RESET, US-STYLE

Hillary Clinton's tour of the Near East and Europe was her second visit in her capacity as US Se-cretary of State.  Shortly before this, she visited South-East Asian countries, in particular, Japan, China, Indonesia and South Korea.  However, these visits by the former US First Lady to the Holy Land and Old World became a landmark event for US diplomacy.  They marked the beginning of a "reset" in relations between the world's only superpower and a number of countries which had created problems for it.  The tour can be viewed as a tile in the mosaic of a good image which the new US Administration is assembling for the country, as the United States is trying, traditionally for a Democ-ratic administration, to be more flexible in international affairs, rather than using brute force.

Near Eastern motives

Hillary Clinton's visit to the Near East took place at a point when escalation of regional tensions had reached a peak, even despite the completion of Israel's military operation in Gaza.  Expectations of the new US Secretary of State's visit to the Arab-Israeli conflict zone were very high:  it was expected to at least clarify the tone of the Barack Obama administration's future policy for the Middle East peace process.  And to all appearances, Ms Clinton did clarify those tones, at least in rough outline.

By taking part in the work of the international conference on financial aid to Gaza in the Egyptian town of Sharm-al-Sheikh, Clinton made it clear that the United States has no desire to deal with the radical Palestinian movement Hamas and views only the Palestinian Authority, headed by Fatah leader Mahmoud Abbas, as a party to negotiations.  Washington promised to allocate $900 million for the restoration of the ruined Gaza only to that party.

Later, during meetings with the Israeli leadership in Jerusalem, Hillary Clinton spoke in support of an idea proposed by the preceding Republican administration - the need to create "two states for two peoples":  Israel for the Jews and Palestine for the Arabs...  Clinton said that the formation of a Palestinian state is in Israel's interests, and furthermore, a solution in favour of Palestine's independence was "inevitable."  However, the Secretary of State recognized Israel's right to self-defence against missile attacks by Hamas and effectively spoke in support of the formation of an ultra-right-wing Israeli cabinet by Benjamin Netanyahu, who supports strong-arm methods against Palestine, by saying that the Barack Obama administration is ready to work with all Israeli governments.  In Hamas-controlled Gaza, Clinton's words were interpreted as an "encouragement to continue violence against the Palestinian people".  At the same time, in the administrative centre of the Palestinian administration, the city of Ramallah, which the US Secretary of State also visited, her statements were received quite well.  And in Israel itself, they realized that despite the harsh criticism of its actions by the international community, the new White House tenant also considers the Jewish state to be the key US ally, as evidenced by the statement by Hillary Clinton that the United States will do its best to prevent the development of nuclear weapons by Iran.

In the mean time, fundamentally different aspects have emerged in US policy.  Clinton voiced the readiness of the Barack Obama administration to establish contacts with Tehran, but "on certain conditions," having thereby confirmed the possibility which the US president had noted of starting US-Iran cooperation if Iran undertakes to stop further development of its nuclear programme.

However, perhaps a true reset is gathering in relations between Washington and Damascus, which were effectively frozen after the assassination in 2005 of Lebanese Prime Minister Rafiq Hariri, which the United States blamed on the Syrian leadership.  During the Sharm-al-Sheikh conference, Hil-lary Clinton met Syrian Foreign Minister Walid al Muallim, who said after the meeting that it was "brief, but not very pleasant."  The United States' goal is very clear - to weaken Iran's influence on Syria, which is why Washington apparently intends to help Syria take back the Israeli-occupied Golan heights and provide economic assistance to Damascus in return for refraining from interference in Lebanon's and Palestine's affairs.  Essentially, Hillary Clinton has demonstrated the United States' aspiration to achieve a noticeable breakthrough in resolving the entire network of Near Eastern controversies by strengthening Washington's positions in this strategically important region and effectively becoming the only sponsor of the peace process.

"Starting from the scratch"

The "Russia issue" was the priority on the European leg of Hillary Clinton's tour.  The US Secretary of State decided to bring a creative approach to her first official meeting with her Russian opposite number Sergey Lavrov.  The Russian Federation Foreign Minister received a souvenir gift:  a button which was supposed to have the word "reset" in Russian and English written on it.  The word has become a symbol of late of new relations between Moscow and Washington.  Earlier, the need for a reset in Russian-US relations had been mentioned by US President Barack Obama, Vice President Joe Biden and Hillary Clinton herself.  However, the State Department interpreters let their boss down:  instead of the word "Perezagruzka," the similar-sounding but completely different word "Peregruzka" (overload) was inscribed on the button.  Lavrov tactfully pointed this out and Hillary Clinton chuckled and promised that she would try to avoid overloads in relations between Russia and the United States.  "We agreed on what words should be used for reset both in English and Russian.  No difference here," Lavrov said for his part.

And the results of the Brussels NATO summit and Geneva talks between the US Secretary of State and Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov prove that the "reset" will have direct effects on states in the post-Soviet area - an area which continues to play the key role in the geopolitical rivalry between Moscow and Washington.  The head of the US foreign political department played an important role in NATO's decision on the resumption of ties with Russia, which were severed after the war in South Ossetia in August 2008.  At the Brussels summit, Hillary Clinton said that it is "time to move ahead, not sit and wait, deluding ourselves that things will change on their own."  Having called resumption of contacts with Moscow an "opportunity to start everything from scratch," Clinton has essentially voiced her solidarity with the Germans and German leaders who have many times voiced their opinion that suspending contacts is a counterproductive measure.  The NATO summit has come up with a clear-cut formula for this approach.  NATO Secretary General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer, "Russia is an important international player, and not talking to it is not a solution."

At a meeting with Sergey Lavrov, Hillary Clinton urged him to "strive to work constructively in areas where we have common interests".  Among these areas are, first and foremost, combating terrorism and nuclear non-proliferation.  The sides have agreed to work consistently for the reduction of strategic offensive weapons and the signing in the near future of a new strategic arms reductions treaty, and they agreed on the need to start permanent consultations on the Iranian and North Korean nuclear programmes.  Clinton invited Russia to work on the problem of missile defence, as its deployment in Eastern Europe, in the view of the United States, should help protect the "free world" from the potential Iranian threat.  The obvious achi-evement of the Geneva talks was a decision to regulate together the increasingly acute "Afghan problem", and an agreement on the continuation of bilateral efforts in the regulation of the Middle East conflict.  In view of such a clearly manifest US-Russian consensus on a wide range of international problems, speculation voiced after Hillary Clinton's recent visit to Beijing, that China rather than Russia would become the main foreign political partner/rival of the United States, was proved wrong.

Nonetheless, the generally optimistic environment created after declaration of the "reset" did not cancel out the differences which exist in relations between the West, and principally the United States, and Russia.  "Resumption of talks within the NATO-Russia Council framework does not mean that all our differences with Russia have already been addressed.  The alliance must not and cannot agree with Russia on every issue.  The existing differences need to be addressed, but we must be firm when our principles and vital interests come under threat," Hillary Clinton said.

The most important stumbling block is the difference in assessments of the Caucasus crisis, which is an outward manifestation of much more profound issues laying the foundation for geopolitics in post-Soviet Eurasia.  Clinton's statement that "none of the former Soviet republics should come under pressure from Russia" and the "United States supports the right of independent states to make their own choice and make responsible decisions in the field of security."  It was stressed specifically that states like Ukraine and Georgia should not come under Russian pressure, be it "abuse of energy levers" or "actions which do not meet OSCE principles" (Clinton said that the latter were used against Georgia).

Having said that these two countries should remain prospective NATO members, the Obama administration's Secretary of State reaffirmed that in the "Russian" direction, the United States will stay the course charted during George W. Bush's presidential tenure.  The superpower across the ocean made it clear that under its new leader, it will keep trying to expand its area of its influence in the CIS and do its best to encourage the pro-Western aspirations of a number of post-Soviet countries.

Not that Moscow has any misconceptions in this regard, which is why its reaction to the NATO decision to resume ties with Russia was quite reserved.  When he welcomed the decision, the Russian foreign minister still said that it should be reached together with Russia.  And Russian envoy to NATO, Dmitriy Rogozin, noted that now Moscow will maintain ties with the alliance on its own terms.  It is not hard to guess what they mean.  Deeming the post-Soviet area a zone of vital interest, Russia intends first and foremost to dissuade the West from attempting to spread its influence in this part of the world.

Commenting on Hillary Clin-ton's words that the "United States support independent nations' right to make their decisions," Konstantin Kosachev, chairman of the Russian Federation State Duma Commission for Foreign Relations noted that this approach is in line with Moscow's views too.  However, in order for this choice to be well-thought-out and realistic, there is a need to halt attempts to make these states hostages to different types of geopolitical games, which Kosachev believes the United States and other Western countries are currently doing.  "We quite agree with the US Secretary of State's words that states like Ukraine and Georgia should 'have prospects,' but their prospects 'must not be invariably Atlantic,'" Kosachev added.

To all appearances, the clash of the titans of global politics over the "Soviet heritage" will continue to unfold in the future under the slogan of "alternative prospects."  The possibility of the preservation of this type of resource in the political arsenal of post-Soviet countries, in the mean time, is questioned not only by the governments and civilized institutes of the West, but also by Russia, whose recent moves to strengthen the Collective Security Treaty Organization indicate that Moscow intends to use the language of pressure more than the language of equal dialogue.

On Turkey's shores

As part of her tour, Hillary Clinton also visited the country with which the United States has the problem of preserving and strengthening a strategic partnership, rather than the problem of amending spoiled relations.  This was Turkey, the last leg of the Near Eastern-European odyssey of Ms Clinton.  At meetings with Turkish leaders, the Secretary of State thanked Ankara for its contribution to the peace process in the Near East, whereas the Turkish leaders, for their part, voiced their readiness to let the United States use Turkish territory for the withdrawal of troops from Iraq.  Difficulties began only during a discussion of the issue of the notorious "genocide of Armenians in the Ottoman Empire."

In the run-up to Hillary Clinton's visit, Turkish Foreign Minister Ali Babacan mentioned the threat of recognition by the United States of the "genocide of Armenians," in other words, fulfilment of the promise which Barack Obama made during the presidential campaign.  Babacan recalled once again the statement by Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan that in the event of official recognition of the "genocide" by the United States, then US-Turkish relations will suffer an irreparable blow.  "This scenario would harm Armenian-Turkish relations and the process of negotiation between Armenia and Azerbaijan," Babacan stressed, adding that the issue can be addressed without straining US-Turkish relations.

As expected, the traditional hysteria over the issue is building up as the next "Armenia day" in April draws near.  Ethnic Armenians worldwide now expect the Obama administration to fulfil its campaign promise.  However, it is not hard to notice that Obama and his team considerably reduced the intensity of pro-Armenian rhetoric as soon as they came to power.  Turkey is far too important for the United States, first and foremost in the Near East, Caucasus and Black Sea regions, to alienate it so easily.  The White House's position on the "Armenian genocide" issue will most likely become clear next month, when the US President visits Turkey to take part in a conference on a dialogue between civilizations.