In Focus: Russia's change of heart Galal Nassar wonders what the rumblings against US hegemony really mean While senior White House officials were busy deciphering the message sent by Iranian President Ahmadinejad they received another, even more alarming, message. This time it was from Russian President Vladimir Putin who had just called the US a "wolf" and said that Russia was in no mood to tag along. Ahmadinejad's message, conveyed via the Swiss Embassy in Tehran, certainly struck a defiant note. The Iranian president made high-flown religious references and philosophical comments about how the US president should repent and admit the error of his policies. The Iranian leader denounced liberalism and Western democracy, blaming them for many of the current catastrophes. How long will the bloodshed of innocent women, children and men continue, asked Ahmadinejad. Putin was no less defiant, though he was considerably more specific. He said that Russia was going to revive the arms race and compete with the US over influence and energy, something it has not done since the collapse of the Soviet Union 15 years ago. The Russian president pointed out that the US military budget was 25 times bigger than Russia's, a situation he said had become unacceptable. Venturing into sarcasm, Putin said, "Comrade Wolf knows what to eat, it eats without listening and it's clearly not going to listen to anyone." The Iranian and Russian messages have a number of things in common. Both are highly critical of US behaviour as a world leader. Ahmadinejad issued a statement of defiance but Putin went further, criticising the international situation and the tyrannical attitude of the Americans. Russia is clearly fed up with Washington's high-handed ways. In much of Russia's recent foreign policy, especially with regards to the Iranian crisis, one senses Moscow's desire to reassert the influence it once wielded on the international stage. Indeed, it was probably Russian resistance that made Washington change its mind on pushing for a UN Security Council vote against Iran citing Chapter 7 of the UN Charter. In New York Condoleezza Rice recently met with the foreign ministers of the UN Security Council's permanent members, as well as Germany's foreign minister, discussing the Iranian nuclear issue late into the night. After the meeting the secretary of state said that they had reviewed the nature of their strategic response rather than engage in haggling over a UN Security Council resolution. Her remarks contrast with statements made two days earlier by the American UN envoy, John Bolton, who had said that Washington would push for a vote on Iran regardless of the opposition of both Moscow and Beijing. Moscow's rejection of US recklessness explains the US about face. The US secretary of state said that Iran had every right to pursue a civilian nuclear programme. The Russian foreign minister reciprocated by saying that UN Security Council members had justifiable concerns over the Iranian nuclear programme which Tehran had failed to address. The Russian foreign minister also said that Moscow would discuss the proposals being prepared by the European troika on Iran. Moscow, he added, had no specific proposals of its own but wanted the concerned parties to maintain dialogue. The Russians are trying to defuse the impression that they are seeking to become the major player in the Iranian crisis. Moscow had offered to enrich uranium on Iran's behalf, which would have set a precedent. Conceivably, other countries may want similar treatment in the future. If so, the Russian Federation would turn into a major provider of nuclear energy. During a meeting with officials from the Baltic states US Vice President Dick Cheney criticised Moscow, saying that it is backsliding on democracy and using energy as a weapon to blackmail former Soviet republics. Putin responded by accusing Washington of double standards. He said that the Americans tend to forget about human rights and democracy whenever their interests are at stake. The shift in Russia's rhetoric came as a surprise to Washington's hawks who had been planning to put more pressure on Moscow ahead of the G-8 conference in St Petersburg in July. Iran, Venezuela, Bolivia, and other countries have every right to reject US hegemony. And Russia is entitled to feel nostalgic for its superpower past. But this explosion of resentment may not be sufficient to turn things around. Are Ahmadinejad, Putin, Chavez, and Morales about to make a dent on the international scene? Or are they just letting off steam?
