"I find hope in the work of long-established groups such as the Arms Control Association...[and] I find hope in younger anti-nuclear activists and the movement around the world to formally ban the bomb."
Russia, West Clash over Troop Pullouts
Wade Boese
Moscow recently warned Western governments that their continuing insistence that Russia fulfill past political commitments to pull its military forces out of Georgia and Moldova is jeopardizing a treaty capping conventional weapons deployments in Europe. However, U.S. and most European governments say that Russia’s failure to fulfill its past withdrawal pledges is the real problem.
In 1990, NATO and its Soviet-led counterpart, the Warsaw Pact, concluded the Conventional Armed Forces in Europe (CFE) Treaty to limit the number and location of heavy weapons, such as battle tanks, deployed between the Atlantic Ocean and the Ural Mountains. The 30 states-parties overhauled the accord in 1999 so each country would have individual weapons ceilings. (See ACT, November 1999.) Yet, the 1990 accord is still in effect because only Belarus, Kazakhstan, Russia, and Ukraine have ratified the adapted version, which will not enter into force until all the original agreement’s states-parties ratify it.
Speaking Dec. 5 at an annual ministerial meeting of the 55-member Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said, “If steps are not taken to ratify [the adapted CFE Treaty] in the very near future, we will be in danger of losing the whole regime of control over conventional arms in Europe.” He added, “I don’t think any of us are interested in having that situation arise.”
NATO members are tying their approval of the revised accord to Moscow ending its lingering Cold War-era military presence in Georgia and Moldova. Lavrov Dec. 7 dismissed NATO’s reasons for not ratifying as “far-fetched pretexts.”
The adapted CFE Treaty was agreed at a 1999 summit in Istanbul, at which the Kremlin also pledged that in 2000 it would conclude a timetable for closing its remaining military bases in Georgia. Moscow further committed that, by the end of 2002, it would completely withdraw its armed forces from Moldova.
Russia and Georgia finally reached a preliminary deal last May for the full departure of Russian forces by the end of 2008 (see ACT, July/August 2005), but it has yet to be finalized. Much less progress has been made with Moldova, where approximately 1,400 Russian troops remain and an ammunition dump totaling nearly 21,000 metric tons awaits disposal. The last shipment of Russian weaponry out of Moldova occurred in March 2004.
Although applauding Russia for its agreement with Georgia, U.S. Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs Nicholas Burns said Dec. 5 that Moscow must do more. “Fulfillment [of the Istanbul commitments on troop withdrawals] continues to be a prerequisite for the ratification of the adapted CFE Treaty,” Burns stated. Explaining the U.S. and NATO position to reporters the next day, Burns said, “We must defend principle and frankly defend the interests of Georgia and Moldova.”
Slovenian Foreign Minister Dimitrij Rupel, the rotating head of the OSCE for 2005, also criticized Russia. Rupel declared Dec. 5, “There is no excuse for systematic failure to live up to the responsibilities to which we’ve committed ourselves.” He continued, “For example, it is unfortunate that after six years we are still debating the 1999 Istanbul commitments on withdrawal of Russian forces from Moldova.”
Moscow claims that its forces are helping keep peace between the Moldovan government in Chisinau and the separatist region of Transdniestria, where the Russian forces are stationed. The Kremlin also has said that the pro-Russian separatists are blocking the withdrawal. However, the general opinion among U.S. and European officials familiar with the matter is that Russia easily could resume the withdrawal at any time.
Largely because of disputes over Moldova, OSCE members failed to reach consensus on a final document to summarize their meeting. Instead, Rupel issued a Dec. 6 statement that “most ministers” support the Istanbul commitments, welcome the Russian-Georgian agreement, and “note also the lack of movement in 2005 on withdrawal of Russian forces from Moldova.”
NATO and Russia are likely to continue sparring over Russia’s withdrawal efforts during the next several months. Georgia, Germany, and Russia are expected to resume talks this spring on arrangements for an international team to verify whether Russia, as it asserts and Georgia disputes, has vacated the Gudauta base located in Georgia. Russia claims the remaining troops at the base are serving as peacekeepers. In addition, CFE Treaty states-parties will convene a treaty review conference in May.