The U.S and Russia need to recognize that they cannot solve global security and energy problems at the expense of each other. If our ultimate goal is the world’s stability, we must work together. Every time the Russians and Americans were on the same side, we got great results, as during World War II, in Afghanistan in 2001, in space exploration, and other areas.   However, when we consider the world as a chessboard and try to outdo each other, we both lose.

Bush seems to share this view.   A few days ago in Kennebunkport he said this:  «I have come to the conclusion that when Russia and America speak with the same voice, it tends to have a strong effect.’’ These words, followed by Putin’s offer to make the missile defense (NMD) a joint U.S.—Russia—NATO project, made me and my colleagues almost ecstatic. Since the launching of the NMD initiative we have been promoting, in the expert community and in the media, including this paper, the idea of a joint U.S.--Russian effort in this field. We believed then, and believe even stronger now, that for technical, financial, and political reasons this cooperation would be the best option for both sides, not to mention our allies.    

Unfortunately, our excitement did not last long.   Praising Putin for his «innovative» proposal, Bush explicitly told his Russian friend that he has no intention of changing the U.S. plan to place NMD elements in Poland and Czechoslovakia. This raises serious questions about Bush’s sincerity and understanding of the present global security configuration.  

Intercepting incoming missiles from rogue states like Iran and North Korea is certainly not a bad idea. However, what we do not understand is why someone would need a system that costs a lot of money, has questionable performance record, and is aimed at threats that may never exist or will not exist in the foreseeable future – all at the risk of antagonizing a powerful and reliable ally in the war on terror who is capable of bringing quite a lot to the NMD agenda.     

Putin’s likely successor, First Vice Premier Sergei Ivanov has said that U.S. acceptance of Russia’s NMD proposals «will quantitatively change Russian-U.S. relations. A new space for mutual trust will emerge. We may establish a real strategic partnership.»  

Another important consideration: Bush’s NMD plan in Eastern Europe is not welcomed in either the U.S. House of Representatives or the Senate. Both chambers are quite skeptical of the whole idea. The House cut the funding substantially, and the Senate Armed Services Committee, justifying its decision to delay funding for the European NMD, emphasized not only foreign policy concerns but also technical issues surrounding the interceptor missiles.  

Additionally, NMD plans for Europe are having an adverse effect on the NATO internal situation, setting the new members against the old ones. Bilateral consultations on the issue with Poland and the Czech Republic rile the key European states like Germany, France, and Italy. Besides, Washington’s increasingly vigorous moves to build NMD facilities in Central and Eastern Europe exacerbates the anti-American sentiment on that continent. It’s a fact of life that has to be faced: the people in Poland and the Czech Republic deeply resent the idea of U.S. anti-missile facilities on their territory; according to opinion polls, an overwhelming majority of Czechs and Poles are against it.

Let’s not forget either that China, too, is closely watching the NMD situation, especially in the context of its Asian segment. Beijing is increasingly worried by the U.S. talks with Japan and Australia on deploying NMD elements there, and it cannot be ruled out that China will coordinate its NMD-related actions with Russia, further encouraging the Beijing-Moscow rapprochement.  

Still, President Bush is not going to give up and most likely will continue his push despite all these objections to such policy. Some Russian pundits with a particularly dry sense of humor explained his stubbornness by suggesting that George W. Bush has long made up his mind about what he’ll do come 2009, when he has vacated the Oval Office. You’d have to be pretty innocent to think he’ll bask in the sun on his Texan ranch and ride his mountain bike. These pundits say that Bush has already prepared a safe haven for himself and, believe it or not, that haven is in Russia.  

Bush is on excellent terms with Vladimir Putin, no one can doubt that. Both presidents got on famously from the word go, and the chemistry between them shows no sign of flagging.  

The Russians will remain Bush fans despite some glitches like the Iraq war or obvious U.S. support for two presidents in Russia’s backyard who are too defiantly independent of Russia, Yushchenko of Ukraine and Saakashvili of Georgia.  

The Russians don’t like that support, no doubt about that, and still they see Bush as a good guy. Not encumbered with too much intellect perhaps, but clearly someone very much like themselves. As for any unfriendly moves, they are prepared to blame these on the U.S. president’s perfidious entourage.  

In Russia, the fairy tale about the good tsar and his tricky courtiers has been passed on from generation to generation for centuries, and even now most Russians prefer to labor under that comforting delusion.  

As the latest Levada Center polls show, 81 percent of Russians have confidence in President Putin (note that Levada Center is not exactly a warm friend of Putin or the Kremlin as a whole). Now, as long as Putin is loved in his own country, its people will at the very least be favorably disposed toward his friend, U.S. President Bush.  

Putin’s knack of making friends and his ability to value friendship is a thing apart. His habit of filling key posts with his old buddies, typically ex-KGB officers, has long ceased to surprise anyone. «He’ll stick by his own,» that’s what the man in the street says, and he is damn right.  

We just don’t know if Putin was indeed a top-notch professional when on the KGB payroll, but in big-time politics the ex-spy has frequently shown that the old skills were there all right. Remember his clever handling of German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder, who now heads the shareholders committee for the North Europe gas pipeline. The joint project will earn the partners billions of euros in profits; this may well be seen as a generous gift to the ex-chancellor in token of inviolable Russian-German friendship.  

A closer look at the current events and the warm human relationship between Bush and Putin warrants some interesting conclusions.   Once the two leaders step down – and Mr. Putin has many times assured his public that Russia will have another person at the helm after the March 2008 election – George and Vladimir will remain friends. That’s point number one. Point two: both the U.S. president and his Russian colleague have more than once made it clear that a quiet snooze in a fisherman’s hut by the lakeside is simply not on their agenda. The two presidents fully intend to go on working and to be active in politics.  

So which area will they focus on? The aggregate defense spending worldwide already exceeds one trillion dollars; Russia’s share there is 20 times smaller than that of the U.S. (which is nearly $600 billion), and half of what Japan and France are spending. And that in a situation where Russia already accounts for more than 10 percent of the world oil market, estimated at $2.5 trillion. Just calculate for yourself what kind of figures we are looking at here.  

Russia has amassed vast amounts of money from oil and gas sales. A good deal of it might go to pay for the new weapons development. Russians have enough experience in this field, which with good management could become no less lucrative than selling oil and gas.  

None of this can fail to interest Bush, who has always kept a keen eye on strategic projects. Also, GW knows that, with a new White House tenant, even if he is a Republican, he will no longer have much say in these matters, nor will he regularly feed at gala dinners given by defense industries’ captains. So when the steering wheel passes into a different pair of hands in 2008, he will hardly be able to resist the offer of a top post in some newly launched Russian military concern for the production of updated missiles or supersonic aircraft.  

In this way Bush will escape the dull existence of an ordinary senior citizen and will make sure that he and his nearest and dearest live happily ever after. Co-chairman of the coordinating council of a joint Russian-U.S. military-industrial complex! How’s that for a title? Besides, it will be doubly gratifying to do interesting work with a trusted friend who has always backed him, whatever their differences of opinion, and at times extended a helping hand. Putin is not one for playing dastardly tricks on an old friend, and he is a man who knows how to make money. A more reliable partner for serious business will be hard to find among present-day politicians . That’s the reason why Russia’s political satirists can think of no other explanation for U.S. administration’s motives for deploying NMD elements in Poland and the Czech Republic.  

Jokes aside, history shows that only very tangible danger can induce the Russian Bear to quit his lair; at all other times he is content to hibernate sucking his paw or, in these days, a bottle of beer. However, President Bush seems to be unhappy about this status quo. He wants to kick the Bear awake at once and force him into decisive action, like investing more in the military-industrial complex and groundbreaking strategic technologies. While our allies, the Russian politicians with democratic leanings, are campaigning against more public money for defense and armaments in the hope of making it to the time when Russian missiles will have rotted away in their silos, and all Russian youngsters, scared by tales of the horrors of hazing, will avoid national service like the plague, our president gives the Russian military machine a good boost and sits back to await some remarkable results.  

Frankly, if Bush indeed wants to follow in Schroeder’s footsteps, I’d rather he went into oil instead of the arms sales business. First of all, he has a lot of experience in the oil industry, and second, I’d prefer Russians to spend their newfound fortune on education, housing, healthcare, and infrastructure, instead of an arms race with U.S.     

As I was working on this article I heard a statement of Putin’s reassuring us that U.S.-Russia relations will grow stronger. «I am sure that, despite known disagreements, which are unavoidable in an open and honest dialogue, the policy of comprehensive development of bilateral ties in all areas will continue,» he said.  

I wish he were proved right. The sooner the better.