Senior Republican Senator Richard Lugar, who headed the delegation, harshly criticized the Aug. 28, 2005, delay, saying at the time that the incident "illustrates a dysfunctional state where the left and right hand don't know what either is doing and people are enforcing their whims of the day without deference to the world."
But Obama struck a friendlier note three months later when he reported to the Senate about the trip, a tour of biological weapon sites in the former Soviet Union.
"Thinking of the Russians more as partners does mean being more thoughtful, respectful and consistent about what we say and what we do," he said.
Obama will get a chance to put those words into action next week when he comes to Moscow for his first official visit as president. But former Russian and U.S. diplomats are voicing doubt that Obama's talks with Medvedev and Prime Minister Vladimir Putin will lead to a diplomatic breakthrough.
Obama and Medvedev discussed by telephone late Tuesday all the items of the visit's agenda, including strategic arms reduction, and agreed to speed up the work of negotiations teams fashioning a new arms control treaty to replace the Cold War-era one that expires in December.
Even the Kremlin's announcement of the phone conversation was carefully worded, saying the upcoming summit "will open the door to more dynamism, to building a more creative atmosphere in bilateral relations and to getting to know each other better."
"I don't expect the two presidents to reset relations but rather restructure them and make a framework for future relations. I don't know what the specifics of the framework might be, however," said James Collins, a former U.S. ambassador to Moscow and now with the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
One of the biggest problems between the two countries is Moscow's demand that Washington scrap plans to install elements of a missile defense shield in Central Europe, an initiative proposed by the administration of former President George W. Bush but put on hold by Obama. Medvedev has tried to tie the shield to the new arms reduction treaty, while Obama has indicated that he might abandon the shield in exchange for help curbing Iran's nuclear ambitions.
In the meantime, both sides have demonstrated their preparedness to cut the number of nuclear warheads in their arsenals. While the negotiators remain tight-lipped on the details, both U.S. and Russian defense analysts agreed that the number of warheads will be slashed to about 1,500 by each country. They also said Obama would not give up the missile shield during the Moscow talks.
"The Americans are working on a review of their nuclear capabilities, and this will go on until the end of the year at least," said Pavel Zolotaryov, a retired general and deputy director of the Institute for U.S. and Canadian Studies.
Another reason why Russia's demand will not be met is that the shield also involves the interests of Poland and the Czech Republic, where elements of the shield are to be placed, Zolotaryov said.
Russia and NATO member Poland have long sparred bitterly over their colonial and Soviet past.
Russia's relations with NATO and the related issue of Ukraine's and Georgia's bids to join the alliance will also be discussed at the summit, but Obama will not be as aggressive as Bush over NATO entry for those countries, said Steven Pifer, a former U.S. ambassador to Ukraine now with the Brookings Institution, a think tank.
"Obama will talk about the Ukraine and Georgia sparingly. It is a point of friction," Pifer said. "Still, I hope in President Obama's speech that he talks about American values and the way in which he hopes Russia will develop."
Obama will give a commencement address at the New Economic School on Tuesday.
Agreements, however, could be reached on Afghanistan, a point where the interests of the two countries converge, said Vladimir Yevseyev, a security analyst with the Institute of World Economy and International Relations.
Russia's preparedness to approve the transit of NATO military cargo over its territory and its acceptance of the Americans using a Kyrgyz air base are a good foundation for talks on more contentious issues, Yevseyev said.
But any Kremlin attempt "to load too many side issues onto the arms reduction talks may result in the Americans just walking away from negotiations," he said.
On a highly optimistic note, Mikhail Margelov, chairman of the Federation Council's International Affairs Committee, said he expected that the visit would raise U.S.-Russian relations to a new level. "Russia originally was not a high foreign-policy priority for the new U.S. administration," he wrote in a commentary published on the opinion pages of The Moscow Times this week. "However, I think that will change after the two presidents meet face to face in Moscow."
Yet Russia will probably remain a secondary issue for the White House in comparison with priorities such as the Middle East, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iran and climate change, said Dmitry Trenin, director of the Carnegie Moscow Center.
Although the general expectations for the summit are low, the analysts brand it as a step forward from recent times when the rhetoric between the two countries was reminiscent of the Cold War. "Anything but failure is a success for U.S.-Russian relations," said Andrei Kortunov, the Moscow head of the New Eurasia think tank. "Change is not overnight."
Issues and disputes |
The main issues and disputes affecting ties between Moscow and Washington ahead of President Barack Obama??s visit with President Dmitry Medvedev: Strategic Arms Control
Georgia
NATO Expansion
Iran
Afghanistan
Russia??s WTO Bid
|
?§ Reuters |
A Message from The Moscow Times:
Dear readers,
We are facing unprecedented challenges. Russia's Prosecutor General's Office has designated The Moscow Times as an "undesirable" organization, criminalizing our work and putting our staff at risk of prosecution. This follows our earlier unjust labeling as a "foreign agent."
These actions are direct attempts to silence independent journalism in Russia. The authorities claim our work "discredits the decisions of the Russian leadership." We see things differently: we strive to provide accurate, unbiased reporting on Russia.
We, the journalists of The Moscow Times, refuse to be silenced. But to continue our work, we need your help.
Your support, no matter how small, makes a world of difference. If you can, please support us monthly starting from just $2. It's quick to set up, and every contribution makes a significant impact.
By supporting The Moscow Times, you're defending open, independent journalism in the face of repression. Thank you for standing with us.
Remind me later.