HOME	Where the World's Views of America Come into Focus

Feb. 25, 2005

By special correspondents Philippe Gelie and Laure Mandeville

Original Article (French)

George W. Bush made every possible effort to sound positive during his 12th meeting yesterday with Russian President Vladimir Putin. But his efforts were badly repaid: barraged by a series of clearly pre-planned questions [from the Russian side], it was the president of the United States who found himself in the position of justifying the operations of his own government.

During almost three hours of consultations in Bratislava, George W. Bush said he had had a "constructive" dialogue with the head of the Kremlin. The word appeared seven times during their short press conference. "I had a very constructive and significant discussion with my friend Vladimir," insisted the American president. He was pleased with their level of agreement on the need to prevent Iran and North Korea from obtaining nuclear weapons, but the agreement in principle seems flimsy in fact: Moscow plans today to announce the sale of Russian nuclear fuel to Teheran.

Not a word was said about Syria, so as not to mention an agreement limiting the sales of anti-aircraft rocket launcher systems, precisely the systems that Moscow is on the verge of delivering to Damascus.

"It is in the interest of the United States that Russia remain a strong and viable partner," an echo that the head of the White House underlined. Anxious to spare his strategic partner, Bush went through the motions to show his concerns over the retreat of freedoms in Russia: "There was an enormous progress in fifteen years. It is a difficult task. I announced my concern in a constructive and friendly way."

That was not enough to defuse the trap carefully prepared by the Russian camp. The questions of American journalists about the state of democracy in Russia were answered with Russian questions about the state of democracy the United States. Instead of forcing Putin to explain his role in Ukraine, the dismantling of oil giant Yukos or the re-centralization of Russia, it was for George W. Bush to justify the ill treatments of the Iraqi prisoners at Abou Ghraib prison and on the threat to imprison journalists wanting to protect their sources.

The American president was drawn into the trap: "I am happy to hear through your comment that you are satisfied with the state of the press in Russia." It was ironic. But Vladimir Putin was ready to rush to his aid: "I would like to give my support to my American friend," he said with a straight face. "Democracy is not anarchy." And he gave the example of the Dutch monarchy to demonstrate that all democracies do not resemble one another.

George W. Bush had to satisfy himself with an incantatory declaration of democratic prospects in Russia: "This is our final choice, and we have no way back," declared the Russian president. "The guarantee for this is the choice of the Russian people, themselves. No, guarantees from outside cannot be provided." By that Putin means that he intends to have a free hand. It is an old Soviet technique, which consists of turning the arguments of your adversary against him, with his own words.

One month ago, in his inaugural address, the U.S. president made democracy the central criterion of "good relations with the United States." At the beginning of the week, in Brussels, he specifically invited Europeans "to put democratic reform at the heart of their dialogue with Russia," and invited Moscow to "renew a commitment to democracy and the rule of law." Yesterday, Bush should have argued the cause of the old Soviet satellites, of the Ukraine, Georgia and the Baltic States, which complain about interference from Moscow. But none of this was raised at the final press conference.

Before Bratislava, the White House carried out "an evaluation" of its policy with regard to Moscow. The Administration cited brittleness in the Bush-Putin relationship, and the need to maintain a double approach, being both consensual and demanding at the same time.

The agreements signed yesterday make it possible to maintain the illusion. But, in tone and in fact, relations have undergone a significant cooling.

"It is a complex relationship," said Steve Hadley, assistant to the President for national security affairs. "But the Russians must understand that in the 21st century, a strong Russia will emerge only through democratic structures."