Re: KISSINGER WARNS AGAINST NEW COLD WAR

Arno, what do you make of the following from Reuters?


ANALYSIS-Don't shout, but Russia caved in on ABM
By Martin Nesirky

MOSCOW, June 5 (Reuters) - It sounded more like a lawyer's
natural caution, yet it turned out to be a shrewd tip.

Read the small print, U.S. President Bill Clinton said after
he and Russian President Vladimir Putin signed a joint
statement on Sunday on strategic stability and their
differences over Washington's plans for an anti-missile
defence system.

Clinton, a trained lawyer and veteran politician, said it
again on Monday when he addressed Russian parliamentarians
on Monday after his summit talks failed to bridge the gap.
Russian officials were perhaps understandably less
forthcoming.

The 16-point statement is indeed worth the read.

Defence analysts say the main conclusions are Russia has
effectively reversed its opposition to changes in the
Anti-Ballistic Missile treaty and the presidents made more
progress than they felt comfortable announcing.

``There is progress but they want to hide it from public
attention as much as possible,'' said Alexander Golts,
defence analyst at the weekly magazine Itogi.

``If it is stated now that we are giving up our correct
position on ABM, I don't think there will be applause, there
will be hysteria.''

THREAT AGREED BUT NOT HOW TO TACKLE IT

A key section of the statement says, in evasive diplomatic
language, that Clinton and Putin want ``to enhance (the ABM
treaty's) viability and effectiveness in the future, taking
into account any changes in the international security
environment.''

In another section the two men agree there has in fact been
such a change in the shape of the ``new threat'' from
ballistic missiles in the hands of so-called rogue states,
although Clinton said they did not yet agree on how to
tackle it.

``Russia lost its position on the ABM treaty,'' said Pavel
Podvig, a prominent Russian arms control expert and editor
of a book on Russia's nuclear arsenal.

``Putin basically says we will talk about changes in the
strategic situation that would lead to changes in ABM. This
is a U-turn in Russia's previous position.''

Clinton said in his speech to the State Duma lower house of
parliament the differences about how to deal with the
growing rogue missile threat were ultimately surmountable.

``I believe that we ought to be able to reach an agreement
about how we should proceed at each step along the way here
in a way that preserves mutual deterrence, preserves
strategic stability and preserves the Anti-Ballistic Missile
treaty,'' he said. ``That is my goal.''

He said the difference boiled down to whether Russia would
accept the anti-missile shield was meant to catch a few
incoming rogue missiles and not ward off a mass nuclear
strike.

Washington wants to amend the 1972 treaty to deploy this
limited National Missile Defence shield. Clinton has to
decide soon whether to press ahead with deployment.

Putin would rather place defences close to risky states to
shoot down missiles in their ``boost phase'' just as they
are launched and has hitherto ruled out altering or
scrapping the pact for fear of sparking a new arms race
Russia could not win.

VIRTUE OUT OF NECESSITY?

Putin may be trying to make a virtue out of necessity and
his ``boost stage'' proposal was more an indication of a
willingness to talk. Clinton said the technology was 10
years away but the threat just five years hence.

In what appeared to be a re-run of his proposal, Putin
suggested during a visit to Rome on Monday that Russia
create common anti-missile defences with Europe and NATO.

Analysts made clear they believed a compromise could still
be some way off, and may not be reached under Clinton's
presidency -- he has to step down in January -- or at least
before the November presidential election.

``It was not up to a lame duck to lead serious negotiations
on this,'' said Igor Bunin, director of the Centre of
Political Technologies think tank. ``There are, however, the
beginning of signs that the positions may come closer
together.''

Terence Taylor of London's International Institute for
Strategic Studies pointed to two deals on destroying
plutonium and setting up an early warning centre as signs of
progress.

``They also agreed on the need to discuss the emerging
missile threat,'' he said. ``So the agenda for the next
negotiation is in place.''

When those talks take place and how a compromise looks are
the next big questions. There are signs work is already
under way, in line with the presidents' order in their
statement to ministers and experts to draw up a report for
them to consider.

``According to my information, several of our generals and
experts have already left for Washington to prepare
something for the meeting between Cohen and Sergeyev,'' said
one Russian defence source on condition he was not
identified.

He was referring to talks expected in Brussels and Moscow
later this week between U.S. Defence Secretary William Cohen
and Russian Defence Minister Igor Sergeyev.

Intriguingly, U.S. Deputy Secretary of State Strobe Talbott
-- a leading U.S. arms negotiator who did much of the summit
advance work -- held extra talks with Russian Deputy Foreign
Minister Georgy Mamedov after Clinton left Moscow.

But no details were available from either side.

It was significant Russia conceded ground on ABM without the
United States agreeing to go lower in the target for cuts in
nuclear warheads under future START-3 arms reduction talks.

Russia has offered to go down to 1,500 warheads per side or
lower, below the originally envisaged number. But the U.S.
military has balked at this.

``The chances Russia will get a good deal out of this are
pretty slim now,'' said Podvig. ``If it is not linked to
real progress with START-3 then it is an opportunity lost. A
missile defence system is going to be built anyway.''



Tausch, Arno wrote:
>To the WWIII prediction subgroup of world systems research:
>
>KISSINGER WARNS AGAINST NEW COLD WAR
>
>Former U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger has warned against a
>new cold
>war that could be triggered by the widening of Russia's strategic
>interests
>to include its neighbors, such as the Baltic States, BNS reported 17 May.
>Writing in "The Washington Post," Kissinger stated that the Baltic States
>are "under permanent Russian pressure," even though they do not belong to
>the common economic space being created by Russia. "If Russia's
>strengthening as a result of reforms leads to territorial expansion,
>which
>all her neighbors fear, Russia's desire to dominate will sooner or later
>provoke a new cold war," Kissinger warned. AB
>
>
>Kind regards. Let's hope the guy got it all wrong!
>
>sdrastvujche
>
>Arno