Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD)

MOSCOW SUMMIT: MIXED VERDICT

(See comment on the visit to Northern Ireland in separate section below)

EUROPE

RUSSIA: "Partnership For Peace Makes Summit Worthwhile"

Vladimir Mikheyev said in reformist Izvestiya (9/3): "'Friend Bill,' unperturbed by the frequent reminders from Washington that few Americans shared his 'Russian orientation,' did his best to fulfill his program. He offered moral support to his 'friend Boris,' warned his foes against trying to alter course, lobbied U.S. business interests, and made steps to enhance confidence in the military field.... Encouragement of Partnership for Peace between the United States and Russia, in a way, made up for defects in other areas of bilateral cooperation. That alone was enough to make the Moscow summit worthwhile."

"Results Less Tangible Than Statements"

Dmitry Gornostayev commented on page one of centrist Nezavisimaya Gazeta (9/3): "The summit's results have proved less tangible than the presidents' statements on the situation in Russia. They are not impressive, as far as Russia is concerned. But it could not be otherwise. Because of the economic crisis, the Kremlin is in a worse position than the White House, whose master's concerns are limited to private and legal matters. As for substance, the meeting was not a failure, even though it produced no breakthroughs."

"Reform Causes Collapse"

Official parliamentary Parlamentskaya Gazeta's editorial stressed (9/3): "Over and over, Boris Yeltsin assured that reform will go ahead. But this reform has brought us financial collapse which, in turn, has seriously effected the U.S. stock market. The West has been increasingly skeptical about Russia's methods to implement economic reform."

"Aim Is To Make Moscow Toe Line"

Stanislav Menshikov, writing from Rotterdam, remarked in neo-communist Pravda (9/3): "Clinton's chief aim was to have Russian leaders confirm their commitment to 'reform,' a term used for the policy dictated by Washington and the IMF."

BRITAIN: "End Of A Road For Russia?"

The independent weekly Economist had this from Moscow (9/4): "Bill Clinton picked a bad week to visit Russia, but for the past thousand years or so Russia has rarely had a good week. The visit was planned months ago as a way for M. Clinton to provide comfort for Boris Yeltsin, and to signal American support for Russia as a more or less normal country with a few passing problems of governance. However brief Mr. Clinton's stay, he must have noticed that Russia was far from normal, its problems far from passing, and its president far from comfortable in any sense of that word.... The sort of problems which trouble Russia are going to take generations to resolve, not days, or months, or years. Russia is a mess, but that is only to be expected of a large country emerging from 75 years of communism with no useful history on which to draw. This does not mean that Russia will remain a mess forever. Sadly, however, it does men that Russia is unlikely to stop being a mess any time soon."

"Smiles For The Cameras But Not A Successful Summit"

BBC Radio said (9/3): "President Clinton offered his support to Boris Yeltsin, and the photo opportunities helped the Russian leader to appear statesmanlike.... But Mr. Clinton brought no

promise of any cash help, and for many in Russia that reduced his visit here to an irrelevance."

"Boris's Baiters"

The conservative Daily Telegraph told its readers in an editorial (9/3): "An itinerant president or prime minister does well to meet opposition leaders during his travels. After all, they may be in office when he next sees them. That precaution was taken yesterday by Bill Clinton, when he received notable critics of Boris Yeltsin. Among them were Gennady Zyuganov, the Communist, and Alexander Lebed, the former general who was recently elected governor of the Krasnoyarsk region. Mr. Clinton's purpose was not just to make the acquaintance of those keenly involved in the struggle between Mr. Yeltsin and parliament. As head of the world's most powerful country, he used the occasion to deliver a courteous yet firm message to two figures who have been doing their utmost to discomfit the president and his nominee as prime minister, Viktor Chernomyrdin. It was that Russia cannot defy the rules of the global economy and expect to flourish; the espousal of democracy and the free market was not specifically American advice: It was something that any country seeking prosperity had to accept."

"Russia's Past"

The independent Financial Times had this editorial view (9/3): "President Clinton has come and gone, but Russia remains locked in a political stalemate.... It maintains much of the psychology of the command economy, within the trappings of a market system. And it does not work."

FRANCE: "Bill Clinton And The Russian Chaos"

Left-of-center Le Monde said in its editorial (9/4): "Political and journalistic circles were divided about President Clinton's visit to Moscow.... Some felt the president would be taking an unnecessary risk in going to a country without a government and on the brink of bankruptcy.... Others felt that maintaining the visit showed that the international community, and the world leader in particular, were not abandoning Russia to its fate. The latter were probably right. The results of the summit are meager. But it could not have been otherwise.... Bill Clinton once again reaffirmed his support for his Russian colleague.... Meanwhile, President Clinton did not neglect to pay attention to the post-Yeltsin.... To all his interlocutors, President Clinton said what he said to the Moscow University students: The solution resides in pursuing reforms; success depends on the Russians themselves, not on foreign financial aid. The question is whether the message has been received. While Yeltsin and his prime minister-designate said that they did get the message, they also added that there was a need for more state intervention in the national economy.... Bill Clinton has warned against turning back, but he did not clearly indicate the road to be followed. We cannot hold it against him. The Russian chaos has left everyone perplexed."

"A Matter Of World Security"

Bruno Frappat argued in Catholic La Croix (9/3): "It is true that one can hardly view the meetings as decisive. Yet, once again, the summit has to do with world security. Because behind the waning figures of the Moscow summit, there are still two major nations talking to each other, even if they are of unequal stature.... If either of these nations were to collapse permanently, it would be enough to threaten world security."

"Frustration, A Factor Of Instability"

Joseph Limagne contended in regional Ouest France (9/3): "Because Russia is at the center of the former Soviet Union, and because it is a nuclear power, it is inconceivable to let it collapse like the unfortunate Zaire. Today's crisis is forcing those helping Russia to be more demanding.... But money is not the answer to everything. Bill Clinton understands that the

frustration of the Russian people is a factor of instability. It was urgent to remind everyone of this, and Bill Clinton has done just that."

GERMANY: "Empty Promises"

Left-of-center Frankfurter Rundschau (9/3) noted under the above headline: "Both politicians exercised whitewash. The path of reforms, of which both politicians were speaking, does not exist in Russia.... If Boris Yeltsin really wanted true reforms, he could have supported Kiriyenko. This is why, for many Russians, Yeltsin's promises sounded as empty as Clinton's words. For the Russians, the term 'reform' has been discredited. Among Westerners, Clinton's admonishments will certainly fall on fertile ground, but in Moscow they rather sounded naive."

"Zero Sum"

Kostas Kipouros judged in a front-page editorial in centrist Leipziger Volkszeitung (9/3): "It was a meeting that finally bids farewell to the reality of two superpowers and the fiction of U.S. unipolarity. Bill Clinton represents a superpower that has lost its ability to forge and lead supportive alliances. Yeltsin in turn is speaking for a state whose weakness is more frightening for his friends than its former strength.... Everything that needs to be resolved ranging from nuclear disarmament to economic cooperation requires new heads and new ideas."

"Coldest Summit"

Right-of-center Badische Neueste Nachrichten of Karlsruhe (9/3) and left-of-center Weser-Kurier of Bremen (9/3) maintained: "The summit between Yeltsin and Clinton was the 'coldest' summit since the end of the Cold War. But the reason was not that new tensions have developed between Washington and Moscow. No, the former friendly casualness did not exist because Boris and Bill are too busy with their own problems which they can resolve only by themselves and not in an international dialogue."

ITALY: "Russia's Criminal Revolution"

Prominent international affairs analyst Barbara Spinelli commented in centrist, influential La Stampa (9/6): "Clinton does not have the charismatic strength to perform more in-depth meditation with the Communist experience and the criminal capitalism which was born of it. Clinton asks for reforms but, at the same time, opens to Zyuganov's Communists, fooling himself that he will be able to create a free market with the support of the forces which oppose it most. This may be the hour of the Europeans." Moscow correspondent Giulietto Chiesa wrote in the same paper (9/8): "An emergency committee should be formed at the highest political level in Europe, a committee which is in a position to monitor closely and continuously the situation and to take--in agreement with all elements of the Russian establishment--the necessary measures with maximum speed."

"Clinton's Turning Point To Save Russia"

Vittorio Zucconi wrote from Moscow in left-leaning, influential La Repubblica (9/3): "This unreal meeting in Moscow...is concluding the way we feared it would: amid embarrassment and a sense of uselessness.... If this trip were meant to provide support for Yeltsin, it on the contrary, underscored the fact that America is distancing itself from his person to focus instead--and rightly so--on the political process of democratization.... The message left behind by the White House to the Russian political world was clear: Any coalition and any political figure is acceptable to Washington as far as Russia continues on the still long road to a free market and democracy."

"Summit Poor In Results"

Andrea di Robilant wrote from Moscow in centrist, influential La Stampa (9/3): "It was a dull press conference, at the end of a summit definitely poor in results. After all, this was predictable, since nobody expected more on the part of two leaders who are simply the shadows of what they used to be until recently. The liveliness and the constructive tension between Clinton and Yeltsin are no longer there. And the U.S.-Russia relationship has become more impersonal and is resuming its concrete and bureaucratic aspects."

"We Should Not Exaggerate Clinton's Meeting With Communist Leaders"

Alberto Pasolini Zanelli commented in leading rightist opposition Il Giornale (9/3): "Clinton did not go to Moscow to 'bless' any restoration and any historical compromise.... The U.S. president simply made a gesture which is in line with political etiquette.... That's all."

"The Summit Was Useful"

PDS (leading government party) L'Unita emphasized (9/3): "For Russia, which learned that it can still count on the support of the United States even if it is proposing a government with the Communists.... And for America, which got the confirmation that the road of reforms will not be abandoned."

"The Sad Decline Of the President"

A front-page analysis by Ennio Caretto in centrist, top-circulation Corriere della Sera maintained (9/3): "The Clinton-Yeltsin summit left things more or less as they were before.... Clinton needs to quickly regain his prestige. Yeltsin's decline is not as dangerous for the well being and the security of the world as Clinton's would be. The U.S. president is the only one in a position to respond, along with the stronger allies, such as Chancellor Kohl, to the most difficult financial and economic challenge since the end of WWII, if not since 1929."

BELGIUM: "Washington Resigns Itself To Communist Revenge"

In conservative Catholic La Libre Belgique (9/3), Moscow correspondent Boris Toumanov concluded: "Mr. Clinton, today, seems to be far from certain of his 'friend Boris's political survival. Of course, he courageously tried to put up a good show at the Russian establishment's unspeakably low games by devoting Wednesday evening to 'consultations' with the most prominent representatives of the Russian political elite, including Messrs. Zyuganov, Lebed and Lujkov. Nevertheless, it seems that Washington has resigned itself to a Communist revenge and is sweetening the pill by trying, through Al Gore's voice, to convince public opinion that 'Russian Communists are no longer what they were fifty years ago.'

"Bill Turns Makes Himself Boris' Guardian Angel"

Diplomatic Reporter Pierre Lefevre wrote in independent Le Soir (9/3): "For two days, Bill Clinton turned into Boris Yeltsin's guardian angel. He constantly whispered into his ear, more or less loudly, that he should stay on the right path of market economy, lest he know an inferno worse than the present crisis. The U.S. president weighed in on as much as the principle of non-interference allowed him to do, the formation and on the orientation of the new Russian government. He obtained a promise of good behavior from his weakened host, although no one can tell whether this is a serious commitment or a pious wish.... The outcome of the summit was no more spectacular in the field of security The two presidents talked about Kosovo and Iraq. They signed three relatively minor agreements.... Bill Clinton could only reiterate his wish to see the Duma ratify the Start 2 disarmament agreement. And he had to bear Boris Yeltsin's public condemnation of the resort to force, an allusion to recent U.S.

bombings in Sudan and Afghanistan. Mentioning an non-existent NATO meeting in Warsaw, the Russian president also assailed the Atlantic Alliance's ambitions. To sum up: many words, but few actions."

DENMARK: "The Yeltsin Era Is Over"

Right-of-Center Jyllands-Posten's editorial held (9/4): "Russia is in the middle of one of its worst crises in this century, and in Moscow a political power struggle is going on with the Communists in the forefront. In this situation, nobody needs a physically and psychologically exhausted president. Neither is it particularly reassuring to have so fragile a man in control of a terrifying nuclear force. Bill Clinton was right in supporting Yeltsin, but it is obvious that Russia needs a new president. Viktor Chernomyrdin may not be the best candidate, but in the present circumstances he will nonetheless be a plus."

"A Tame Summit"

Center-right Berlingske Tidende's editorial held (9/3): "The summit has proven yet again that the age when Washington and Moscow together set the tone for global development is finally over. Today completely different powers are at play--from stock exchanges around the world to a number of regional power centers. Add the fact that [Clinton and Yeltsin] just now are weighed down by domestic problems, which, despite their different natures, make both men appear politically weakened, and it was completely predictable for the summit to end without any great results. Seen in this light the two days of negotiations in Moscow lived up to all expectations."

"Clinton In The Bear's Den"

Left-wing Information's editorial said (9/3): "The only tangible outcome of the U.S. visit is probably that Clinton made it clear to Yeltsin, the acting Prime Minister Viktor Chernomyrdin and the leaders of the Russian parliament that neither the United States nor its European allies, nor the IMF would spend one single dollar more on Russian reforms unless Russia's politicians come to grip with reality.... Neither the United States nor other powers want to dictate to Russia which way to take after the collapse of the Soviet system in 1991. But if those, who have been elected by the people, want to integrate the country completely in the global market economy and profit from it, then reforms of the bank system, new tax laws, anti-trust laws, etc. are needed."

FINLAND: "Nothing To Give But Encouragement"

Finland's leading, independent Helsingin Sanomat opined (9/3): "The visit to Moscow by U.S. President Bill Clinton was useful only in the sense that a cancellation of the trip would have unnecessarily accentuated the impression of a power vacuum in Russia. Clinton did not have anything else to give to President Yeltsin but the encouragement, which already sounds empty, to continue to be committed to 'reforms.' At the press conference, Clinton was busy answering embarrassing questions about the Lewinsky scandal which has significantly weakened his own position."

"The Visit Was More Important Than Expected"

Social Democratic Demari said (9/3): "President Clinton's discussions with key opposition leaders strengthen the impression of uncertainty in Russia. But the discussions can also be seen as a positive message. Clinton and the foreign affairs administration of the United States want to maintain and strengthen close contacts with Russia."

"A Visit For The Sake Of A Visit"

Leftist Kansan Uutiset commented (9/3): "The United States wants to continue to believe-- or pretend to believe--that Yeltsin and acting Prime Minister Victor Chernomyrdin are in control of affairs and that the reform policies continue under their leadership. Clinton's support to Yeltsin may no longer be helpful to Yeltsin. It could even work against Yeltsin. It gives a boost to claims by nationalists and communists that Yeltsin and his government have sold their country...to a foreign power. Clinton needed the visit for his own personal reasons, as well. Washington is preparing for the end to the Yeltsin presidency which may happen at any time. Clinton's meeting with all potential successors of Yeltsin shows this, and so does the fact that Clinton did not make any promises of economic assistance. Advice does not cost anything, and Clinton certainly did not spare his advice. What good will advice do to Russia is another question. After all, the current crisis is, to a great extent, a result of the fact that Russia has followed advice from the United States and other leading Western countries."

"Lesser Of Two Evils"

Independent Turun Sanomat observed (9/3): "The fact that the visit took place can be seen as an achievement. One can only guess how a cancellation would have been interpreted in Russia. It would have been the final blow to Boris Yeltsin's prestige, which has become severely eroded. For Clinton, too, the Moscow summit was the lesser of two evils. The master of the White House, who has been caught in the quagmire of women problems, could move the limelight away from the Lewinsky case, at least for a brief moment.

HUNGARY: "Neither To Bury, Nor To Praise"

Washington correspondent Gabor Lambert argued in centrist conservative Magyar Nemzet (9/4): "Financial and political leaders of the world have become careful. And helpless as well. The Moscow summit went about it, too: It would be too early to bury everything but there is no reason for praising either. But the events of the week support the view that the lasting crisis could probably be the most threatening factor for the U.S. president this time...and that one who manages to control the crisis is likely to be accepted by Washington, too. "

KAZAKHSTAN: "A Kremlin Dreamer"

Independent weekly Delovaya Nedelya (9/4) commented: "The visit of the U.S. president to Russia has finished with nothing to show for it. Bill Clinton didn't bring Boris Yeltsin either confident promises or faint hints about financial aid from the West.... It's not strange: On the eve of a change in the political regime in Kremlin, it is not only useless to help to Russia but even dangerous for those who can provide help. Taxpayers in developed countries will not forgive their presidents or governments such carelessness."

KYRGYZSTAN: ''Clinton Gone, Russia Unchanged"

Azimov wrote in government-owned Kyrgyz Tuusu (9/4): "This trip was necessary, not for America and Russia, but for Clinton and Yeltsin. Clinton's situation is well known.... Clinton is doing everything to divert public attention.... He has achieved his goal by coming to Moscow.... This visit was especially necessary for Yeltsin, because America and its president demonstrated political support for him.

FORMER YUGOSLAV REPUBLIC OF MACEDONIA: "Mediator Clinton"

Pro-government Nova Makedonija had this op-ed article by Mirche Adamcevski (9/4): "Clinton went to Russia to mediate between politicians. They should all bear in mind that, whoever rules Russia...they will all look to the United States."

NORWAY: "Summit Meeting In The Fog"

Independent tabloid Dagbladet commented (9/3: "The strangest summit beween the presidents of the United States and Russia has ended. Even in Moscow President Clinton could not escape questions about Monica Lewinsky, and Boris Yeltsin acted as if he had full political control at a time when the Duma is publicly revolting against him. The meeting resulted in two concrete agreements, an early warning system and the destruction of 50 tons of plutonium by both nations, but these were merely follow-ups to old understandings: In today's situation Russia's domestic problems are overshadowing, and on this issue both presidents proved powerless in reaching concrete results."

POLAND: "Witness"

Leopold Unger wrote in liberal Gazeta Wyborcza (9/3): "To ask why Clinton went to Moscow is an absurd thing. First, he went there because canceling the visit would bring much worse consequences than the visit itself. It would be a sign of international mistrust toward Yeltsin, and an apparent mistake of the West. For the time being, Yeltsin is still president. Another reason for Clinton to go was to see for himself as a 'witness'...what the options are--Lebed, Zyuganov, Luzhkov--of those who aspire for succession after Yeltsin. Third, because this way, Clinton--and the West--washes his hands and clears his conscience. He will be able to say: 'I was with Yeltsin till the very end, nothing else could have been done.' The opinion that the visit [Moscow summit] was to help both presidents get rid of their unpleasant records is ridiculous. As for Yeltsin, nothing can help him now. Clinton does not need help--either way, it could not come from Moscow.

SLOVENIA: "Both Presidents Dangerously Wounded"

Left-of-center Delo (9/2) commented: "Both presidents are dangerously wounded; one has lost morale, the other power.... Bill Clinton simply had to come to Moscow--also because of his own political rehabilitation. There are at least two reasons for this...cancellation of the summit would be a severe political blow for Yeltsin; and the crisis in Russia. For a long time, Russia has been threatening the world with its financial and political crisis... rather than with its red ideology and nuclear warheads.... Yeltsin (did stress) that Russia will remain on the path of reforms, market economy, and democracy...but he is no longer a match for these demanding tasks. Washington is increasingly aware of this fact. Therefore it has been looking for new appropriate interlocutors in Russia."

SPAIN: "Russia Ungoverned"

Liberal El Pais opined (9/8): "The great powers and specialized economic organizations have no idea how to come to grips with the problem, as the recent Clinton-Yeltsin summit in Moscow demonstrated.... The only thing positive to come out of all this is that the debate continues to focus on votes, elections, and politics as opposed to coups d'etat.... Small consolation. But if a government prepared to take the necessary steps quickly does not appear soon in Russia, this, too could change."

"Pointless Summit"

Independent El Mundo opined (9/3): "Two world leaders at their saddest moment.... If a large part of the international stock market crisis can be attributed to growing unease at the lack of world leadership in addressing the weaknesses of the global financial system that are becoming increasingly evident, the spectacle that we have witnessed over the past two days in Moscow has done little, frankly, to allay that unease."

EAST ASIA AND PACIFIC

CHINA: "Russia Has To Play Waiting Game"

Xinhua news agency wrote in official English-language China Daily (9/5): "U.S. President Bill Clinton left Moscow on Tuesday in the middle of a waiting game with Russia. As the Russians grapple with a financial crisis and political chaos, Clinton set some ground rules: The U.S. will only throw in more financial and economic assistance when it is sure that Russia is sticking to a course of economic reform and democratization championed by the West. Until then, the Russians will have to wait. Clinton, for his part, was trying to help Yeltsin from the sidelines."

"Influenced By Domestic Issues, Russia-U.S. Summit Achieves Little"

Sheng Shiliang wrote in State Council Economic Daily (Jingji Ribao) (9/4): "The achievements of the Russia-U.S. summit was quite limited. The only substantive result was probably the two nations' agreement to both remove 50 tons of plutonium and convert its form.... However, the Russian media considered the meeting `successful' if only because it was held as scheduled."

"Supporting Yeltsin"

Dong Wen wrote in official English-Language China Daily (9/3): "At a time when Yeltsin's opponents are urging him to step down, Clinton's visit to Russia is undoubtedly a signal of U.S. support for Yeltsin.... The trip supports political stability in Russia but also is in the interests of the U.S."

JAPAN: "New Thinking Needed For Aid To Russia"

Liberal Asahi editorialized (9/4), "The U.S.-Russia summit did not turn out as quick relief for embattled Russia President Yeltsin.... For Washington, the confusion engulfing the Russian economy is no longer a far-away issue. U.S.-Russian relations remain the most important part of the international order in the post-Cold War era. Support is growing in the U.S. Congress for suspending American assistance to Russia. In order to keep Russia within the international order, U.S. support, accompanied by new thinking, for restructuring the Russian economy is still necessary. President Clinton advised Yeltsin to strengthen tax-collection systems and to develop a 'safety net' for low-income households. The most serious defect of Moscow's reform policy was its failure to properly address concerns of ordinary people, such as the chronic delay in wage payments. This must be kept in mind when Washington considers new types of assistance to Russia."

"Important Subjects"

Business-oriented Nihon Keizai commented (9/3): "Both Clinton and Yeltsin might have become somewhat 'absent-minded' during their summit talks. But subjects of discussion...included Russia's future course, and Western reaction to the 'Russian crisis.' In fact, these are very important subjects to which the world gave considerable attention."

"Russia Must Stand On Its Own Feet"

An editorial in the conservative Sankei observed (9/3): "As expected, the summit turned out to be low-keyed. At the summit, Yeltsin had been expected to explain how positively and effectively he would deal with his country's political and economic crisis. He failed to give any reassuring remarks on the matter to the world."

AUSTRALIA: "Clinton And Yeltsin Wasted Their Time"

Conservative Brisbane Courier Mail's editorial (9/5) declared: "The biggest disappointment was that Mr. Clinton could offer nothing to address the (Russian) economic situation except for glib platitudes.... The failure of the West to assemble a Marshall-style economic package (such as) after the break-up of the Soviet Union in 1990, remains the blackest spot in the final years of the millennium. Mr. Clinton's wasted visit shows the world's superpower is still unable to face up to the needs of a post-Cold War world and is led by a man without his mind on the job."

INDONESIA: "We Support Yeltsin's Critical Stand On U.S. Missile Strikes"

Leading, independent Kompas commented (9/3): "It is absolutely appropriate that President Yeltsin strongly criticized current U.S. foreign policy, which relies too heavily upon violence.... Yeltsin's statement is praiseworthy."

SINGAPORE: "A Useful Summit"

Pro-government Straits Times (9/5) had this editorial: "There is a danger of making too much of the fact that this week's U.S.-Russia summit in Moscow brought together two weakened presidents. The point is true, of course.... However, to focus on their weak positions excessively would be to lose sight of the fact that they represent the world's two strongest military powers. While summits are of course held between leaders, it is their nations which they represent. When nations have overlapping agendas, the interests that unite them develop a resilience and gather a momentum of their own. The problems of presidents do not detract from the strength of that fundamental relationship."

SOUTH KOREA: "Clinton's Firm Message On Russia's Reform"

Pro-business Joong-Ang Ilbo remarked (9/3): "Given the chaos engulfing the country now, Russia may indeed give up its economic reforms, and that danger is the reason that the United States has been tenaciously urging the country to stay on the track of reform."

MIDDLE EAST

EGYPT: "West Gave Advice Without Positive Steps"

Ibrahim Nafie, editor-in-chief of pro-government Al Ahram, made these observations (9/3): "President Clinton is visiting Russia in the most difficult circumstances.... The problem is that the donors limited their look at the crisis to Russia's need of financial aid, rather than its need for a radical remedy to many of political, economic, social and psychological aspects, which resulted from dictatorship."

ISRAEL: "Clinton Talked About The Ruble, Press Asked About Monica"

Traveling with the president, correspondent Orly Azolay-Katz wrote in mass-circulation, pluralist Yediot (9/4): "Clinton's 48 hours in Moscow were not very impressive. The summit was a letdown. The agreements the two leaders signed were too few and came too late to resolve Russia's grave crisis. Clinton could not and did not offer Yeltsin financial assistance.... The truth is that Clinton did not expect the summit to produce dramatic results. He did expect it to

deflect international attention from his personal problems."

"All Clinton Wanted Was A Break"

Traveling with the president, correspondent Nitzan Horowitz wrote in independent Haaretz (9/4): "Clinton's emotional preaching left little impression on his Russian audience. At times his

words appeared to have even accomplished the opposite results.... Clinton told the Russians unblushingly that he did not come to meddle in their own affairs and in the same breath read out to them a list of things they had to do.... What Clinton wanted the summit to do was to make him again, at least for a day or two, the 'leader of the free world,' and make him forget his problems at home with the Congress and...last but not least, Monica Lewinsky. He failed. Lewinsky dominated the summit."

"Tedious Press Conference"

Independent Channel 2-TV told its viewers (9/3): "In the course of a rather tedious press conference, they said they agreed on just about everything. However, the friendly statements did not do the summit much good. It will be remembered essentially as a meeting between the world's two mightiest leaders at the lowest points in their careers."

"Two Lame Ducks"

Liberal Haaretz Washington correspondent Nitzan Horowitz filed from Moscow (9/3): "The American objective of getting Russian reforms going met with only partial success.... Clinton's numerous appeals to the Russian public 'not to go back' received only limited response.... The administration failed to gain a clear notion of what was going to happen in Russia, a fact that is bound to have ill effects on international money markets.... The agreements the two presidents signed did not manage to dispel the gloomy impression."

JORDAN: "Conspiracy Theory The Greatest Achievement"

Intellectual columnist Mu'nes Al-Razzaz commented in pro-government influential Arabic Al-Rai (9/3): "I imagine that President Yeltsin is saying to President Clinton: 'How I wish I were the ruler of a Third World country. Then I would be able to accuse foreign agents of manufacturing the (Russian) economic crisis and deal with the situation by conducting a few executions, perhaps starting with the former prime minister.' Clinton, for his part, would sigh sadly and say: 'You know, Boris, I wish I were an Asian leader, because then I would have Monica flogged to the marrow for conspiring to defame me for the benefit of the Communists, the Jews, the Arabs, or the Sanskrits!' To this Yeltsin would respond: 'The conspiracy theory is the greatest achievement of the human mind. It is more important than the theory of relativity and far more dangerous that the theory of gravity. It relieves the conscience and always finds a scapegoat to be sacrificed by the ones really responsible for all major disasters and scandals.'"

TUNISIA: "How Can Clinton Help Yeltsin?"

An editorial by Director Taieb Zahar in independent bilingual weekly magazine Realites held (9/3): "The Clinton-Yeltsin summit should have produced initiatives to help resolve regional issues, such as the economic crisis in Asia and terrorism.... However, the summit on Tuesday between the two men produced few such proposals.... The summit was marked by the crises that Clinton and Yeltsin are living.... What can Clinton do for Yeltsin? The ongoing investigation of his relationship with an intern has weakened his political base.... Unless there is a significant political change, the American president does not have much room to maneuver. The U.S...believes that Yeltsin is the only man who can guarantee the stability of Russia and move the country along the road to economic and democratic reform. However, during the summit this view lost some support.... What can Clinton do? He can continue to

reaffirm his support for Yeltsin? But how valuable is this support to a president is facing a powerful opposition.... Until now, the West relied on the massive injection of millions of dollars into the Russian economy and economic liberalization policies to save Russia. However, those measures are proving insufficient... Hence, Russia has become another problem for Clinton.... This one concerns the future of the second world nuclear power."

SOUTH ASIA

INDIA "Dialogue Of The Deaf"

The right-of-center Indian Express had this editorial (9/3): "The predominant image was of two diminished leaders waiting for time to run out as they went through the formalities of the pow wow... One...topic raised by the American president was Russian military cooperation with India. This is as surreal as the rest of the arms control discussion."

PAKISTAN: "A Summit Devoid Of Substance"

An op-ed column by Dr. Rifaat Hussain in the centrist News opined (9/6): "This last week, when they held their twelfth summit meeting in Moscow, the two presidents neither looked well nor seemed to be feeling great. The world also refused to take them seriously."

"The Moscow Summit"

An editorial in the Karachi-based independent Dawn said (9/4): "Given the ambivalent state of relations between the two countries, one could not have realistically expected any significant understanding on foreign policy issues at this stage.... Much depends on whether Russia has really acquiesced in America's demand to halt all defense cooperation (both nuclear and conventional) with India and stop exports to Iran for its missiles programme.... If Mr. Yeltsin has now agreed to a shift in his policy, it can have profound implications for the region. In this there is a clear signal to the subcontinent, especially New Delhi, that a nuclear weaponization programme is no longer acceptable to Moscow."

LATIN AMERICA

BRAZIL: "The Empire's Arrogance"

Liberal Folha de S. Paulo's editorial (9/3) said: "President Clinton's attitude in Moscow this week was something unthinkable ten years ago: to give the Russians lessons on what they should do in domestic affairs. Since the collapse of communism the U.S. began to act as an imperial power, frequently neglecting to consult with the international community before its unexpected actions.... What is expected from a democratic superpower is less imperial behavior and more moral leadership, which is something the U.S. is failing to provide."

COLOMBIA: "We Expect Overriding Interests To Prevail"

Bogota's liberal El Tiempo had this editorial (9/2): "The bad thing for Clinton and Yeltsin is tat

due to their political weakness it seems like there's not much one can do for the other. But for the good of both communities and of the world, we expect overriding interests to prevail during the summit, resulting in something positive."

NORTHERN IRELAND: WARM WELCOME FOR 'PEACE HELPER' CLINTON

EUROPE

BRITAIN: "Clinton Has Not Lost His Touch"

The liberal Guardian said (9/4): "Bill Clinton, despite a dismal trip to Russia and never-ending trouble at home, has not lost his touch. He sensed that Omagh needed a release, an excuse to smile after weeks of pent-up feeling. Somehow he managed to find that narrow spot between sober and warm, and touch it directly."

"Peace Role Clinton Can Be Proud Of"

The left-wing tabloid Mirror had this lead editorial (9/4): "When the political obituaries of Bill Clinton are written, they will not make pleasant reading. His presidency is collapsing into a mess of sexual scandal and bare-faced attempts to fool the American people. But he will at least have one achievement of which he can be proud. Mr. Clinton has played a real role in helping to bring peace to Northern Ireland.... His problems are not going to go away. But the people of Northern Ireland--and Britain and the Irish Republic-- have a lot to thank him for. On the rocky path to peace, President Clinton's unshakeable support may have been what made the difference."

"Smoke Signals"

The conservative Times' lead editorial held (9/4): "Mr. Clinton handled himself with considerable dignity and struck the right balance. His impeding arrival was doubtless the catalyst for Gerry Adams's statement Tuesday--since reinforced in characteristically forceful terms to his republican opponents--and for the appointment of Martin McGuinness to liaise with the disarmament commission. The president's unambiguous call for full decommissioning and an end to punishment beatings will have been warmly welcomed by Ulster democrats of all stripes."

GERMANY: "Godfathership"

Klaus-Dieter Frankenberger declared in an editorial in right-of-center Frankfurter Allgemeine (9/4): "Clinton can present himself as the godfather of the peace process, whose message of courage and reconciliation were not empty words but are considered a welcome encouragement to continue the path all sides involved have embarked upon."

"Peace Helper Clinton"

Olaf Kanter noted in right-of-center Die Welt of Berlin (9/4): "Several times before, Bill Clinton gave the stalemated peace process in Northern Ireland an important boost. In 1995, for instance, he received Gerry Adams...in the White House thus promoting him from pariah to statesman. This was a courageous decision backed by the belief that peace can be found only in a dialogue among all parties involved in this civil war. And Clinton's strategy proved

successful.... Shortly before Clinton's arrival, Sinn Fein leader Gerry Adams said that the time of violence is 'over and done with.' It is certain that the president helped formulate this phrase. Irish and Northern Irish papers are currently expressing their wish for 'realpolitik.' In order to pursue such realpolitik, men of Clinton's stamp are necessary since they know what is feasible."

"A Terrain For Clinton"

Christoph von Marschall maintained in centrist Der Tagesspiegel of Berlin (9/4): "The peace process in Northern Ireland is, despite periodic setbacks, one of the visible successes of President Clinton's foreign policy. It was U.S. influence that integrated Sinn Fein into the negotiations and forced the political arm of the IRA to renounce violence. It seems that the bomb attack from Omagh did not stop this development but even accelerated the peace process.... In Northern Ireland, Bill Clinton can bathe in a success which he has not yet accomplished in the Middle East, a feeling that has become rare for the U.S. president."

"Worth A Trip"

Centrist Abendzeitung of Munich (9/4) had this to say: "President Clinton seems to do the right things. On his way back from Russia he scored a point, since the arch enemies from the past are about to narrow their views.... U.S. pressure would be useless if both sides did not consider

the U.S. government to be a reliable 'referee' in the peace process. This is a vote of confidence for Clinton and makes his trip a success."

ITALY: "Clinton Welcomed With Two Steps Toward Peace"

Conservative Il Tempo commented (9/4): "Northern Ireland yesterday welcomed Bill Clinton with two steps towards peace. IRA former Catholic rebels have taken action to disarm their extremist faction, called 'the real IRA.' And Unionist leader David Trimble, leader of the local government, for the first time has agreed to meet with Sinn Fein president Gerry Adams. After the failure suffered in Russia, where his visit was not enough to calm the political and economic turmoil, the U.S. president thus had a chance to present himself as the sponsor of reconciliation among the Irish people."

"The Two Have Been Working Together For Peace In Ireland"

Andrea di Robilant filed from Belfast in centrist, influential La Stampa (9/4): "In this day of sun and feast, away from Moscow's greyness and domestic problems, Clinton is trying to enjoy the lights of this Irish 'magic'.... Notwithstanding the applause for the U.S. president, nobody is fooling himself that peace has been achieved and that there will be no more violence.... But Clinton noted that there have been important steps forward over the last few days.... And his visit has helped create the conditions for another major development: the beginning of direct dialogue between Unionist leader David Trimble...and Sinn Fein leader Gerry Adams.... Has the 'Irish magic' had positive effects on the presidential couple as well? It is still too early to say.... A few malicious observers interpret Hillary's more visible role in Ireland as the price she demanded in exchange for pardoning her husband. But we should not forget that peace in Ireland is a goal for which the two have been working together, year after year. And Hillary, who received a possibly warmer reception than her husband here in Ireland, really looked like a different woman with respect to the last few days. Perhaps this is not reconciliation yet, but, at least in public, the first lady has found her smile again."

"Clinton Received Like A Hero"

Monica Ricci Sargentini wrote from Belfast in PDS (leading government party) L'Unita (9/4): "Northern Ireland received Clinton like a hero.... The ovation he received at Waterfront Hall

was liberating. Never before has it been so clear that peace in Northern Ireland is, at this point, a reality. People really believe it for the first time.... And Clinton is enjoying this moment."

BELGIUM: "Bill Clinton Really Made A Contribution"

Philippe Le Corre stressed in independent Le Soir (9/4): "This was the U.S. president's second

official visit to Belfast in two years. Attached to Ulster--for sentimental as well as electoral reasons--Bill Clinton really made a contribution to the peace process by supporting Tony Blair even in the most difficult moments.... The presence of a strong Irish community in the United States is not alien to the Democratic president's interest for that small country. Some 45 million Americans reportedly claim 'Irish origins.'... Yesterday afternoon, Bill Clinton went to Armagh

and Omagh to pay homage to the latest victims of the terrorism which has plagued Ulster for thirty years. This is a gesture which the Irish population will not forget. For three years already, in Belfast as well as in Londonderry, the population-- particularly the Catholic minority--only have praise for a president so favorable to the cause of peace."

CANADA: "Parcel Bomb"

Liberal, French-language Le Devoir wrote (9/5): "His (President Clinton's) laborious trip to Moscow followed by his visits to the two Irelands have above all demonstrated that his credibility has been mortally hurt by the Lewinsky affair.... Those who are hounding him for a

complete confession overlook the fact that he has largely contributed to convince Gerry Adams to soften his positions. The order of priority is completely disoriented when a half-admitted presidential lie has more information value than the atrocities governments of good will are trying to stop."

DENMARK: "Northern Ireland--A Light In The Dark"

Right-of-center Berlingske Tidende's editorial concluded (9/4): "Yesterday Bill Clinton received the homage he deserved as an American president who has played a positive role in the peace process. At several critical moments he has actively intervened--with speeches, phone calls and diplomatic lobbying. It is, therefore, most appropriate that Clinton today can take a break from his troubles at home and enjoy Northern Ireland's tribute to him. It is also a recognition of Clinton's efforts that Catholic Sinn Fein in the days preceding his visit took a number of initiatives which definitely prove that the peace process did not merely survive, but was actually strengthened by the car bomb which killed 28 people in the town of Omagh last month.... The developments in Northern Ireland have really become a light in the dark among this year's events occurring on the stage of international politics."

SPAIN: "Clinton's Role Has Been Decisive"'

Liberal El Pais opined (9/4): "Clinton's warm reception in Northern Ireland was merited because his participation [in the peace process], albeit discreet, has been decisive, as British Prime Minister Tony Blair acknowledged.... Clinton, the first sitting American president to visit Ulster, has thus burnished his image somewhat at a time when he is being hounded juridically and politically at home. His role has been decisive because of the importance of the United States and its ties with both the British and Irish."

PAKISTAN: "Timely Renewal"

An editorial in the Karachi-based independent Dawn held (9/5): "President Bill Clinton's visit to Northern Ireland and the Irish Republic could not have been more timely. Coming just over a fortnight after the horrendous Omagh bombing, the American leader's presence in the strife-torn province, attempting to rebuild the partly fractured structure of peace, should have a profoundly important healing effect."

AFRICA

KENYA: "Twice-Snubbed Kenya Could Do With A Visit"

An editorial in conservative East African Standard maintained (9/4): "It was Kenyans who bore

the brunt of the terrorist attack. To date all this country has received are mere pledges and 'sympathies.' U.S. Secretary of State Madeleine Albright was the highest-ranking American to visit the scene of the bomb and those injured.... Why did the American see sense in visiting Northern Ireland, instead of flying to Africa where Kenyans died because of a quarrel between America and its enemies? Kenya may not have a special place in Clinton's heart (recall he snubbed Nairobi in his African trip). However, it's time the focus changed because one cannot talk about Africa without Kenya."

For more information, please contact:

U.S. Information Agency

Office of Public Liaison

Telephone: (202) 619-4355

9/8/98

# # #