Deauville Summit Echo: Reaction of American and European media

Tatiana Tallerova (Russia)

While European heavyweights consider the cooperation with Russia to be necessary and mutually beneficial, certain political circles of the USA and their Eastern-European friends still stick to the policy of informational pressure and opposition to the closer between two high rollers on the European arena. And the main reason for that is still a fear to lose American influence.

International mass-media attention is thrust to the Deauville summit, where Dmitry Medvedev, Angela Merkel and Nicolas Sarkozy had a meeting. State leaders aimed to push the European “Reset” button. As always, estimates of summit meaning varied a lot.

Shortly before its start “The New York Times” cited certain American diplomat in the article named “Sarkozy to propose new bond with Russia“: “I wonder, since when have the matters of European security became something of no interest to America and something to be exclusively between Europe and Russia?… It is strange to hear that we should care about it no more — and that’s after being involved into the very heart of European security policy for 70 years”.

There are evident elements of bargaining in another article of that newspaper “Russia wants to put relationship with the EU into definite shape” (“Russia is to give something for becoming a part of the EU institutes”). Transdniestria is possible to become a payment: “… Merkel told Medvedev this June that Germany is seeking for Russian cooperation in a solution Transdniestrian conflict, which is a root of instability at the southeast European borders”. In another article — “At Deauville Europe embraces Russia” author more reservedly mentioned: “if Europe is willing to save its importance on the world arena and peace on its periphery, it needs Russia”. It is also mentioned that Merkel assured the USA that “no new ‘security architecture’ would be an obstacle to American-European cooperation within the scope of the NATO framework”. “U. S. officials, however, expressed their dissatisfaction with the fact that France and Germany have been negotiating with Russia over security issues in absentia of the USA right before the NATO meeting”.

The Christian Science Monitor thinks that “Facing a rising China Russia looks to boost European ties“. Project Syndicate is full of skepticism: “beware of smiling bears” and calls: “no agreement can be signed, until there apprehends in Russian consent to follow norms of international behavior remain”. Bloomberg openly eggs Italy on (the article “Berlusconi, snubbed in Europe, finds friends in Minsk, Tripoli“): “Today the President of France Nicolas Sarkozy will play host to his colleagues from Russia and Germany and negotiate over European security. The second most important Moscow partner from Europe in the sphere of energy wouldn’t be there. It is Silvio Berlusconi and he wasn’t invited to the summit”.

Commenting the meeting, The Financial Times wrote in the article “Paris and Berlin seek “reset” relations with Moscow”: “No decisions should be made during these negotiations. Certain German partners from the EU and NATO treat this meeting with suspicion. It is Italy, which is discontented because no one invited her. And there are some Eastern-European countries, afraid of France’ and Germany’s intention to establish relationship with Russia without taking their anxiety for national security into consideration”.

In the article “The spectre of multipolar Europe” Open Democracy sees pros of this summit: “Angela Merkel and Nicolas Sarkozy are mending the diplomatic ties with Russia, thinking that European security is not an exclusive problem of NATO or EU alone. And they are quite right”.

Sueddeutsche Zeitung is agreeing with the previous opinion. Its article “Als Schrittmacher nach Osten[Peacemaker of Eastern policy] says: “Sarkozy and Merkel will try to strive for Moscow to approach the EU along with the USA. Their aim is to tie Russia with the West once and for all. Fragile peace must be replaced with a lasting friendship “. Frankfurter Rundschau is full of hope, too: “Sarkozy and Merkel are to convince Medvedev of the fact that predesigned AMD-system isn’t aimed against Russia. But it is rather to prevent possible threat from nuclear Iran. Summit’ participants will regard other questions as well” claims “Alle unter einem Schirm[Everyone under the same shield] article.

Der Spiegel writes about neighbors’ apprehensions and the U. S. discontent in its editorial article “Sarkozy dreams of a European Security Council“: “Trilateral summit at the French sea resort Deauville — the first one for four years — arouses concerns of other European countries, which feel being pressed aside. In Washington this event calls up reminiscences of alliance between leaders of Germany (Gerhard Schröder), Russia (Vladimir Putin) and France (Jacques Chirac), which were opposed the war in Iraq in 2003… European Security Council would have devalued the NATO-Russia Council, where America previals”.

Sommet Deauville Russie Fait Gestes Envers Otan” [Deauville summit goals are very extensive and blurred] — Radio France Internationale commented this meeting. “Paris reckons on the changes, which took place in Russian foreign policy recently”. Sarkozy and Merkel aim is “Amarrer la Russie à l’Europe” [To tie Russia to Europe], claims Le Figaro. Le Monde reported that “Un sommet France Russie Allemagne pour parler de la securite en Europe” [Summit of France-Russia-Germany would discuss the European security issues] and reassured discontented countries: “Champs-Élysées Palace reassures non-invitees, promising them that no decisions regarding the European continent security would be adopted during it. Aims, which Paris thinks about, are large-scale and yet ambiguous at the same time”. “President-reformer Dmitry Medvedev changed Kremlin style so drastically that the world has almost forgotten about tough Putin-style politics. Being in need of foreign partners and investments, Moscow turned to Berlin and Paris” — Ouest-France reports in its article “Les vises europeennes de Moscou” [European aspirations of Moscow]. In yet another article “Sarkozy and Merkel invites Medvedev to Europe” of this newspaper the authors state that “it is impossible to exist forever just on gas and nuclear missiles. Moscow needs foreign investments and industrial partnership. That’s why it applies for Berlin in the first place and for Paris in the second one. Past enemy is becoming a partner. But can it become an ally? Paris, Berlin and Moscow make up a pretty figure at the world map”.

Permanent chairman of the NATO in Poland Jerzy Nowak gave an outright downcast interview to a Rzeczpospolita newspaper: “UE i NATO brakuje wspólnej polityki wobec Moskwy” [EU and NATO have no defined policy towards Moscow], saying that “it’s a signal that Russia isn’t considered as a possible threat…which is painful for us”.

While European heavyweights consider the cooperation with Russia to be necessary and mutually beneficial, certain political circles of the USA and their Eastern-European friends still stick to the policy of informational pressure and opposition to the closer between two high rollers on the European arena. And the main reason for that is still a fear to lose American influence.

Source: Win.ru

4 Comments

  1. Pingback: Franţa, Germania şi Rusia – în încercuirea a două anaconde. Va deveni România a treia? « Octavian Racu

  2. Pingback: Noua ordine continentală în Eurasia? « Octavian Racu

  3. Pingback: Noua Ordine Continentală în Eurasia? | AntiMedia - Reţea Independentă de Jurnalism Civic

  4. Pingback: Anonymous

Leave a Reply