SNAP ANALYSIS: Putin conciliatory but short on specifics

DAVOS, Switzerland | Wed Jan 28, 2009 3:57pm EST

DAVOS, Switzerland (Reuters) - Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin struck a conciliatory tone in a keynote speech at the World Economic Forum in Davos but made few specific proposals:

** Putin's comments decrying militarization and higher defense spending sit at odds with Russia's recent big military build-up and government pledges to continue it. Last September, Putin promised a 27 percent rise in defense spending in 2009.

** Putin's positive tone toward the new Obama administration is consistent with a recent softening of Moscow's diplomatic line. This has been prompted by suggestions that Obama may shelve U.S. plans for a missile defense shield in Europe and is less enthusiastic about NATO membership for Georgia and Ukraine than his predecessor, George W. Bush.

** It could be an error to read this as a major shift of policy in Moscow toward a more pro-Western stance. Hawks in Russia, already flush from their victory in the war against Georgia last year, may see the Obama administration's gestures as a sign of weakness and an opportunity for Moscow to push its nationalist foreign policy agenda more aggressively.

** Putin's remarks on the global financial crisis repeat Russia's ideas that a range of reserve currencies and fundamental reform of world economic institutions are needed. But he offered no specifics on how this might be done, beyond saying that changes should be based on fundamental asset values.

** Putin said Russia welcomed foreign investment but again offered no specific measures in support. A pattern of perceived state interference in companies closely followed by foreign investors, such as TNK-BP, Mechel and Uralkali means that overseas funds will want to see more than words before buying Russian assets again.

** The tone and style of the remarks were very different to Putin's trademark set pieces, suggesting that the speech may have been written for him. It remains to be seen whether it presages a significant shift in policy in Moscow or is merely a rhetorical gesture toward the West.

(Editing by Richard Williams)

Comments (0)
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.