Analysis: Moscow's mood shift

Lord Robertson hailed a new era of co-operation with Russia

By Europe correspondent James Rodgers

In the aftermath of the terrorist attacks on the United States, Russia has been reconsidering its place in the world.

The Cold War was supposed to have ended in 1991. Looking at Russian responses to Nato's eastward expansion, that alliance's campaign in Kosovo, and US plans for a new missile defence system, you could have been forgiven for thinking it had started again.

But in the weeks since 11 September, there has been a definite shift in Moscow's mood. Confirmation came with President Vladimir Putin's visit to Brussels.

There, he said that Moscow's view on Nato enlargement - so far it has been an implacable opponent - could change.

'New era'

"One can take another, an entirely new look at this if Nato takes on a different shade and is becoming a political organisation," he said.

Nato Secretary-General, Lord Robertson, said Russia could not have a veto over which countries become members of the organisation.

Russia has received a chance to become part of the civilised world

Alexander Goltz

But he did hail "a new era of substantial and practical co-operation".

The main sticking point will be the Baltic states. Moscow was outraged when its former satellites in the Warsaw Pact - Poland, Hungary, and the Czech republic - joined Nato. Cold War era generals would find the entry of former Soviet republics even harder to stomach.

There is no doubt, however, that many in Russia believe this is a moment of historic opportunity.

"Russia has received a chance to become part of the civilised world," said Alexander Goltz, a Moscow-based military analyst.

"Now we are at a very crucial turning point. There are forces who want to limit our support for this operation, and other people want Russia to be a part of the future world."

That is the difficulty which President Putin faces as he enters this "new era."

Alexander Goltz says that most of Russia's military establishment still thinks in Cold War terms.

Underlying differences

They will be hard to persuade of the benefits of greater co-operation with Nato.

Nor is it such a long time since March 1999, when opinion polls suggested that some 90% of the Russian public were against Nato's campaign in Kosovo. Then, the alliance was an object of hatred across the political spectrum.

The Russians blame "terrorists" for the conflict in Chechnya

These underlying differences may not be so apparent as former foes struggle to present a united front in the war against global terrorism.

But if this "new era" proves to be a false dawn, they can be expected to resurface. So too can the West's concerns over the Kremlin's military campaign in Chechnya.

Since that campaign began two years ago, there have been persistent reports of human rights abuses by Russian forces. Russia insists its operation there is aimed solely at those it has described as "bandits and terrorists".

The Kremlin has suggested that Islamic extremist fighters from outside Russia have joined the rebel side.

But claims by Chechens of torture and summary execution have prompted international criticism.

The United States and its allies need Russia on their side if they are to prosecute their "war on terrorism" successfully.

That may mean that differences are put aside - perhaps even eventually resolved.