Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD)

EUROPE

RUSSIA: "Last Summit For Bill And Boris"

Reformist weekly Vlast (# 33, 9/2) published this article by Aleksei Ryabov: "The current meeting of President Bill Clinton and President Boris Yeltsin is their last as real politicians. It also marks the end of Moscow's attempts to conduct a dialogue with Washington as an equal.... Both presidents pretend not to notice the obvious, that they are already history.... The meetings of the next American and Russian presidents will have a new format. The Gore-Chernomyrdin Commission has become an effective mechanism of Russo-American cooperation and a factor of stability."

"Personal Aspect Prevails"

Vladimir Mikheyev pointed out on page one of reformist Izvestiya (9/2): "While demonstrating solidarity with 'friend Boris' and encouraging radical reformers in public, the Americans keep reminding us unobtrusively that the leader of a civilized democratic country like the United States, by definition, cannot have permanent friends, only permanent interests."

"Two 'Invalids' Meet"

Sergei Agafonov asserted on page one of reformist Noviye Izvestiya (9/2): "Those two are political invalids, so the whole thing makes no sense. It is a token meeting."

"Crisis Offsets All Accords"

Dmitriy Gornostayev said on page one of centrist Nezavisimaya Gazeta (9/2): "Boris Yeltsin and Bill Clinton appear to have convinced each other that they have similar views on how Russia can get out of its economic crisis. Whether that is important is hard to say, though.... The crisis will offset all agreements to be signed.... Do we really need economic aid and credits from the West? For credits in an emergency, we may have to pay by giving up our stand on major bilateral and international issues."

"Vain Hopes"

Gennadiy Sysoyev remarked in reformist, business-oriented Kommersant Daily (9/2): "Those were vain hopes that America would come down with the money once Yeltsin confirmed Russia's commitment to reform."

"Washington's Complacency Unjustified"

Vladimir Abarinov said in reformist Russkiy Telegraf (9/2): "Unlike most Americans, the White House, in its perception of Russian Communists, is strikingly and unjustifiably complacent."

"Russia is Hated"

Melor Sturua reported from the United States for reformist, youth-oriented Moskovskiy Komsomolets (9/2): "Americans feared Russia before. But they hate it now--for having undermined the U.S. stock-market policy. It was their lives before. But it is their money now."

"Clinton Comes To Listen, Rather Than Talk"

Sergei Merinov said in official government Rossiyskaya Gazeta (9/1): "A financial crisis, ruble devaluation, default, the resignation of one government and uncertainty about another, all might have made this visit impossible. But Bill Clinton--we have to hand it to him--made up his mind,

even though he was under strong pressure.... The White House is not inclined to dramatize the situation. Russian reform, difficult and painful, has not stopped, and the United States is willing to continue to help, provided Moscow at last finds a correct, considered and feasible solution."

"Why Wait For The End Of Talks?"

According to Fyodor Lukyanov in reformist Vremya-MN (9/1): "The official result of the talks is known already. The Russians will confirm their commitment to market reform and declare that a return to the past is out of the question. The Americans will contentedly listen to all that and express strong moral support to the Russian leadership."

"Why Is Clinton Coming To Moscow?"

Andrei Smirnov said in reformist Segodnya (9/1): "This summit, the first in the last one and a half years, has a good chance to go down in history, as an exceptionally trivial event.... It looks like a private meeting of two friends wishing to say a couple of consoling words to each other."

"Russia, U.S. Can't Do Without Each Other"

Vladimir Kuzar surmised in centrist, army Krasnaya Zvezda (9/1): "It is quite clear that, despite the current inequity between the two powers, they cannot do without each other when dealing with security matters and new challenges."

"Yeltsin is Harder to Help Now"

Aleksei Portansky remarked in reformist Izvestiya (9/1): "There being so much uncertainty about (Russia's) government and economic policy, this summit may end with general expressions of support for Yeltsin and Chernomyrdin. In that case, the rest of the G-7 won't be able to take any real action to aid Russia either."

"Joyless Meeting"

Sergei Guliy judged in reformist Noviye Izvestiya (9/1): "Coming to Russia today, Clinton may not recognize it. What is called Russia is now a gigantic hole, without government or policy, with ghosts moving about carefully, playing their roles in a nameless play by a nameless author. It is not going to be a joyful meeting for either 'friend Boris' or 'friend Bill.' In fact, it may be their last summit. Clinton is coming over because of the force of inertia. The declared aim is to support (Russia's) reform policy and... Chernomyrdin. The other aim, undeclared but just as obvious, is to say good-bye to that reform policy.... Russian-American top-level rendezvous have long since lost their epoch-making quality. Today they are a near-routine event, free of sensations and scandals. Observers welcomed the gradual reduction in their global importance as evidence of human civilization overcoming divisions. But today a little jolt, breakthrough, or a venture out of bounds would not hurt. The trouble is that neither Clinton nor Yeltsin have the desire or strength to make it."

"Russia Weak, To Make Concessions"

Dmitriy Gornostayev asserted on page one of centrist Nezavisimaya Gazeta (9/1): "To be sure, the West wants Russia to get out of the crisis and is convinced that market reform is the best way to do so. Quite obviously, it is betting on Viktor Chernomyrdin as a guarantor of that reform. But its support may harm the premier-designate, since, under the circumstances, it looks more like a defect than a virtue to Duma deputies.... Having neither government nor premier reduces Russia's chances at this summit. Since basic differences remain and there is an apparent political disparity between Russia and the United States, Boris Yeltsin, evidently, will have to make concessions."

"Yeltsin To Choose Between West and Duma"

Gennadiy Sysoyev noted in reformist, business-oriented Kommersant Daily (9/1): "After the summit, it will ultimately be clear whether or not the West will help Russia. That depends on what Clinton hear from Yeltsin."

"Where To Begin In Moscow?"

Stanislav Menshikov, writing from Rotterdam, remarked in neo-communist Pravda (9/1): "Clearly, Clinton only gets worked up because of uncertainty and the risk involved in this trip. The more difficult it is, the more points he will score if he is a success.... The White House does not seem to know yet where to begin in Moscow. It is clear to all that Russia's old policy has failed, and no summit will fix it."

BRITAIN: "Bill Clinton--America's Churchill?"

The conservative Daily Telegraph carried this op-ed essay by veteran columnist Perry Worsthorne (9/2): "At a crisis of this order, only an American president can act, and even a weakened and disgraced president is better than no president at all. That--his own indispensability--is his new source of strength. He is the only president we have got. It is an ill wind that blows nobody any good, and President Clinton could just be the beneficiary of this particular ill wind. My guess is that he will not fail, if only because the hour produces the man, and there is no other man, at this turn of history, for it to choose. Lucky Clinton, maybe lucky us."

"Bill And Boris Locked In Doomed Embrace"

The liberal Guardian observed from Moscow (9/2): "With no money on the table and no grand strategic bargain to strike, their meeting was drowned out by the noise of markets in chaos. For the first time in their relationship, there was no hiding the immense personal gulf between Mr. Clinton and Mr. Yeltsin, and no hiding the alienation between Russia and a United States suddenly conscious of how weak and decayed its old Soviet sparring partner has become."

"Clinton's Timely Visit"

The conservative Daily Telegraph had this lead editorial (9/1): "The value of the visit lies in the platform it affords for the American president to address the Russian people at large.... The tone of the message will be as important as its content. Mr. Clinton should assure Russians that the West has not turned its back on them.... The outside world has a genuine interest in preventing a nuclear-armed power from sliding into hyperinflation and revanchism. While making clear the conditions for further financial help, Mr. Clinton should express his faith in the good sense of the Russian people. Entering a political vacuum, he could even tip the balance towards reform. The circumstances of the visit are extraordinary, but it could be one of the most important of his presidency."

"The American President Can Still Make A Difference"

The lead editorial in the centrist Independent asked (9/1): "What does one say about today's meeting of Presidents Bill Clinton and Boris Yeltsin--two discredited leaders propping each other up as they desperately seek to get to the finishing line of the millennium?... Powerlessness need not mean futility, however. The right words at this time can help. And no one should doubt President Clinton's ability to deliver them. He understands better than any leader since Churchill and Roosevelt how much politics is the art of tone. The world and the markets, never mind the Russians, do need an air of reassurance at this time; a feeling that while the problems are Russia's and theirs to solve, they will not spread or bring down the rest

of the world with it.... No one is saying that, with a wave of his hand, Clinton can make Russia's political problems or the world's financial crisis disappear. But he can help influence events if the timing is right. On that score he still remains a master."

"In The Bear's Den"

The conservative Times commented (9/1): "Yet even if few concrete steps can be taken in Moscow--and Mr. Clinton has every reason to be exasperated with Mr. Yeltsin--he is right to have gone. To have cancelled this summit at so perilous a juncture would have been a public washing of American hands that carried the risk of converting an already grave crisis into a dangerously contagious panic.... It will be justification enough of this summit if it can help to avert the worst."

FRANCE: "Clinton And West At Loose Ends"

Laure Mandeville opined in right-of-center Le Figaro (9/2): "After having unconditionally supported Yeltsin, the West is taking stock of his stature: Weakened and isolated, he no longer seems to be in a position to guarantee anything whatsoever.... Faced with a worst case scenario of a dissolution and a state of emergency, the international community stands perplexed."

"Clinton Made The Right Decision"

Patrick Breguier maintained in regional L'Echo Republicain (9/2): "It is legitimate to ask what could rationally come out of such a summit. But to conclude that it should have been cancelled would be an error.... It is far better to sustain the dialogue. The U.S. president was perfectly right to try, at any cost, to keep the channels open between the two countries."

"Clinton And Yeltsin Helpless"

Charles Lambroschini commented in right-of-center Le Figaro (9/1): "Faced with the Russian impasse, both Clinton and Yeltsin appear helpless.... Russian reforms have failed.... Privatizations have been profitable only to former apparachiks.... The only consolation for Clinton and Yeltsin is that the Russian people, while disappointed with this form of capitalism, have no intention of returning to Marxism. What they want is to find their own way."

"Surreal And Pathetic"

Jacques Amalric opined in left-of-center Liberation (9/1): "The vision awaiting Clinton in Moscow is surreal. There is the Russian bankruptcy of course. But also the pathetic vision of the Russian president. And the abysmal political vacuum which the communists hope to fill."

"Small Summit For Two Weakened Presidents"

Jean-Jacques Mevel wrote in right-of-center Le Figaro (9/1): "There are two major disappointments in store in this summit. One for the United States, the other for President Clinton. For the United States, it is the end of a dream: a democratic Russia anchored in a market economy.... For Bill Clinton, the summit puts a damper on his dream of a high visibility foreign policy to repair his damaged image after the Lewinsky affair."

"The Threat of Russia's Nuclear Warheads"

Jacques Guyon said in regional La Charente Libre (9/1): "One man has predicted that 'Moscow could fall in 24 hours and that the Russian army is in a revolutionary mood.' That man is Alexander Lebed.... It is no coincidence that Clinton is expected to meet with the famous

general.... Washington has not forgotten that there are still ten thousand nuclear warheads pointed in the air."

GERMANY: "Superfluous Summit"

Centrist Der Tagesspiegel of Berlin (9/2) commented: "We will remember this summit: Two presidents who are no longer really in office, and a government leader who is running the business only on a provisional basis. All this is not a Central-American farce but U.S.-Russian superpower reality.... It should have been canceled."

"Clinton Learned Something In Moscow"

Olivia Schoeller had this to say in left-of-center Berliner Zeitung (9/2): "Clinton will now do something which quite a number of critics of his foreign policy have demanded for a long time. He will reduce the fixation on Boris Yeltsin, and may even give it up. His meetings with possible candidates for the Russian presidency...speaks for new realism in the White House."

"Trip At The Right Time"

Centrist Mitteldeutsche Zeitung of Halle (9/2) argued: "Was this a trip at the wrong time? By no means. The summit in Moscow is important in two respects. On the one hand, it signals to the Russian people that they can count on Western support even in difficult times. Please imagine what the Russians would have thought if Clinton had canceled his trip. Would it not have contained the--unspoken--message: You are written off. On the other hand, it clearly says that Western assistance is not given unconditionally but is linked to a continuation of the course of reforms. Seen from this angle, Clinton's visit is not backing ailing President Yeltsin, who is able to act only to a limited degree. This visit gives the reform process and reformist forces a new momentum."

"Much Shoulder Patting"

Right-of-center Nordwest-Zeitung of Oldenburg (9/2) said: "There is no U.S. promise for more dollars to alleviate the Russian financial crisis but instead there are demands for a continuation of market economy reforms and an efficient fight against corruption. Yeltsin will promise both--but be unable to keep to his word because he lacks the power to stick to it. This Russian-American summit will end as it began: with much shoulder-patting. But these symbolic gesture will hardly be to the benefit of the two presidents."

"Hope In Coming Generation Of Russian Politicians"

Right-of-center Saechsische Zeitung of Dresden (9/2) noted: "If we ignore the agreements on early warning systems and the destruction of plutonium, there will be no concrete results. Only political visionaries could have expected more. The fact that the summit took place at all is the most important outcome of this meeting. With a cancellation of the visit, the White House would have embarrassed the Russian president and politically weakened him further. And this at a time when he is trying to cling to the last straw. But gloomy political scenarios will not prompt the United States and Western Europe to offer additional funds to Moscow. They will come only if Moscow's leadership finally agrees to a reform course that deserves the name. But this is not very likely as long as Boris Yeltsin heads Russia. Thus the United States and the international donors can only hope for the coming generation of Russian politicians."

"Lame Ducks"

Christoph Rabe had this to say in business Handelsblatt of Duesseldorf (9/1): "Moscow is now witnessing the summit meeting of two lame ducks.... Clinton will come empty-handed. He

has not more than some encouraging words in his luggage. As far as finances are concerned, the West has already offered too many IMF and bilateral loans, and without clear reforms it will be unable to pump more fresh money into Russia's battered economy. Every further dollar that falls into this bottomless pit is a lost dollar for the banks and the taxpayer. And the U.S. president, who is embattled at home because of the Lewinsky affair, and who is unable to convince Congress to transfer the long overdue funds for the IMF, has by no means the power to make financial promises to Moscow."

"Special Kind Of Summit"

Centrist General-Anzeiger of Bonn (9/1) and centrist Darmstaedter Echo (9/1) carry this editorial by Wolf Bell: "Never before has a U.S. president dared such an important visit under similar conditions and with similar high risks. He has nothing to offer and cannot expect substantial results from this visit. He can also not help his embattled friend Boris, and he can hardly hope to give his damaged reputation in the field of foreign policy new glamour."

"Bill, Boris and Helmut"

Adrian Zielcke had this to say in a front-page editorial in centrist Stuttgarter Zeitung (9/1): "When U.S. President Bill Clinton meets Russia's President Boris Yeltsin in Moscow today, this meeting will inevitably remind us of the blind person who wants to show the lame the way. Bill Clinton does not know how and whether he will survive his term as president. The German voter will decide in September whether the German chancellor will still be the chancellor in one month to come, and Boris Yeltsin is but a shadow of his former self."

"Just Words"

Right-of-center Nordwest-Zeitung of Oldenburg (9/1) opined: "We can hardly presume that the embattled President Clinton can offer his ailing friend Boris more than words. Congress will not approve new financial injections worth billions of dollars. But the problem over the past few years was not money, since the billions were generously paid to Russia. But in contrast, the control over the spending of this money was lax. Deutschmarks and dollars trickled away as fast as they were transferred."

"Crisis Will Remain"

Right-of-center Ostsee-Zeitung of Rostock (9/1) opined: "The past few days demonstrated that instability is the only stable factor in Russia. Thus, President Clinton, who is under fire at home because of the Lewinsky affair, is meeting a Russian president who no longer controls the country. Nobody in Moscow's parliament is any longer shocked by defiant (presidential) threatening gestures to nominate his old and new desired premier Chernomyrdin a second and third time by parliament. Behind the scenes the real power struggle is going on, while reforms are postponed. Clinton will again call for the implementation of reforms and threaten to withhold IMF payments. He will depart again, but the crisis will remain."

ITALY: "U.S. President Opening Doors To Compromise"

Ennio Caretto filed from Moscow for centrist, top-circulation Corriere della Sera (9/2): "At the conclusion of the summit, Clinton will receive Russian opposition leaders at the U.S. embassy. Among his guests will be not only General Lebed, but also Communist leader Zyuganov. By partially legalizing the heirs of the Soviet Union, the U.S. president seems willing to open the door to a sort of Russian-style 'limited historical compromise.'"

"West Can Play Role In Political Accord Among Russian Leaders"

Moscow correspondent Giulietto Chiesa commented in centrist, influential La Stampa (9/2): "The scheduled meetings with Lebed and Zyuganov...seem to show that the U.S. president does not intend to make the mistake of saying farewell to Russia, nor of imposing on it conditions it would be unable to meet, unless it intends to commit suicide. The West can play a key role in creating the conditions for a political accord among Russian leaders.... There is no time anymore for additional experiments and additional mistakes. If the Clinton-Yeltsin summit succeeds in bringing about this change, we will be able to call it a success. Otherwise, let's prepare for the worst."

"Without A Guide"

Economist Paolo Savona commented on the front page of centrist, top-circulation Corriere della Sera (9/2): "The world economy is sitting on a monetary powder keg.... The disappointing results of Clinton's visit to Moscow suggest that the United States does not perceive the seriousness of the crisis."

"The Illnesses Of the World"

Prominent economic writer Mario Deaglio commented on the front page of centrist, influential La Stampa (9/2): "President Clinton who, leaving aside his personal matters, has shown himself to be a rather careful politician on the international scene, is repeating in Moscow a cliche which is totally inappropriate: moral support, no money, an appeal to proceed on the road of privatization. The ex-Soviet giant, instead, will not be able to do without huge lines of credit and, well before proceeding with privatization, will have to restore the authority and the presence of the state, beginning with the payment of taxes."

"Saddest Summit At The Kremlin"

Former Ambassador and senior foreign affairs commentator Boris Bianchieri commented on the front page of centrist, influential La Stampa (9/1): "The worst is that Clinton...can do very little to help Yeltsin overcome the stalemate.... He can bring nothing else than good advice, such as not to abandon the reform and liberalization efforts."

"Moscow Paradox"

Former Ambassador and respected commentator Sergio Romano held on the front page of centrist, top-circulation Corriere della Sera (9/1): "The most improbable... interlocutor is sitting at the negotiating table of the new government: the U.S. President.... Only those who want a tug of war...can ignore Clinton's visit and the need to give an answer to his concerns.... Therefore it is a trilateral negotiation."

"Half Yeltsin Meets With Half Clinton"

An editorial in provocative, classical liberal Il Foglio stressed (9/1): "For both leaders, Clinton and Yeltisin, their avoiding its becoming a superficial meeting and making it a useful step toward the forthcoming G-7 [meeting] represent almost their last chances."

AUSTRIA: "Effect Of Clinton Trip Turned To The Positive"

Otto Klambauer commented in independent, mass-circulation Kurier (9/2): "Before Clinton's trip, it appeared grotesque that Bill Clinton insisted on paying an official visit to Boris Yeltsin, for the only reason of scoring a foreign policy success after the U.S. retaliatory strikes against Afghanistan and Sudan and the Lewinsky affair. But after the political intrigues of the

Duma...the effect of Clinton's trip turned to the positive: There is no pro-Western Russian, who would not have welcomed Clinton's urgent appeal not to leave the reform course, despite the crisis. Moreover, it would have been a fatal signal, if Clinton had canceled his trip because of the crisis in Russia: The Russian soul, which often feels abandoned by the West anyway, would have become even more lonely."

BELGIUM: "Painful Dilemma"

Eastern European affairs writer Freddy De Pauw wrote in independent Catholic De Standaard (9/1): "The U.S. president is facing a painful dilemma. A desperate attempt today to help his Russian host, President Boris Yeltsin, may turn against him. In the United States, the notion is also penetrating that only a limited number of Russians benefited from the aid which Yeltsin has been offered to date. Additionally, the sharp Russian-American rivalry in the trans-Caucasian area and Central Asia--including Iran and Afghanistan -- is also playing a role because both want to acquire a grip as strong as possible on the oil and natural gas riches in those regions....

"The Western leaders....knew that Yeltsin and Chernomyrdin have a past as apparatchiks and that the prime minister has enriched himself enormously. However, while Yeltsin and his companions may be rascals, they are rascals with whom one can do business. That attitude was prompted by concern about stability in a country with 15,000 nuclear missiles. Moreover, that country has a seat in the UNSC where it can obstruct major decisions. On the sideline, the Western attitude was also justified as support for Russia's efforts to build a market economy--which was a good affair for Western investors. Maybe, that support was stabilizing in the short term, but, in the most recent crisis, doubt about long-lasting stability is emerging.... For many years, Yeltsin has fooled the West with the 'me or chaos' (slogan). Yeltsin has not left yet--but, chaos is nearby. And that, Clinton and his Western colleagues owe to themselves."

"Both At Their Lowest"

Maroun Labaki commented in independent Le Soir (9/1): "Bill Clinton and Boris Yeltsin are the world's most powerful men, if power is measured in terms of nuclear warheads.... Yet, they are both at their lowest.... The two presidents will certainly give each other a helping hand to restore their image. It is prescribed by the rulers' code of good manners, the rules of the game."

CANADA: "Welcome To The Sickos' Summit"

Columnist-at-large Matthew Fisher noted in the conservative Ottawa Sun (9/1): "Clinton and Yeltsin have each diminished their high offices and are much less powerful than they were when they were elected and re-elected. They may still be obsessed by sex and vodka, but their greatest obsession at present must simply be how to confound their growing critics and remain in power.... Owing to their personal excesses, neither carries much prestige and their power has been greatly diminished. Whatever transpires, their performances will earn scathing reviews in Russia and the United States. Americans will shrug off their president's lies because they are doing nicely. Russians will shrug off their president's lies because that's what Russians always do."

"Russia's Rocky Road"

Mid-market conservative Ottawa Citizen (9/1) editorialized: "Clinton's presence [in Moscow] signals that the U.S. and other developed countries are still taking an interest, and that Russia need not turn, dangerously, in on itself.... If this summit serves no other purpose than to bolster Moscow's reform constituency against a return to the failed policies of yesteryear, it will have achieved something worthwhile."

DENMARK: "Confused Policeman"

Left-wing Information's editorial held (9/2): "Now that Clinton is in Russia, have the will to contribute to a solution to the Russian crisis?... Or is the visit just something to get through with the usual rhetoric, again intended to make the president look good? Or will we see the world's, rich policeman live up to his responsibilities?"

"Nyet To Chernomyrdin"

Center-right Berlingske Tidende's editorial held (9/1): "In view of the situation in Russia you cannot blame President Clinton's advisors in Washington for seriously considering a cancellation of the summit which is to start today in Moscow.... But an American cancellation would have meant giving up on President Yeltsin, and one can only imagine the kind of reaction it would have caused in the financial markets around the world.... Clinton must adhere to and continue the policy of the Western world towards Russia: future financial support for the country depends on thorough political change; he should also take this opportunity to encourage the Russians to return to the reform process. If he can get this message through Russia's current political chaos he will have achieved something."

HUNGARY: "Clinton In The Front Line"

Second largest Nepszava carried this by foreign affairs editor Peter Barabas (9/2): "It is bad times for Clinton but we would be unfair to say that the U.S. president's Moscow visit is a maneuver simply to distract. By his appearance in the Russian capital Bill Clinton is giving support to Yeltsin in a moment when his power is under concentrated attack from all directions. He is speaking for the importance of the continuing of reforms at a time when the keenest opponents of those reforms are carrying out the most successful attacks.... Those, therefore, who considered the summit an event of no importance, are wrong. During the coming weeks many things might turn out. If the U.S. president has any influence on the decisions at all, then he can't miss the opportunity. And he can have an influence on how things develop in Russia since he is meeting many political figures who are shaping affairs in Moscow these days. Clinton has indeed traveled into the front-line zone of Russian politics. There might not be any grand agreements reached or any mutual promises and obligations made, but what this current summit of Clinton and Yeltsin is about is the kind of world we are going to live in tomorrow."

"Lame Ducks In Moscow"

Top-circulation Hungarian Nepszabadsag carried this by new Washington correspondent Gabor Miklos (9/1): "The critics of the U.S. president claim louder than before that there is no real gain of the Yeltsin-Clinton summit. The two leaders are still going to call each other Boris and Bill but despite the friendly atmosphere of talks the debate is not going to be settled on a number of issues. The fact that the views on the Russian crisis are utterly different in the two countries in question makes it difficult to understand the situation. The message that President Clinton is taking to Moscow is that without financial, tax and bank reforms and further restrictions no additional financial aid is available. But it is exactly the IMF's `external dictatorship' that is seen in Russia as a main reason for the country's poverty. This is the contradiction that should be resolved by Boris and Bill in the Kremlin today. But both of them are struggling with a crisis of confidence and the U.S. press has already described the summit as the `discussion of two lame ducks'.

KAZAKHSTAN: "Those Who Have Similar Problems Have Similar Interests"

Independent Kazakh-language Zhas Alash opined (9/1): "The U.S. president has lost the respect of his people and now he is focusing on political activities [abroad] to get it back....

And today he is trying to help Russia which has sunk deeply into a [political and financial] crisis. Yeltsin, who changes governments like he changes shoes, also needs Clinton's visit. By inviting Clinton to the Kremlin, Yeltsin hopes to put pressure on the opposition."

POLAND: "The Right Decision"

Ryszard Malik wrote in centrist Rzeczpospolita (9/2): "It may not be the best time to pay a visit to Moscow but Bill Clinton has done it better by coming now rather than canceling travel planned a long time ago. Even though he did not arrive with the proverbial bag of money--which nobody really expected--by visiting Moscow he sends a signal to the world that America is always present where it should be at a given moment. The United States, the only global superpower today, cannot ignore the dramatic situation in Russia. Although hesitant about whether he should meet with Boris Yeltsin right now, President Clinton has finally made the right decision."

ROMANIA: "Absurd To Compare Clinton And Yeltsin"

A front-page editorial in centrist Curentul (9/2) stated: "It would be wrong and absurd to compare Clinton's precarious power with Yeltsin's. America without Clinton to lead it (and even without Gore, who has been challenged as vice president) would still be the same democratic state.... Without Yeltsin...the chaos...could only increase."

SPAIN: "Clinton in Moscow"

Conservative ABC observed (9/2): "As Air Force One was touching down in Moscow on a gray, rainy morning yesterday, Muscovites were lining up to buy their metro tickets whose cost had just risen by 50 percent, market shelves were beginning to appear empty of goods for sale.... What was Clinton supposed to do in the circumstances? Just what he has done: not suspend his trip in order not to further alarm investors, take care not to excite nationalist sentiments, and point to theonly way out of the chaos--greater sacrifice and more reforms. Without them, Moscow's pride -- its legendary Metro -- may have to close down."

"A Different Kind of Summit"

Barcelona's centrist La Vanguardia opined (9/2): "If Clinton had not traveled to Moscow, it could have been a coup de grace for a weakened Yeltsin.... What is at stake now is not Yeltsin's survival but the survival of the reform process, as Russia finds itself debating whether to pursue a Western economic model or reject the same. For all Yeltsin's flaws, it would be risky to assume that without him Russia would continue its transformation towards political integration with the West and the consolidation of its market economy."

"Russia At Edge Of The Abyss"

Conservative ABC opined (9/1): "The Clinton-Yeltsin summit and Western support for the continuation of reforms could prove crucial in Russia's present circumstances, given that the wildfire that has now sprung up is beyond the capabilities of the Kremlin and the Duma by themselves to control."

"Advice for Moscow [or Washington?]"

Jose Maria Carrascal remarked in conservative ABC (9/1): "[The Americans] were able to defeat the Soviet Union, but not Russia.... They will need to invest much more patience and money if they hope to change Russia into their own image and likeness--if in fact they are ever able to do so."

MIDDLE EAST

ISRAEL: "Clinton Tells Russians To Pursue Reforms"

Independent Channel 1-TV said (9/2): "The Clinton-Yeltsin hug yesterday was one of the weirdest inter-power hugs in quite a while. Each appeared to be trying to steady the other.... Clinton's visit is unlikely to make the Russian crisis go away. The visit may offer Yeltsin some secondary help but not where it really counts, namely in Moscow's corridors of powers. Neither the Russians nor Clinton's party harbors any illusions about Yeltsin's situation.... That said, the first day of the summit succeeded in projecting a businesslike, gap-narrowing atmosphere.... Clinton practiced in Moscow what he did rather successfully in Beijing a while ago: He took his preaching to the students--Russia's future leadership."

"Problems Swept Under The Carpet"

Top-circulation, independent Yediot's Washington correspondent Orly Azolay-Katz wrote from Moscow (9/2): "Clinton needed the summit to prove that the Monica affair does not stop him from doing his job. Yesterday the parties managed to accomplish a series of nuclear and missile-related agreements.... When Moscow is burning and the United States is led by a powerless president, nuclear materials and missiles are not exactly top issues. Alas, Clinton and Yeltsin failed to do any better. The true problems have been swept under the carpet."

SAUDI ARABIA: "Ineffective Summit, But World Is Watching"

Influential Al-Riyadh had this editorial (9/1): "Although it will be an ineffective summit, the entire world will be watching it for surprises. How will these two sick leaders tackle their...problems, as well as the deterioration of their public support? Will Clinton be able to protect the Russian regime from a possible collapse?"

"Clinton's Position Better Than Yeltsin's"

Riyadh-based, moderate Al-Jazira had this editorial (9/1): "Today's summit, which reports mention will discuss several regional and international hot issues, apparently will focus completely on the economic crisis of Russia..... However, President Clinton's position is far better than the position of his counterpart President Boris Yeltsin."

SYRIA: "Untimely Summit"

Hanan Hamad wrote in government-owned Tishreen (9/2): "The main stumbling block...is ratification of the Start II treaty and reaching an agreement on Start I. It is obvious that the Russian president is completely incapable, at the present time, of addressing this issue. If he did it would seem as if he were trying to strip Russia the only power she still holds after the political tensions and the financial and economic collapse. Likewise President Clinton cannot offer much when he is tied to a Congress which adamantly rejects the offer of any aid to Russia. The only thing Clinton can offer is advice; what Russia needs today, however, is not advice but rather internal reconciliation because the continuing confrontation and the lack of political consensus needed to overcome the crisis puts it on the verge of collapse."

MOROCCO: "Keeping Russia On Path To Reform"

Government TV "RTM" said (9/2): "The Monday's Duma vote cast a shadow of uncertainty over the summit. Clinton is visiting a country with no official government. Both Clinton and Yeltsin find themselves on shaky political ground at home.... Clinton's mission is to keep the world's second-largest nuclear power on the path to reform."

UNITED ARAB EMIRATES: "Not Much Expected"

The Dubai-based English-language Gulf News editorialized (9/1): "It could be argued that not much is expected from the meeting. Clinton cannot afford to spend any more money to bail Russia out of its crisis, while Yeltsin will not cause further strain in the Russian-American ties on international issues such as the recent American bombings and Iraq sanctions. With fading images at home and abroad, they will both want to be seen as statesmanlike and in charge."

"Any Breakthrough Will Be In The Hands Of The Russians Themselves"

Sharjah-based Al-Khaleej noted (9/1): "Today's summit in Moscow is funny for it includes two helpless leaders sitting on wheel chairs who cannot help one another.... The Russians have to understand that any improvement in their economy will not be in the hands of Clinton. Any breakthrough will be in the hands of the Russians themselves."

EAST ASIA AND PACIFIC

CHINA: "A Hard-Time Summit"

Dong Wen wrote in official Central Legal and Political Commission Legal Daily (Fazhi Ribao, 9/1): "Since Clinton is now obsessed with scandal, he will probably use the Moscow diplomatic stage to mend his image by showing off his remarkable negotiation ability and his grace as leader of the world's superpower. As the political status of both presidents is being challenged, Clinton's Moscow trip will perhaps be more symbolic than substantive."

"After Hesitating, Clinton Decides To Visit Russia As Scheduled"

Weng Xiang commentedin official Chinese Youth Party China Youth Daily (Zhongguo Qingnianbao, 9/1): "The U.S.-Russia summit is not likely to see progress on major issues. However, the support shown by Clinton with his visit will hopefully help stabilize the situation in Russia."

HONG KONG: "Russian Crisis A Little Too Close To home"

According to the independent, English-language Hong Kong Standard (9/2): "Mr. Clinton could not have been unaware of the fact that he might achieve very little on this visit. But his presence in Moscow is to underscore Washington's and indeed Europe's, support for Mr. Yeltsin's continued presence at the helm."

JAPAN: "Effectiveness Of Clinton-Yeltsin Meeting Doubted"

Conservative Sankei's Moscow correspondent Maeda observed (9/2), "The United States is placed in a dilemma. It will have to seek solutions to these urgent issues with a Russia fast losing its influence.... It is very doubtful that Russia, acting on a U.S. request, will exert its influence or apply pressure on Iraq.... It is also unlikely that Clinton and Yeltsin will be able to agree on Russia's suspending exports of missile technology to Iran."

AUSTRALIA: "Expectations Low But Not Non-Existent"

Liberal Sydney Morning Herald (9/1) opined: "There are things that Mr. Clinton can achieve this week. He can forge links with the new political leadership emerging in Moscow. He can drive home the point that the West is not about to abandon Russia unless it first abandons itself to archaic economic policies or extreme nationalistic sullenness. Mr. Clinton can also go home from his Russian visit demonstrating that, despite the continuing fallout over the Monica Lewinsky affair, he is still capable of exercising global leadership when it is needed.... The

expectations of this summit are low, but it would be wrong to regard them as non-existent."

INDONESIA: "Clinton-Yeltsin Summit Plan Filled Doubts about Russia"

Leading independent Kompas noted (9/1): "The outcome of this--the first such summit in 18 months--is not yet clear. Both leaders are dealing with challenges to their credibility, although Yeltsin may be in a more difficult position than Clinton. Nevertheless, regular contact between the U.S. and Russia is preferable to having the world's two leading powers at a hostile distance. We cannot ignore that there have been many international and regional issues during the past several years which could easily have brought the two into conflict. From this perspective, one can still see the obvious significance of a U.S.-Russia summit."

PHILIPPINES: "Russian Tragedy"

Nelson Navarro's column in independent Manila Standard held (9/2): "Grim thoughts of Russia in absolute turmoil and its deadly weaponry falling into the hands of profit- hungry warmongers and rogue regimes were obviously high in President Clinton's mind when he decided to stick to [the]...summit date with the ailing Yeltsin in Moscow. Presidents and kings normally do not visit counterparts who are facing imminent overthrow. But Clinton's advisers nonetheless decided to make the most conspicuous exception to this rule.... As the world's central economy and lone military superpower, America is expected to help. Still, the U.S. can only go so far. Washington has gone the whole mile plus more to prop up the Yeltsin regime."

SINGAPORE: "Summit Of The Politically Wounded"

Pro-government Business Times said (9/2): "Mr. Clinton may have had no choice but to go ahead with the two-day Moscow summit. Cancelling it would have sent--to the Russians and the world--the dangerous message that the U.S. was abandoning Mr. Yeltsin and the remaining supporters of economic reform in Moscow. The two leaders also need to focus on common global security interests, including the nuclear arms race in South Asia and the tensions in the Middle East and the Balkans. However, it is quite depressing to note that at this critical period in international relations, with some experts warning that the financial crises in East Asia and Russia could produce a global economic depression as well as new military threats to international stability, both the world's only superpower as well as the former Cold War-era superpower are now being led by people who are unable to advance creative game plans to deal with the dangers ahead."

SOUTH KOREA: "Two Lame Ducks Meeting: Little To Expect"

Reporter Kim Sung-yong of the conservative Chosun Ilbo (9/1) commented: "Washington has no additional money to offer Moscow. While Clinton takes empty pockets and no prescription to Russia, the U.S. Congress remains skeptical about the summit. A 'bottomless pit' to many in the United States, Russia does not welcome President Clinton, either. Some of Russia's elite are increasingly nostalgic for the past, while anti-American sentiment is growing among the ordinary Russian people.... Washington may well be preparing a new Russia policy, with Yeltsin excluded this time, and this summit could be their last gathering, marking a redefining moment in the two countries' relations."

THAILAND: "Last Episode Of The Comedy 'Bill and Boris'"

Business-oriented Krungthep Turakij commented (9/1): "It is speculated that in the final analysis when the curtain rises, the comedy 'Bill and Boris' will conclude with warm embraces and sincere smiles for the last time. Meanwhile, the backstage crew, especially the U.S., is scrambling for a new character to assume the role of the 'important ally' Russia, who has been kicked off the stage."

"U.S. Will Support Yeltsin After All"

Channarish Boonparod asked in elite Naew Na (9/1), "Why must the U.S. government continue its support for President Yeltsin? The answer is Washington probably fears that without Yeltsin, the new Russian leadership may come from the Communist faction, which the U.S. will have a hard time controlling. More worrisome is the question as to who will be the person pushing the button to launch the missiles in the absence of Yeltsin."

SOUTH ASIA

INDIA: "Summit In Deepening Crisis"

The right-of-center Pioneer had this editorial (92/): "With both presidents in enfeebled conditions, it is unlikely to produce earth-shaking results. It is surprising that it is being held."

"The Duma Has Its Day"

The right-of-center Indian Express had this editorial (9/2): "The West is desperately continuing to pin its hopes on Yeltsin, for it has no one else to pin them on. Witness Clinton's failure to call off his visit in spite of fears of comparison with Yeltsin, for that would only further damage Yeltsin. Yet Clinton is wrong. It is time the West realized that Yeltsin is no longer the man to push forward its agenda.... Yeltsin's replacement will more likely than not have communist or nationalist antecedents which so threaten the West."

"More Money, American Support Can Restore Confidence"

The nationalist Hindustan Times commented (9/1): "Russia's economic mess has achieved what its politics couldn't: clipping the wings of President Boris Yeltsin.... The Western powers' interest in Russia's problems (is due to) its huge nuclear arsenal. Together with the IMF, they have pledged to lend Russia $22.6 billion in a 'rescue package,' but ...foreign investors and common Russian people seemed to have lost confidence in the government's solvency.... Mr. Yeltsin is likely to ask for more aid from the West when President Clinton visits Russia. More money and strong American support alone can restore investors' confidence."

BANGLADESH: "Russia Needs Bold Leadership"

Independent Daily Star had this editorial (9/2): "Both leaders [Clinton and Yeltsin] are fighting for their political lives. It is unlikely that any bold step to face the economic crisis would come out of the meeting. After the recent intervention in the foreign exchange market for yen where the United States spent about two billion dollars, the U.S. policy makers are in no mood to make similar moves to shore up the value of ruble.... The need for a new leadership to steer Russia from the verge of an economic collapse is more urgent than ever before.

AFRICA

SOUTH AFRICA: "Clinton To Russia: No Alternative To Reform"

Liberal, independent Cape Argus (9/1) commented: "The only message he can bring the Russians now is that they should stick to political and economical reform, for the sake of Russia itself, and for the sake of all of us. There is no alternative."

For more information, please contact:

U.S. Information Agency

Office of Public Liaison

Telephone: (202) 619-4355

9/2/98

# # #