Top-level political geography lesson

Vasily ARKANOV, journalist, translator (New York)

The other day it was announced that they would meet again. Bush and Putin. In America, in Maine. Press Secretary Tony Snow was peppered with questions at a White House briefing. As if there was talk, at the very least, of an invasion of Iran. Or about a nuclear strike on North Korea. “Why all of a sudden Maine?” "Why not?" — Snow answered playfully and did his best to pretend that he sincerely did not understand why everyone was so excited.

Indeed. What time does a person come to America? Don't torment him again with Washington protocols and the Texas heat. Moreover, the Bush family estate on the Atlantic coast is idle. In the land of lobsters, mosquitoes and aging hippies. In places favored by the writing American intelligentsia, who treat their president with undisguised contempt. Over the years, she might have forgiven him for dyslexia, antics, Cheney, even Iraq, but she will never forgive her native pastures trampled (which is inevitable!) by hordes of journalists in a God-forsaken land, always far from politics.

But the writing intelligentsia is not so bad.

What to do with political commentators who see in every gesture, look, word, yawn either a hint or a whole programmatic statement. You can't convince them that Maine was not chosen for the meeting as a geographical metaphor and that its "northernness" should not be taken as an indication of the emerging coolness in relations.

Although the articles went like old times. Moscow compares America to the Weimar Republic, and here they talk about the revival in Russia of the spirit of unscrupulous Soviet cynicism.

With all the Internet transparency, our countries are increasingly beginning to live inside their own hermetic shells. Even the news on TV became different again.

In Russia - about the strengthening of the ruble and the “Estonian conflict” (which could easily be mistaken for the outbreak of the Third World War if, apart from the RTR-Planeta channel, there were no other news sources). In America - not a word about Estonia, but in every detail about the march of dissent and the contract killings of journalists.

In Russia - about the political background of Scotland Yard's demands for Lugovoi's extradition and its own internal investigation (according to which Lugovoi should have been the victim of poisoning). In America, it’s about Russia’s reluctance to comply with international norms and extradition conventions. Finally, both here and there - about the upcoming deployment of a missile defense system in Europe (with the only difference that in Russia the emphasis is on the threat to state interests and, as our answer to Chamberlain, they are testing a new ballistic missile, and in America they are proposing to make this shield common ).

No, no one denies that cooling is evident. But why draw far-reaching conclusions because of some geography? In addition to their official roles, the presidents have warm personal relationships. In the end, they will both monitor the deployment or non-deployment of the missile defense system in Europe as private individuals. And as a private citizen, Bush has every right, without answering to anyone, to receive Vladimir Putin at his original private residence.

Warm welcome in a cold state