With a few "Satans" in its own closet, Russian diplomacy is making steady gains against the backdrop of the current disarmament crisis, Shohdy Naguib reports from Moscow Former Russian Foreign Minister Yevgeny Primakov's visit to Baghdad on Saturday, shrouded in secrecy until the last minute, was reminiscent of the 11th-hour diplomatic effort by the seasoned Russian politician just before the Gulf War. A few hours before Primakov's departure, a representative of the Russian Foreign Ministry issued a statement announcing that his country would not support a Security Council resolution that would automatically ratify the use of force against Iraq. Deputy Foreign Minister Juri Fedotov also told Interfax news agency if the US submits a draft for a new resolution, "its contents will have to be looked into". Such actions suggest that Moscow is trying to convince Saddam Hussein to make further concessions in the wake of the Russian president's announcement of support for the Franco-German position. The joint statement issued as a result of Vladimir Putin's visit to Berlin and Paris said the three countries believe "the problem of Iraq can and should be resolved by peaceful means." However, this should not be taken to mean they are entering into an open confrontation with the US. How far they assessed the implications of their position remains unclear, though. When they were asked during the joint press-conference about a common plan of action in the event of a war, Putin and Chirac refused to discuss the subject, showing marked irritation. Caution and pragmatism appear to be the watchwords for Russia's approach to the current Iraq crisis. Iraq has never been a Russian ally, only a trading partner -- and one with a $9-billion debt with dim prospects of ever being paid back. The Russian economy, which is highly dependent on oil, may be strengthened if the war is protracted and oil prices remain high. Following this line of thinking, a war that would put Iraqi oil firmly in US hands would be against Russia's interests because this would presumably bring oil prices back down. Whether these concerns have been mitigated by any US guarantees of a role for Russian companies in post-war Iraq and a share of the exploration and extraction pie, remains unclear. Putin most certainly recalls the humiliation of former President Boris Yeltsin with respect to his Kosovo diplomacy, and is consequently keeping his options open. By refusing to support the US in its efforts to convince the United Nations that it is necessary to take military action against Baghdad, Putin is not opposing Bush directly, but seems to be trying to antagonise as few players in the crisis as possible. In light of this strategy, the Russian president appears set to come out ahead -- regardless of the resolution of the current standoff. The "bonds of partnership" between Russia and the US have grown stronger since 9/11, although they had a strong foundation in ties of "personal friendship" between Putin and Bush that date to their first meeting in Ljubljana, Yugoslavia in the summer of 2001 -- three months before the attacks on the US. Putin was the first to convey his condolences to the US president on the fateful day his country came under attack, something that apparently means a lot to George Bush. "The war on terrorism", then, has brought about the new century's epic alliance between the two superpowers, who not long ago had the world teetering on the brink of destruction with their ideological enmity. The current Iraq confrontation, though, is probably the first disarmament crisis of the many to come in the not so distant future. In an interview with Izvestia newspaper, US Under-Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz called the task of disarming Iraq "decisive to winning the war on terror". According to Wolfowitz, Iraq will continue posing an "unacceptable threat to the US, Europe and the whole world" if it is not disarmed immediately. Praising South Africa, Kazakhstan and the Ukraine for voluntarily dismantling their nuclear capabilities, Wolfowitz did not express any concerns regarding Russia's nuclear arsenal. Disarming Russia is of the utmost importance for America -- no matter what the short-term bargains between Putin and Bush are. A recent documentary shown here featured a bizarre scene inside a silo of an intercontinental ballistic missile SS-18 (nicknamed "Satan"), in which its commander demonstrated the superior acoustics of the spacious shaft by playing his trombone. Needless to say it sounded rather grim. The popular protests against war that swept capitals around the world on 15 February barely touched Russia. Two tiny leftist demonstrations occurred, one outside the US Embassy and the other, in Pushkin Square, the former being organised by the communists and the later by assorted anti-globalisation movements who also chanted the unpopular slogans against war in Chechnya. Such low attendance at a rally can be partly explained by the biting frost on that sunny day in Moscow, yet it could well be that 250 is the number of those who bitterly oppose the war, while the majority think it is inevitable. In Russia two major considerations dominate discussions of politics in the country: the upcoming government- sponsored referendum in Chechnya on the future of the republic and next year's presidential election. The two are tightly bound in a no-alternative patriotic propaganda train powered with nationalistic resolve. In a timely political gesture, Washington has promised to include some Chechen resistance organisations on the official list of terrorist groups. While some argue this is a short-sighted move, others conclude that such a concession on the part of the Bush administration is well worth the price to ensure the loyalty of the Russian "best friend" in the current dispute on the war against Iraq.
