Opinion Bedfellows, strange and otherwise

One American frailty that I'm prone to rail against -- probably because I share the guilt -- is our collective obliviousness to other nations and cultures.

Further, you'll have to agree with me when I say that Central Oregon is hardly a crossroads of cultural diversity and understanding.

In pleasant contradiction to that premise, however, is the High Desert Forum.

Created to "increase the level of public debate and discussion regarding concerns of our day," the forum brings public policy issues to Central Oregon.

Last week the Forum did so by hosting the distinguished former Soviet Ambassador, Yuri Pavlov.

They say that politics makes strange bedfellows, and certainly none are stranger than those found in international bedrooms.

Russo-American relations are known for the enmity that marked the last half of the 20th century. One of the more interesting developments in our post-September 11 world, is a dramatic improvement in how Russia and the United States view each other.

Pavlov suggests that this once-inconceivable turn of events is not as surprising as it might seem.

In tracing more than two centuries of common history, Pavlov found examples of positive Russo-American relationships in the American Revolution, the U.S. Civil War, the sale of Alaska and World War Two.

Even when at odds, the two countries served a useful role for each other.

The Cold War, for example, prompted the Soviet Union to draw down the "Iron Curtain" to hide the success and wealth of a competing ideology. On the other side of the Curtain, the hysteria generated by the specter of a belligerent "Evil Empire" helped fuel a post-war U.S. economic expansion that is unprecedented in the history of the world.

It is an everlasting credit to the people of Russia that, when it became clear that their system could not succeed, they ended it themselves. Still, according to Pavlov, the failure of the Soviet system was a "personal tragedy" for many who held a deep faith in the communist ideology.

Not surprisingly, that failure was due less to the ideology than to how it was practiced.

The images of equality, equanimity and economic homogeneity were found only in the Soviet ideology, not in actual practice.

Pavlov pointed out that many principles of communism, such as equality, sharing, and helping one another, have much in common with Christian principles.

It's an observation that I made many years ago; and it's also worthy of note that people occasionally find Christian principles difficult to adhere to, as well.

I asked him why the Soviet regime steadfastly opposed religion, when one could easily have reinforced the other.

It's such a logical marriage, I opined.

"They didn't want the competition," he laughed. "They didn't want people thanking God for their blessings; they wanted them to thank the Party."

Perhaps due to that oversight, in the end, there was nothing to thank anyone for.

All this, of course, is history. What about the future?

Russia desperately needs the benefit of U.S. economic experience. Yet, until a few months ago, Russia was regarded by the United States as a has-been power, hardly worthy of serious attention.

Compounding Russia's problems, radical Islamic insurgencies to the south threatened to destabilize a Russian sphere of influence that Moscow once dreamed of extending all the way the Indian Ocean.

Today, Russia finds itself a key ally in a U.S.-led war against Islamic terrorism, and Russian influence in Asia is on the rise.

As Pavlov observed, the two countries are simply too big to avoid each other.

As if to underscore the inevitability of a linked future, a scant two miles separates them in the Bering Strait. That's closer than Sisters and Black Butte Ranch.

With so much in common, the only logical course of action is to develop closer ties.

It's time to put an end to posturing. We need Russia as much as much as they need us.

Thank you, Mr. Ambassador, for helping us to see that.