington -- were "an example of old logic where Russia was viewed as an adversary."
Aboard Air Force One returning to Washington, Bush administration officials insisted the language on missile defense in the joint "strategic framework" declaration showed Russia had softened its opposition to the U.S. plan.
Reflecting concern about how the outcome of the U.S.-Russia summit was playing in the media, Bush aides came back to the press compartment four times to make their case.
National security adviser Stephen Hadley was asked whether he expected the United States and Russia to reach a missile defense deal by the end of Bush's term in office.
"I don't think that matters," he replied. "What matters is that the two presidents have reached an agreement to set our two countries on the path for cooperation here. And they can leave that to their respective successors."
Hadley said the administration would like to get a deal done on Bush's watch but that it was not critical to do so.
(Additional reporting by Matt Spetalnick; Writing by Matt Spetalnick and Christian Lowe; Editing by Andrew Roche and Chris Wilson)
Russia's President Dmitri A. Medvedev and Prime Minister Vladimir V. Putin make a joint appearance at a congress of the United Russia ruling party in Moscow on Saturday.
By ELLEN BARRY and MICHAEL SCHWIRTZ Published: September 24, 2011 comments (53)
MOSCOW — Vladimir V. Putin, .. http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/p/vladimir_v_putin/index.html?inline=nyt-per .. who transformed post-Soviet Russia by imposing strict Kremlin control over most aspects of public life, publicly signaled that he will return to the presidency next year and could remain until 2024, giving him a rule comparable in length with that of Brezhnev or Stalin. Related
President Dmitri A. Medvedev .. http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/m/dmitri_a_medvedev/index.html?inline=nyt-per .. announced Saturday at a party convention in Moscow that he would step aside for Mr. Putin, who served as president from 2000 to 2008 but was limited by the Constitution to two consecutive terms. Mr. Medvedev is to take his place as prime minister after presidential elections in March, which Mr. Putin is assured of winning.
At the announcement, wave upon wave of applause washed over the hall, where 11,000 members of Mr. Putin’s party, United Russia, had gathered. Mr. Medvedev’s face was projected on a giant screen above the stage, and he gave a flickering smile as the crowd roared, rose and swung its attention away from him toward Mr. Putin, who was sitting in the audience.
“I want to say directly: An agreement over what to do in the future was reached between us several years ago,” Mr. Putin said. Mr. Medvedev also said there had been no conflict, though his account was less definitive.
“What we are recommending to the convention, it is a deeply thought-out decision,” Mr. Medvedev said. “Moreover, we really discussed this possible development of events at the period, when we formed our comradely union.”
As the news filtered into the street, most Russians expressed little surprise. Mr. Putin’s rise to power accompanied an oil-fueled rise in income, and ended the chaotic and sometimes violent political pluralism of the 1990s. Opposition to Mr. Putin’s government has grown strongest in places like Moscow, whose residents are not as reliant on government transfers and state-controlled television.
“I don’t know what feelings I have about it because on one hand, it seems like we don’t have any alternative, we have to accept that Putin will be president,” said Yulia Belova, an advertising manager. Ivan V. Chaikin, 71, was similarly philosophical, saying his own hopes for democratic reform had withered a decade ago.
“They decided between themselves who will hold which job,” he said. “It’s like a swap in chess — my bishop for your rook.”
There is little evidence that the change will portend dramatic policy shifts.
Mr. Medvedev has called for political and judicial reforms that would decentralize power away from the Kremlin, and his rhetoric won him the backing of many in the West and in progressive circles. But he did not push through substantial political or judicial reforms during his presidency and was widely viewed as a weak executive. Mr. Putin, meanwhile, has signaled in recent months that he may restyle himself as an economic reformer, wrapping himself in the mantle of the tsarist Prime Minister Pyotr Stolypin.
Mr. Putin is expected to face painful and unpopular decisions .. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/28/world/europe/28kudrin.html .. over the coming years as oil production levels off and the rise in Russians’ standard of living will slow. In 2014, Russia’s oil production will no longer offset imports of consumer goods, forcing the government to be increasingly dependent on foreign investment.
The governing United Russia Party has been gradually losing popularity, dropping 9 points since January, according to the Public Opinion Foundation. And back-to-back elections in December or March, neither of which offers an alternative to the current government, will strain the state’s coffers and voters’ patience.
Over recent months, Mr. Putin, who turns 59 in October, has left little question that he intended to remain the dominant partner, making televised appearances on a Harley-Davidson, deep-sea-diving and engaging in soulful dialogue with ordinary people. After Mr. Medvedev delivered a major speech in Yaroslavl this month, the analyst Lilia Shevtsova, of the Moscow Carnegie Center, titled her blog post on the subject “The Last Act of the Play.”
“How difficult it has become for Medvedev to fill the time,” she wrote. “It was not long ago that he practically reveled in his function. He clearly believed in its seriousness. But now the moment has come, when it became clear — he has to get his things together.”
Mr. Medvedev had developed a circle of supporters during his presidency, and there was palpable disappointment from those people on Saturday. One of Mr. Medvedev’s closest aides, Arkady V. Dvorkovich, vented via Twitter during the United Russia event, remarking, first, “there is no reason for happiness,” and then “now it is time to switch to the sports channel.” The influential political consultant Gleb O. Pavlovsky, whose longstanding contract with the Kremlin was severed this spring, gave one of the sharpest comments.
“The fact that the president, as a politician, betrayed those who believed in him — that is political self-annihilation, and he has the right to do it,” Mr. Pavlovsky said. He called the move “a blow to the prestige of the institution of the presidency in Russia.”
Various political experts questioned Mr. Putin’s assertion that the decision was long since set in stone. The economist Mikhail G. Delyagin, a former government aide, said Mr. Medvedev had “exhibited a degree of independence,” and, if elected to a second term, could have tried “to become a real president and not a technical one.”
“I know that Putin and Medvedev had to clarify their agreement several times and that at times these conversations were difficult,” said Mr. Delyagin, director of the Institute of Globalization Issues. “There were moments where there was absolutely a sense that Medvedev spat on this agreement and tried to play his own game. But in the end he turned out to be weak.”
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
