Outside View: CFE talks facts -- Part 2

MOSCOW, Jan. 7 (UPI) -- It would be odd for Russia to be seriously worried about a higher level of military threat after NATO admitted Poland, Bulgaria, Romania and the three Baltic countries of Lithuania, Estonia and Latvia as member nations. But not everyone can afford to follow this logic -- military experts, diplomats and lawyers have to be guided by military balance figures and contractual provisions until they receive other signals or documents from political leaders.

This vision of the world contradicts the partnership proclaimed by Russia and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization -- yet it is the duty of policymakers to eliminate contradictions.

Russia was not happy about the plans to deploy a U.S. missile shield based in Alaska and with some of its missile defense elements Europe. This shows that partnership with the United States is fragile and that deterrence is still going strong. In much the same manner, the deadlock with the updated Conventional Forces in Europe Treaty demonstrates the true value of partnership with NATO.

The Moscow-imposed suspension is not an extreme measure. It has not unilaterally walked away from it as Washington did from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty.

Recently, Russia has amassed some weight in the world arena and is becoming more confident and economically stable. It would be great if it could afford not to resort to demarches. It could instead exploit the potential of economic diplomacy and package deals in order to persuade its partners to ratify the updated CFE Treaty.

By declaring that its suspension of the CFE Treaty is just that -- a temporary moratorium on provisions of the treaty and its relevant documents, including the restrictions on conventional weapons, inspections and information exchange, Moscow leaves the door open for a return to the treaty. Having exhausted other methods of persuasion, an exasperated Russia is trying to send a signal to the West.

Russia's actions in the future will depend on many domestic and external factors, and it is not possible to foresee how they will develop. But I for one would like to hope that any steps taken by either side will adequately reflect the diminished level of military threat in Europe and pave the way to a real partnership.

The negotiating experience suggests that only the political will of statesmen can bring about early compromise and effective arms-control agreements. Without that, the reduction and elimination of conventional forces in Europe is unlikely to be a feasible goal.

--

(Sergei Oznobishchev is director of the Strategic Assessments Institute in Moscow. This article is reprinted by permission of RIA Novosti. The opinions expressed in this article are the author's and do not necessarily represent those of RIA Novosti.)

--

(United Press International's "Outside View" commentaries are written by outside contributors who specialize in a variety of important issues. The views expressed do not necessarily reflect those of United Press International. In the interests of creating an open forum, original submissions are invited.)