Moscow, Russia, Apr. 22[, 2005] (UPI) -- United Press International's Moscow correspondent Peter Lavelle discusses Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice's visit to Russia and the state of U.S.-Russia relations with experts Andrei Tsygankov, Edward Lozansky, Eric Kraus, Gordon Hahn, Dale Herspring and Vlad Sobell.
-----
UPI: Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice visited Russia this week for the first time as America's top diplomat. She arrived with a message that should have not surprised anyone: Pursuing close U.S.-Russia cooperation covering many strategic interests, but with concerns focused on Russia's democracy project under Vladimir Putin. What were the highlights of the visit what is the state of U.S.-Russia relations?
--
Andrei Tsygankov, professor of international relations, San Francisco State University:
I think there is not much news here. For two main reasons, the Kremlin is listening, but not hearing the American lectures on democracy. First, Russia is still recovering from state disintegration and dramatic decline of living standards that were inflicted on Russian people on behalf of "democracy." The nasty word der'mokratiya translated as "democrapcy" continues to be in circulation here. Second, although the Kremlin has a lot to learn about democracy and tolerance, the U.S. is not really in a position to be the teacher. Its democratic credibility is the record low in Russia and across the world.
--
Edward Lozansky, president, American University in Moscow:
I doubt Condi Rice or any other responsible politician would ever state that we cannot work with the Kremlin unless Russia passes an American test on democracy. U.S. cooperation with Russia is not a reward for a good behavior or a charity enterprise. We deal with Russia because it is in our national interest. There are countries that we consider to be our allies, for example Egypt or Pakistan, whose record on democracy is pretty dismal but who somehow manage to avoid constant lecturing from Washington or U.S. media bashing.
--
Eric Kraus, chief strategist, Sovlink Securities, Moscow:
The Russian government continues to show itself supine and apologetic vis à vis the United States. Although the Kremlin largely ignores the deeply self-serving advice from Washington, its seems totally unwilling to make a public stand on the issues -- being lectured on democracy by the Bush administration is akin to being upbraided for excessive license by the Marquis de Sade.
It would appear that the Kremlin seeks to claim the high moral ground by consistently turning the other cheek -- a weak gambit in diplomacy. Until they make it clear their intention to negotiate on the basis of legitimate national interests -- with a warning that can be highly obstructive if these interests are ignored -- they can expect no better than to be treated with derision and contempt by an increasingly nationalistic and authoritarian Bush administration.
--
Gordon Hahn, scholar-at-large:
Rice's visit will have little or no effect on U.S.-Russian relations other than to add impetus to the present course. That course is the U.S.'s empty formal rhetoric, which ignores terminology like "the protection of human and political rights" and skirts the issue by talking about "democracy being in Russia's interest." Putin has decided that soft authoritarianism is in Russia's interests. He has carefully calibrated the backsliding in democracy so it can be somewhat, at least, credibly defended not as a rollback of democracy but the establishment of the rule of law (over wayward regions and oligarchs) and preservation of the country's unity (against the Chechen war and terrorism).
--
Dale Herspring, professor of political science, Kansas State University:
Despite suggestions in some quarters, I do not believe Rice's visit to Russia presages a downturn in U.S.-Russian relations. Rather, it represents a continuation of the approach taken by Bush in his last meeting with Putin -- readiness to criticize a lack of democracy in other parts of the world.
Since Rice has indulged in some plain speaking, commentators might be justified in doing the same. I believe she has blundered and needlessly soured the U.S.-Russian relations. Her criticism of Putin shows that she (and, presumably, President Bush) have been swayed by the vibrant Russophobic lobby in Washington. This channel is not objective, having been influenced by the unholy alliance of "persecuted" Russian oligarchs, Central European revanchists and Chechen terrorists. This alliance pursues objectives other than the deepening of Russia's democracy and stability, albeit disguised under these noble principles. This amounts to a perversion, not advancement of democracy.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
