There is nothing more potentially threatening than a Russian-Chinese alliance aimed at the United States. The Nixon Center's Peter Rodman believes there now is such a "rapprochement at our expense" aimed at an American dominance they think "should be knocked down a peg or two." While the alliance has not yet solidified, it is strong enough to have provoked a recent major intelligence review from CIA Director George J. Tenet.

As The Washington Times' Bill Gertz and Rowan Scarborough have reported, this was prompted by the "growing relations between Moscow and Beijing after the two found common ground in opposing NATO's war in the Balkans." Russia has now sold 40 new top-of-the-line Su30 fighters to China, following 76 modern Su27s, four Kilo submarines, six S-300 air defense systems and—most ominously—two Sovremenny class destroyers with SSN-22 Sunburn anti-ship missiles. A fully operational alliance would have 4 million troops and 20,000 nuclear warheads. While both land armies are relatively weak technologically, its missiles could destroy the United States, which has absolutely no defense against them. This threat is predominantly from Russia.

Russia's economy is virtually at a Third World level. There are shortages of food. Inflation has been rampant. Barter is the pre-eminent method of exchange. Much of the economy is controlled by insiders and even criminals who received favorable terms during privatization. Extremist elements grow in power. As Yulia Latynina told The Washington Post, "Russia lives not by law but by understandings." Corruption and coercion rule. Some reforms have been made but, as Professor Yuri Dmitriyey emphasized, "We are only 10 years away" from the iron rule of the Soviet Union not the 800 years of the British constitution or even the 200 years of the United States. Foreign aid does not help because it is siphoned to foreign banks, with the Bank of New York scandal only the latest example. At the same time, Russia itself is fragmenting, first with a de facto autonomy agreement with Chechnya and now an armed uprising in Dagestan that threatens to expand to an Islamic republic for the whole region. Such instability in a country that could cause such problems for world peace obviously deserves the highest priority.

But the Clinton administration's major contact person for Russian issues, Al Gore, suggested in mid-1988 that the solution for them was more taxation -- in the midst of economic calamity. More foreign aid and International Monetary Fund loans down the rathole, and bad advice are the only solutions emanating from the Clinton-Gore team. At least these do not provoke the Russians. But their Kosovo war against Orthodox ally Serbia sent all Russia up the wall. If the order of Clinton buddy and American commander in chief, Gen. Wesley Clark, to engage the Russian troops who seized Pristina airport, had not been ignored by the British commander it just might have caused the new world war he feared. Cloudy thinking comes from many sides, however.

The Center for Strategic and International Studies decided the solution was for the president of the United States to issue an order "to the effect that the proliferating activities of Russian and central Eurasian organized crime elements Constitute a danger to the interests of the United States." This inadvertently parodied the universal fear the United States would become the world policeman. Neoconservatives could not understand why Mr. Clinton should, not simply invade and occupy Kosovo and even Montenegro and Macedonia and then turn the American protectorate into a greater Albania.

In the general confusion of talking tough and repeating outworn or silly verities, it restores ones faith in human intelligence to read Steve Forbes' recent book, 'A New Birth of Freedom." Perhaps not surprisingly, it effectively restates traditional conservative domestic philosophy: "Genuine political freedom exists only when the powers of centralized government are limited, checked, controlled and balanced. As our federal government has grown too large and too powerful, the real loss has been the freedom of people to govern their own Lives and participate fully in the American dream." And he promotes an exciting conservative program of domestic policy reform to restore it. But tile real strength of the book is that it shows his intellectual powers on foreign policy, certainly, the most important issues for a president.

Immediately after making the rebuilding of the hollowed-out military first and deploying an antimissile defense to protect the United States (and its allies) second, Mr. Forbes sets the problem of Russia next. This illuminates in the most dramatic manner that he has his priorities straight.

Defense of homeland and vital interests, and concern about the only nation able to annihilate both, are the essentials of a rational foreign policy. This is not a recent revelation, since he has been speaking about the importance of "not losing Russia" since 1994 in his Forbes magazine editorials. He recognizes Russia must be helped, not forced, to adopt the positive program he proposes: create a sound currency, keep taxes and tariffs low, build a rule of law with protected property rights, minimize government interference especially with small business, and remove barriers to foreign trade. "Our top priority must be to make it clear to all parties in the Russian government -- and to the Russian people -- that we want a peaceful and productive relationship with them, regardless of who is in power." That is getting it just right.

Yes, there are significant abuses in Russia and American spokesmen should not abandon Western values in their diplomacy. But, as Henry Kissinger recently noted, Haiti, Somalia and now Kosovo prove how difficult it is to change values even in small nations. Farflung Russia makes them look like Sunday school. Most nations are a long way from good government and few will ever make it. Yes, there are areas where America will have to pursue its vital interests even when Russia is vigorously opposed, such as building a missile defense. But it is just foolhardy to push tangential or spurious American interests when these will unnecessarily inflame Russian ones, such as with Kosovo. In other areas, cooperation is vital, such as accepting Russia's offer for the United States to buy its stockpiles of excess weapon-grade uranium.

Notwithstanding, the administration continues to recklessly pursue its world policeman dream without regard to the essentials. The military gets declining budget resources, missile defense is a low priority, and pushing democratic values in the world's most inhospitable locations takes precedence over helpful dealings with the one nation that is a serious risk. As Mr. Forbes notes, "Not since the early days of Weinlar Germany after World War I -- where similar failures farmed extremists, including the Nazis—has there been such a disaster in such an important country?'

The great danger of the Wilsonian dream that dominates U.S. elite thinking -- to impose American values on the world -- is that it simply cannot work. The direct result of that progressive policy in Kosovo is chaos and a potential alliance of the world's two next most powerful nations against it.

---

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.