NATO's new head is obviously trying to rebuild relationship bridges with Russia that were destroyed by his predecessor(s). Given NATO are looking for more help in Afghanistan, this is probably a good time for Russia to ask for things from Western governments.

Russian autorities and military leaders should make sure that no afghan drugs reach Russia but should not in any way help american and NATO 's troubles-makers in military operations or anything related to US imperialism. I suppose that no russian would like to insult the thousands young soviet soldiers, killed on US orders, with US weapons. By refusing to join the afghan and irakian tragedies, you will save young americans, frenchs and even russians and thousands innocent other lifes. The USA-NATO agression needs to suck Russia in that mess. If this insane idea fails, the invaders will have to leave Irak and Afghanistan; their own populations, plus the invadeds's, will require it. Naturally to well understand the whole scenario, we must not forget that huge iraki oil and gas reserves have been attributed to large multi-nationals companies of that industry. It is just the transactions' beginning (russian and chinese are involved in those deals). What a deceitful and cynic World, we live in !!! Sorry Future Generations. Sincerely. Jean-Claude Meslin

To Meslin, I agree with you that Russia should stay out of the Afghanistan mess - and I am sure they will, but reading between the lines in these new US-Russia relations there is a bigger issue here, and that issue is Iran. The US need Russia to at least stay out of, if not assist with, the coming war with Iran (an esculating economic war if not yet military). The US has been conceding a lot to Russia recently, including the 'surprise' oil contracts in Iraq. Russia has always looked after its own interests (and I don't blame them for that), but whatever sweet offerings the US give to Russia in the short term it will not be in their long term interests to see the US military in Iran and staring at them accross the Caspian.

The North Atlantic Terrorist Organization should just leave Afghanistan. Although I am not particularly fond of the Taliban government Afghanistan, IT WAS A LEGITIMATE government. They succeed in keeping the country together, but all NATO did was destroy their self-sustained peace, completely destabilized the region and brought billions of dollars worth of heroine into Russia, China and Europe. The North Atlantic Terrorist Organization failed. I can't believe the world even holds conversations with these NATO terrorists.

I don't believe Russia can rely on NATO to be a trustworthy partner in any activity that might be contrary to American interests. NATO is controlled by America who views Russia as a competitor on the world scene. Once NATO is able to extricate itself from Afghanistan, it will invite Ukraine and Georgia to become members of the organization. Such action will only antagonize Russia and the relations will be strained again. United States-NATO military in Afghanistan is like a bull elephant that has stumbled into an anthill. The bull elephant will kills thousands of ants, but if he doesn't get out in time, he will be eaten to the bone. NATO needs Russia only temporarily.

The help, depending on what it is, is a double edged sword. Without being privy to the ultimate goal of NATO alliance in the Afghanistan, and the region as a whole, Russia is in no position to offer much help. Even the mere assumption that Russia is helping NATO has all the negative connotation for Russia that you can imagine. Even if we forget how unpopular this war is in US and Europe, let us only take into account the implications to the region. From Turkey to China, and everything in between, the entire swath of Central Asia, is vehemently against the collaboration with NATO to stay endlessly in Afghanistan. For Russia, that means getting very unpopular in the region, as it may be perceived as nothing more then a weak ally being seduced or forced into cooperation. Russia needs to get some commitments by NATO on the security infrastructure in Europe. Without it, the goodwill Russia is willing to dispense with, may be wasted. NATO needs to clearly outline its exit strategy, and the willingness to include the region in the talks on the future of Afghanistan. If clear commitment of withdrawal, as well as a commitment to all the regional organizations not given, then proceeding with the help will only get Russia deeper into negatives. That would be throwing good money after the bad. In the meantime, Russia needs to provide any type of assistance to the Afghan neighbors in Central Asia. These are the countries that are experiencing the brunt of drug trafficking, as well as the infiltration of unsavory insurgents cum criminals cum opportunists of every kind. These kinds of festering wounds create scum of all types, as only scum can successfully operate in a lawless outposts of NATO empire. The bottom line, Empire needs to be engaged, but not cuddled as soon as some soothsayers show a glimmer of good will. Such phenomena is often short-lived, and without real value. I am sure SCO has considered these and other factors.

Should China not also have a major say in the developments happening in Afghanistan as it would likely effect them the most..

Bianca, There is nothing in Afghanistan worthy of NATO resources except for the terrorists and to a lesser extent (although to a great extent for Russia) the opium. So it isn't so much that NATO wants things from Afghanistan as it is things that it wants to get rid of certain things in Afghanistan. NATO's commitment to Afghanistan is very expensive (w/ Obama's surge the US alone will spend $160+ billion per annum on the war), and so the limited interests it has in the area would not adequately compensate for a perpetual stay. NATO will inevitably leave the country, either being successful or beaten. However, the problem with time tables is that the war is unpredictable and NATO hasn't yet gotten to the point where it has decided it will leave soon if things don't get better. Time tables can be made, and indeed Obama proposed one, but we can't have confidence in these time tables yet because the war isn't being won and NATO hasn't yet decided on a threshold point beyond which it will forfeit the war. Nevertheless, make no mistake, NATO doesn't plan to stay forever.

In regards to Russia's assistance, thus far it has been small. The bases are nice. The use of Russian transit ways (which save NATO hundreds of millions of dollars) are nice. The small contributions of supplies are nice. But in relation to what is by NATO probably a $200+ billion per annum commitment, in lieu of the fact that alternative bases exist, Russia's contribution has been small. Russia's main interests in the conflict are that it wants to curtail the exportation of opium into Central Asia and Russia and that it wants to prevent the instability and violence in Afghanistan from spreading north to Russia's Central Asian allies. At present, NATO is primarily interested in strengthening Afghanistan's government and defeating the insurgency. To this end, NATO believes bombing the poppy crops would be harmful because it would be unpopular with the country's farmers. Even if NATO salvages the situation to the extent possible, there is no guarantee this would entail Afghan farmers giving up poppy crops.