The real story of old 1998 did not even make Time magazine's annual review. It had nothing to do with its "man of the year" award to Bill Clinton and Kenneth Starr. It did not even involve, except indirectly, the United States. The authentic story blotted out by impeachment was about Russia and the man of the year was its Prime Minister Yevgeny Primakov.

On December 21, 1998 Mr. Primakov announced, from New Delhi's historic presidential palace his vision of a "strategic triangle" alliance between Russia, India and China, uniting the world's largest land, and first and second most populous nations--all nuclear armed--to "bring about greater stability, not just in the region but the world." Specifically, he announced a "strategic friendship" agreement to be signed next year with India and a new 10-year defense cooperation treaty, as well as seven agreements to increase trade, air service, criminal extradition and diplomatic relations with the sub-continental power. Already, 50 percent of India's military jets were of Russian origin and most of its battle tanks. While stressing that the tri-parte alliance Awas not a formal proposal--and both China and India said they would continue on independent foreign policy courses--all three powers said they would also continue to develop closer ties.

Prime Minister Primakov has been pursuing this dream for years. In September 1995, while he was head of foreign intelligence, he developed a new cooperative intelligence alliance between Russia and China that foreign reporter Martin Sieff described "as close as Britain's with the United States." He also increased Russia's traffic in high-technology arms with China. Most important, Russia and China settled their 4,500 mile frontier--the longest in the world and a past source of great tension. Today, hundreds of thousands of troops on both sides have been freed for deployment elsewhere. These developments with India and China coincided with end of the year treaties signed with Belarus to re-join Russia, and a friendship agreement with Ukraine.

Meanwhile, the United States developed friendship with Monica Lewinsky. To the extent that foreign policy intruded upon public and elite consciousness, it was to support a "Wag The Dog" blowing-up of Iraq munitions, conveniently bracketing the House of Representatives impeachment vote. But the only consequence was to guarantee replacement trade in military supplies to Iraq from its number one supplier--which is, hum, Russia. The only other issues exciting American foreign policy leaders were more efforts to turn Bosnia and Kosovo into multi-ethnic democracies, with the Orthodox Serbs cast into the role of bad guys. Since the neighboring Moslems, Croats, and Albanians were not interested in the multi-ethnic dream either (nor much more innocent), the only credible solution was a NATO occupation that could stretch to 20 years leading Serbia to propose a new alliance with--guess who--Orthodox cousin Russia.

To give Bill Kristol and his "national greatness" neoconservatives credit, at least they are willing to face the facts in the Balkans and support the decades and funds it would require. Bosnia has cost the incredible sum of $20 billion already with no end in sight. Undoubtedly, the United States will end up paying most of the cost of the Kosovo monitoring operation, also with no exit strategy, and will supply the troops when (not if) fighting begins again in the Spring, if not before. The much-vaulted NATO alliance, having chosen--as Robert Manning put it--its post Cold War role as "babysitter for the Balkans," it had no energy for anything else--only donating a dozen airplanes to the Iraq operation. NATO may not be an effective babysitter but there is no question they will provoke the Bear to the East as it pursues diversity training in Yugoslavia.

If the United States were planning to alienate Russia it could hardly do better. American hardliners suggest that Russia's economic difficulties should be exploited to force it to follow U.S. policies on Iraq, one saying "we have nothing to lose." How about to prevent future Mayak incidents, where a guard sergeant ran amok in the closed weapons-usable-plutonium city, killing several and escaping with who knows what? Under two programs with the U.S. Department of Energy, Russia is selling it weapons-grade uranium--36 tons so far--cooperating with U.S. experts to increase tracking of weapons materials, deactivating materials, and pursuing peaceful uses for them. Is the loss of the nuclear security of these programs worth bombing Iraq? The attack provoked a rare complaining telephone call from President Boris Yeltsin. He was insulted that Russia was not even consulted about so serious an action with a country on its periphery. India and China objected too The U.S. has no plan for Iraq anyway and should back a free hand for neighboring allies Turkey and Israel to contain Saddam Hussein.

Boris Yeltsin was an enormous asset that is now almost wasted. By some strange quirk of fate, or something, he was pro-Western and courageous enough to move toward its values and institutions. He undertook an incredible privatization against enormous odds that forever has moved his nation away from communism. His reward has been to be criticized for not doing it well enough. As the privatizer of the Czech Republic, Vaclav Klaus, noted no one knows how to do it right. The fact he did it was more than enough. Now he is in ill health and cannot long hold back the forces of nationalism and xenophobia that could really threaten world peace. As predicted here, the rise of Mr. Primakov was the indicator. Bill Clinton's profound failure was not Monica but his failure to make the strengthening of Mr. Yeltsin his number one priority. George Bush shares the blame, as do all the Western intellectuals promoting other priorities, especially aggravating ones. Every reason of interest and culture requires befriending nuclear Russia.

Secretary of State Madeline K. Albright meanwhile announced that the main subject for her January 25 to 27 discussions with top Moscow officials will be to force the "long delayed" strategic arms reduction talks. There is no chance on earth the Duma will even consider START II. Rather than preaching to them for the millionth time on lost, faulty liberal causes, why not try asking them what we can do to improve fractured relations? It may not be too late to seriously cultivate future Russian leadership, but it will require that many secondary crusades be put aside, and to stop all the hollow preaching. If the "strategic triangle" becomes a reality, Mr. Clinton will not be remembered for being impeached but for placing America in the direst peril.

---

Donald Devine, former director Of the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, is a columnist and a Washington-based policy consultant and a Vice Chairman for the American Conservative Union.