DATE=05/14/02

TYPE=U-S OPINION ROUNDUP

TITLE=NUCLEAR TREATY

NUMBER=6-125669

BYLINE=ANDREW GUTHRIE

DATELINE=WASHINGTON

INTERNET=YES

EDITOR=ASSIGNMENTS

TELEPHONE=619-3335

CONTENT=

INTRO: President George W. Bush has announced he will sign a nuclear arms reduction treaty when he visits Russia next week. The treaty will commit both nations to reducing their nuclear arsenals by about two-thirds over the next ten years. The announcement has drawn an immediate response in the U-S press. However, as some papers are noting, the reaction is not as euphoric as it might have been ten years earlier. V-O-A's ____________ has this sampling in today's U-S Opinion Roundup.

TEXT: President Bush says the streamlined, three-page agreement, "… will liquidate the legacy of the Cold War." What the document does not do is require the destruction of the warheads which, according to The New York Times report, gives both sides the right to keep the weapons in storage where they could be reactivated on relatively short notice.

In a front-page analysis, The Times suggests that the real importance of the agreement is the beginning of a process by which Russia will be more fully integrated into Western Europe. It is, continues the Times, a deeper integration than Peter The Great could ever have imagined when he anchored his empire on the Gulf of Finland with the construction of Saint Petersburg, the new Russian capital. We begin our sampling in the historic old Southern port of Charleston, South Carolina, where The Post and Courier say:

VOICE: The … treaty … marks a major breakthrough to a new, post-Cold War relationship between the world's two leading military powers. [It] … slashes deployed strategic nuclear weapons in the American and Russian arsenals by roughly two-thirds … each over the next decade. … Because the main outline of the agreement has been known for months, the new treaty contains few surprises … But the rapid pace of negotiations is in itself surprising evidence of a new and more trusting relationship between Mr. Bush and Russian President Vladimir Putin.

TEXT: In the nation's media capital, "No-Frills Arms Control" is how The New York Times describes this development:

VOICE: Unlike the voluminous and arcane arms treaties of the Cold War, the latest pact runs barely more than three pages and is a model of simplicity. It codifies cuts that George W. Bush and Vladimir Putin … informally announced last fall. Over the next decade, each nation will reduce the number of warheads loaded on missiles or bombers from current levels of nearly six-thousand to somewhere between 17-hundred and 22-hundred.

TEXT: The Los Angeles Times, noting that President Bush has "rejected one international agreement after another," calls this announcement "a refreshing change."

VOICE: … the forthcoming treaty is evidence of a new relationship based on trust and common national interests. Already a NATO-Russia Council is being created that will give Moscow a greater role in counter-terrorism and military actions. … The sooner Russia is included in NATO decisions, the more willing it will be to work with the U-S and its allies.

In improving ties, [President] Bush is following in the footsteps of President Clinton, who was ferociously attacked by the Republican right on the grounds that he was appeasing Russia. But the United States and Russia have far more to gain by cooperating than returning to Cold War-era confrontation.

TEXT: Thoughts from The Los Angeles Times.

In the nation's capital, meanwhile, The Washington Post adds: "the most important aspect of the new treaty on nuclear weapons reductions … is its mere existence. … [President Bush's] announcement … that he and Mr. Putin would sign an accord this month … represents an important advance for his administration."

Taking a more jaded view of the proceeding, The Wall Street Journal calls the deal "A Gift for Mr. Putin," explaining:

VOICE: Mr. Bush really did not want another treaty; he had said all along he could do a Russian deal with a handshake. U-S national security did not require it … and domestic American politics did not demand it. No, this is Mr. Bush's gift horse to Mr. Putin. The American [president] has now agreed to breathe life back into the dinosaur bones of arms-control, largely to assist Mr. Putin in Moscow. There is really no other justification for Mr. Bush's announcement … of one more nuclear-arms reduction treaty, a Cold War relic if there ever was one.

The real reason the U-S and Russia do not need this treaty is because of their improving relationship. Arms-control is dangerous between adversaries, and it is unnecessary between friends. Mr. Putin has drawn closer to the U-S for his own self-interested strategic reasons.

TEXT: The views of The Wall Street Journal. Also non-plussed by the announcement itself is the Chicago Tribune:

VOICE: There was a time when such an announcement might have sparked the kind of hats-in-the-air exuberance of the end of World War Two. It is a sign of changing times and improving relations that both nations seem to take this as great news, but no great surprise. … It is also a welcome sign that this agreement is a product of compromise, and apparently of growing mutual trust. It stands as more evidence that President … Putin has taken Moscow on a deliberate path toward warmed relations with the U-S.

TEXT: Across town, The Chicago Sun-Times calls the agreement "a welcome bit of rationality" that the two nations are moving farther and farther away from the doctrine of Mutually Assured Destruction [MAD].

The Houston [Texas] Chronicle is pleased and without reservations notes: "… the proposed reductions, with careful verifications by both sides, will enhance relations between Russia and the United States and increase the likelihood of even greater cuts … in the future."

TEXT: Lastly, from a Washington, D-C suburb, the national USA Today offers this assessment:

VOICE: The treaty is an indicator that for all of the Bush administration's ideological ferocity, it will make pragmatic tradeoffs. In this case, that is less about missiles than it is about Russian politics and gaining support for the war on terrorism.

Since the campaign against al-Qaida and the Taleban began, [Mr.] Putin has taken several steps unprecedented for a Russian leader. He has quietly accepted the entry of U-S troops into Uzbekistan, Georgia and other former Soviet republics. He has reduced Russian bluster about the eastward expansion of NATO. He has agreed to new U-N sanctions on Iraq.

All fly in the face of centuries of Russian resistance to any other power's presence in its neighborhood or interference in its spheres of influence. …[President] Putin proceeds [against nationalistic opposition] because he knows … Russia needs Western investment and diplomatic stability to deal with its economic and social problems. … By giving in to [Mr.] Putin's demands for a treaty, [President] Bush helps [Mr.] Putin ensure that future.

TEXT: With those thoughts from USA Today, the national daily published outside Washington, we conclude this editorial sampling on the nuclear arms reduction treaty announced Monday by President Bush.

NEB/ANG/SAB