Arrow-right Camera
The Spokesman-Review Newspaper
Spokane, Washington  Est. May 19, 1883

Rice careful on issue of Russian democracy

Michael Abramowitz and Peter Finn Washington Post

MOSCOW – With the Kremlin backsliding on democracy, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has responded with expressions of dismay over a crackdown on independent institutions, while steering clear of any direct criticism of President Vladimir Putin’s possible plan to extend his hold on power by becoming prime minister next year.

On the second day of her trip here, Rice assured human rights activists and other members of Russian civil society that she supports their efforts to protect “universal values” such as freedom of expression, worship and assembly.

A few hours later, however, Rice told reporters that she had not raised the issue of Putin’s political future when she met with him Friday, saying the topic was not appropriate for a meeting devoted to security issues.

“There’s a lot of speculation about who’s going to be president, whether President Putin is going to take any number of jobs or no job at all,” Rice said in an interview with reporters traveling with her. “I just think speculating on that is not going to help the situation.” But she added: “I think there is too much concentration of power in the Kremlin.”

Administration officials once thought that Putin’s decision on his future would be a defining moment for Russia, when it would become clear whether the rule of law or the rule of one man would win out. Their careful language following Putin’s recent announcement that he might become prime minister shows how cautiously Rice and other officials are now balancing concern about the Kremlin’s autocratic moves with the need to enlist its cooperation on confronting Iran, missile defense and other volatile issues. It may also reflect a recognition that the United States has limited influence on Russia’s decisions.

Rice is one of two old Soviet hands at the top of the Bush administration – the other is Defense Secretary Robert Gates, a former CIA director. Both were deeply enmeshed in Soviet affairs during the administration of George H.W. Bush, when Rice was a young National Security Council staffer. On a visit to an ice rink Saturday, Rice chatted briefly in Russian with a young figure skater, although in official meetings, she spoke English, which was translated.

Given her background, the troubles in U.S.-Russian relations are all the more frustrating for U.S. and Russian experts, who diverge on how much Rice should be faulted. In Moscow, some leading commentators said Rice is viewed somewhat sympathetically, as someone officials can deal with in an administration regarded as hostile. The view appears to be less favorable in Washington, where specialists across the political spectrum see Rice as having misunderstood Putin and mishandled relations with Russia.

Sergey Rogov, head of the Institute of U.S.A. and Canada Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences, said Rice was not responsible for what he called the “very poor” state of Russian-American ties, with disputes over economic relations, arms control, missile defense and regional issues.

“All of this is much broader than the portfolio of the secretary of state,” he said. “In general, she is respected in Russia. It would be a mistake to blame her. Because this is the attitude of an American administration where the secretary of state is not the number one player. There are other players, first of all Dick Cheney, who is rightly considered to take a hostile position on Russia.”

After meeting with Rice on Saturday morning at the U.S. ambassador’s residence, Tatyana Lokshina, head of the Demos Center, a Russian human rights group, described the secretary of state as an “impressive and an interesting interlocutor” but said Rice and other officials had lost leverage over democracy in Russia because of Iraq and other issues.

“Whatever criticism the Russian authorities get is wasted to a large extent since the Russians say the U.S. does not have the right to criticize us because of their own record. American criticism alone, the American voice alone, cannot be effective today,” she said in an interview afterward.

Some leading U.S. figures said Rice has contributed to the problems; some say the administration gave insufficient attention to Russia; and others argue that the United States has been too accommodating.

“I think the administration has seriously misread Putin,” said Richard Perle, a former Reagan administration official who is close to some in the Bush administration. “The approach seems to have been to try to win them over by making nice, and it hasn’t worked. In fact, it has encouraged the opposite.”

Perle laid blame squarely on Rice: “She’s been the president’s principal adviser on Russia and practically everything else.”

Michael McFaul, a former colleague of Rice’s at Stanford University who has advised Democratic presidential candidates, said Rice is among several top officials who have failed to realize that the 1990s effort to integrate Russia into the West has run its course.

“What I don’t think a lot of people have come to appreciate is, and I don’t think Condi understands this, is that project is over,” he said. “Putin could give a damn about Western institutions.”

Rice said U.S.-Russian relations, while strained in some areas, were better than many critics contend, pointing to Russia’s cooperation on Iran at the United Nations – although the Kremlin raised questions this week about the seriousness of Iran’s threat. “Yeah, we have tactical differences about how strong or when, but the degree to which that has held together I think is pretty remarkable.”