Originally posted by the Voice of America.
Voice of America content is produced by the Voice of America,
a United States federal government-sponsored entity, and is in
the public domain.


Three Questions: Russia, NATO and Afghanistan

   Ira Mellman | Washington 18 November 2010

Photo: ASSOCIATED PRESS

   A  man  walks by a logo printed on a wall inside the NATO summit venue
   in Lisbon, Portugal on Thursday, Nov. 18, 2010. Heads of State of NATO
   member  countries gather for a two day summit beginning on Friday, and
   will  discuss  such  topics  as  Afghanistan  and missile defense. (AP
   Photo/Virginia Mayo)

   Kurt  Volker,  former  US  Ambassador  to  NATO  and  now the Managing
   Director  and  Senior Fellow of the Center for Transatlantic Relations
   for  the  Johns  Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies says
   there  has  been a change in Russia's attitude toward a number of NATO
   related  issues, including a willingness to help NATO and US forces in
   their  battle  against  the  Taliban  in Afghanistan. In fact, Russian
   President  Dmitry  Mevedev  is  scheduled  to speak to the NATO summit
   meeting in Lisbon.

   Volker  said  it  was  in  Russia's interest. He said Russia was quite
   happy  to  see  NATO  and  the  US  taking on a problem that exists on
   Russia's   southern   flank.  That  includes  violent  extremism,  the
   possibility  of  terrorist  groups.  So, says Volker, it's in Russia's
   interest to support the logistics flow to Afghanistan.

   One cannot think that the Afghanis are overjoyed about this.

   I  think  what  the  Afghanis would be very concerned about would be a
   visible  Russian presence on the ground in Afghanistan. They have very
   clear  memories  of  the  role  Soviet  troops played in their country
   twenty some years ago. That said, what weāre talking about here mostly
   is transits for Afghanistan, Russia allowing NATO to provide both rail
   cars  and  over flights to get to Afghanistan. That sort of logistical
   supply  is really a good thing. Itās kind of transparent to the Afghan
   people,  but  it  adds stability to the operation especially given the
   attacks on the supply lines in Pakistan.

   Could this not been seen, however, with a withdrawal date being set up
   for NATO and US troops, as an opening for the Russians to return?

   I  donāt think so. In fact, the withdrawal date people are now talking
   about,  and I shouldnāt say itās a withdrawal date, itās really a date
   for  the  transition  to  lead  Afghan responsibility. That transition
   begins  in July of 2011, maybe even slightly before, but itās going to
   take  a  very  long  time  with a robust international presence there.
   President  Karzai  has  set out the date of 2014 when heād like to see
   Afghanistan  fully  in  the  lead. And NATO and the United States have
   fully supported his efforts to set that deadline. So that is, I think,
   President  Karzaiās  date.  Secondly,  a  longer  term and more robust
   commitment from the international community canāt really be read as an
   opening or handoff back to Russia.

   President  Karzai  is also scheduled to attend this meeting in Lisbon.
   How important is the topic of the drawdown at this NATO meeting?

   I  think  itās  important  because  the  expectations were set back in
   December  of  last year with President Obamaās speech that withdrawals
   begin  in  July  2011.  If  that is not in fact what we expect to see,
   thereās  not  going to be a āhead for the doorsā, thereās not going to
   be  a  mass  exodus,  but  rather a longer term commitment, one thatās
   aimed  at a transition over a longer period of time, 2014 out there is
   the new date, itās important to reset those expectations.

.