MOSCOW. (Nikita Petrov for RIA Novosti)
On October 21, Admiral Michael Mullen, the chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff, met with his Russian counterpart, Army General Nikolai Makarov, at a mansion outside Helsinki, Finland.
Military analysts continue to discuss the meeting because they have not yet clarified numerous issues considered by the two military leaders.
They would like to know why the talks were held on the initiative of General Makarov, why Admiral Mullen went to Helsinki, rather than Riga, from Belgrade, and why both men chose to negotiate just outside the capital of a neutral state rather than in more convenient Vilnius or St. Petersburg. Analysts would also like to have an idea regarding the agenda.
After landing at the Chkalov military airfield near Moscow, General Makarov told reporters that he and Admiral Mullen had discussed the Caucasian situation and that of South Ossetia. The sides agreed to resume cooperation under the Russia-NATO Council's auspices, discussed some traditional issues, including counter-terrorism operations, efforts to fight drug trafficking, African and other pirates, as well as the non-proliferation of weapons of mass destruction.
"We have agreed on the need for subsequent efforts and moves in order to solve these important and serious problems," General Makarov said.
He said they came to understand the causes of cooler Russian-U.S. relations. "The issues that we discussed require serious assessment so as to choose the appropriate decisions for adoption and implementation in the future," he said.
General Makarov said he had informed Admiral Mullen about the structure of the Russian military bases in Abkhazia and South Ossetia and their projected operations.
"The two bases will have 3,700 officers and men and will start operating next year. Although the sites have already been established, it will take at least 12 months to create the required infrastructure, to allow them to complete their objectives," General Makarov told journalists.
However, the issue of the Russian bases in Abkhazia and South Ossetia was not the main focus of the bilateral talks. RIA Novosti sources said both military chiefs had reviewed the August 2008 Russian-Georgian military conflict, Tbilisi's unprovoked attack on Tskhinvali, the killing of Russian peacekeepers and South Ossetian civilians, the subsequent Russian peace-enforcement operation, the assistance to Georgian units by U.S. military instructors, and the capture of U.S.-made combat-support systems delivered to Tbilisi and seized by Russian forces.
For example, Russian paratroopers seized four Humvees near Georgia's Poti seaport. Washington considers this act unlawful because these are U.S. Army vehicles with federal license plates. They allegedly had nothing to do with the Georgian aggression against Abkhazia or South Ossetia and were driving to Poti for subsequent shipment back to the U.S. after a Georgian-U.S. exercise.
This is why the U.S. side is demanding that the Humvees be returned without delay. U.S. Ambassador to Russia John Beyrle also said this in a recent media interview.
But Moscow thinks otherwise. Deputy Chief of General Staff Colonel General Anatoly Nogovitsyn told a RIA Novosti news conference that Georgian rather than U.S. soldiers were driving the Humvees, which had data-exchange, reconnaissance, navigation, telecommunications and other military systems in the vehicles.
The Russian military are convinced that these systems were used to support Georgian combat operations. Consequently, the four Humvees are a non-returnable military trophy under international law.
Russian experts are now meticulously analyzing Humvee equipment. The vehicles could be returned to the United States if it turns out that they were not involved in Georgian combat operations.
The situation is reminiscent of a 1976 incident when Viktor Belenko, a Soviet MiG-25 pilot, defected to Japan. U.S. experts also dismantled the sophisticated warplane, analyzed its layout and components, and eventually shipped it back to the U.S.S.R.
However, the Makarov-Mullen talks had more far-reaching implications. Both men discussed the possibility of mutual consultation on elements of the U.S. National Missile Defense (NMD) system in Europe.
Washington proposes holding another round of two-on-two talks involving the Russian foreign minister, the U.S. secretary of state, the Russian defense minister and the U.S. secretary of defense.
Similar talks were conducted in the spring of 2008 and last fall, and were aimed at removing Moscow's concerns about NMD elements, due to be deployed in Poland and the Czech Republic.
However, neither the Kremlin nor the General Staff see the point in NMD talks prior to U.S. presidential elections. It would be appropriate to discuss specific concerns and joint cooperation prospects after a new White House administration, including a new president, secretary of state, and secretary of defense, take over. Moscow considers such talks untimely at this stage.
Both army chiefs probably discussed the forthcoming Russian-Venezuelan naval exercise in the Caribbean Sea. The Russian General Staff says the exercise, as well as Russian strategic-bomber flights to South America over the Atlantic Ocean, are not directed against the United States.
Quite possibly, a joint exercise involving elements of the U.S. Seventh Fleet and the Japanese Maritime Self-Defense Force near Russia's Far East is not directed against Russia.
Although General Makarov and Admiral Mullen discussed many issues, final decisions will be made by their respective heads of state, for example, on resuming cooperation under the auspices of the Russia-NATO Council.
All the concerned parties, including Moscow and Washington, should have common interests. This concerns the European missile-defense system and the Caucasus.
It does not matter that the unscheduled Helsinki meeting was kept under wraps and took place in a neutral country. Nor does it matter who initiated the meeting. Most important, both countries continue to negotiate despite their diametrically opposite assessments of global developments.
The opinions expressed in this article are the author's and do not necessarily represent those of RIA Novosti.
