U.S. Rules Out Unilateral Steps Against Russia

September 9, 2008

By THOM SHANKER and STEVEN LEE MYERS

WASHINGTON — The Bush administration, after considerable internal debate, has decided not to take direct punitive action against Russia for its conflict with Georgia, concluding that it has little leverage if it acts unilaterally and that it would be better off pressing for a chorus of international criticism to be led by Europe.

In recent interviews, senior administration officials said the White House had concluded that American punishments like economic sanctions or blocking Russia from world trade groups would only backfire, deepening Russia’s intransigence and allowing the Kremlin to narrow the regional and global implications of its invasion of Georgia to an old-fashioned Washington-Moscow dispute.

Even as they vowed to work with allies, administration officials conceded that they wished the European Union had been willing to take firmer action than issuing tepid statements criticizing Russia’s conduct. But the officials said the benefits of remaining part of a united front made it prudent for the United States to accept the softer approach advocated by Italy and Germany, among other allies.

Some within the administration have argued for a more hawkish response, saying that Moscow probably intends to impose its will among independent states along its borders. They say the Kremlin is signaling to Ukraine, the Baltic nations and Poland that it is back in the game of regional hegemony, and they say it must be deterred.

In the first days of the conflict, for example, Vice President Dick Cheney reflected the view of administration hard-liners who saw Russia’s offensive as justifying their skepticism and a policy that the Kremlin’s actions would “not go unanswered.” In his more recent comments, Mr. Cheney has stuck with the administration’s emerging position of a more calibrated response.

In an interview, Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates described the administration as having come to a unified position that calls for “a long-term strategic approach — not one where we react tactically in a way that has negative strategic consequences.”

Mr. Gates, a career Kremlinologist and former director of central intelligence, said: “We are all agreed that we need to stay very much in close collaboration with the Europeans and others. I think there is a sense that we do have the time to calibrate reactions carefully. And I think there is agreement not to take any precipitous actions. But there is also agreement on the importance of continued support for Georgia’s territorial integrity.”

He cautioned that “if we act too precipitously, we could be the ones who are isolated.”

As part of the new strategy, President Bush notified Congress on Monday that, “in view of recent actions” by Russia, he was withdrawing from consideration an agreement for civilian nuclear cooperation that he and Vladimir V. Putin, then Russia’s president and now the prime minister, negotiated in April after years of effort. While the step was the most meaningful show of displeasure the United States has made over Russia’s military action in Georgia, it also reflected a more cautious response.

The deal was all but certain to die in Congress anyway, and the agreement could be revived by the administration should Russia’s behavior improve, officials said.

The issue of how to manage Russia is also playing into presidential politics. Senator John McCain, the Republican nominee, has long called for excluding Russia from the Group of 8 industrialized powers and has urged a firmer response. Senator Barack Obama, the Democratic nominee, has criticized the Kremlin’s decision to go into Georgia but has made it clear that he favors more engagement.

While the United States has been cautious in moving to punish Russia, it has thrown significant support behind Georgia, including a $1 billion economic assistance package that Mr. Bush proposed last week. The aid, officials said, was to shore up Georgia’s economy and to help the political standing of President Mikheil Saakashvili, the republic’s battered leader.

Overall, the administration’s strategy reflects a desire to defend Georgia’s territorial sovereignty and its symbolic role as an emerging democracy, while not precluding cooperation with Russia on a number of important long-term national security interests, including counterterrorism, nonproliferation and efforts to halt narcotics traffic.

While the United States and Russia continue to share a number of national security interests, Mr. Gates said, “We would still like to see Russia headed toward a more constructively collaborative role in dealing with international problems — rather than throwing their food on the floor.”

In other interviews, a range of senior administration officials argued that Russia is already paying a price for its actions, as foreign investors appeared to be removing or withholding assets, prompting a decline in the ruble since the Kremlin’s forces crossed into Georgia. The Russian stock market has also plummeted.

“Russia has been condemned by the European Union, by the Group of 7 foreign ministers and individually by many other countries,” said a senior State Department official, who, like some others interviewed for this article, was given anonymity to discuss internal administration thinking.

“This is very strong stuff, and they do feel that,” the official added. “And even if they didn’t feel that, they might feel the billions of dollars of capital that has fled. The Russians are on a course of self-isolation. Nothing we do in a deliberate, punitive way would be as effective in isolating Russia as what they have done themselves.”

Regarding another possible punishment, a veto of Russian entry into the World Trade Organization, the more likely decision now is for a disciplined silence from powerful voices in Washington that had supported Moscow’s membership, other officials said. A renewal of support for membership in the organization would be dependent on Russian behavior.

“We were an advocate for Russia, but maybe we just go quiet,” Mr. Gates said in describing the emerging strategy. “So it’s not a negative decision. Where we were their advocate, maybe we’re not so much their advocate anymore, at least not for the foreseeable future.”

The United States has left much of the direct diplomacy to Europe, including the administration’s endorsement of a leading role by Nicolas Sarkozy, the French president and current president of the European Union, who visited Moscow on Monday to urge Russia to abide by the terms of a cease-fire he brokered last month.

Inside the Bush administration, cabinet-level meetings of principal policy makers have been held several times since the fighting in Georgia began on Aug. 7. The most recent took place just before Mr. Cheney visited the region last week.

The vice president, who visited Azerbaijan, Georgia and Ukraine, all former Soviet republics on Russia’s periphery, spoke forcefully on Russia for much of last week, but even he did not close the door on improved relations, casting future relations as a choice for Russian leaders to make.

“What we do know right now is that Russia’s leaders cannot have things both ways,” Mr. Cheney said on Saturday at an international forum in Cernobbio, Italy. “They cannot presume to gather up all the benefits of commerce, consultation and global prestige while engaging in brute force, threats or other forms of intimidation against sovereign, democratic countries. To succeed and prosper in the modern world, Russia must relate to the world as a responsible modern power.”

In Rome on Monday, where the vice president was meeting with Italian officials, a senior administration official said, “The emphasis that the United States wants to make going forward is to make certain that we’ve got everybody knitted up together in terms of developing a common policy that we can all support.”