Antinuclear

Banning Putin from the G20 would have been counterproductive. The point of such international institutions is not that they are a reward for good behaviour but that they provide a forum for dealing with common problems. The West needs Russia’s help to secure a nuclear deal with Iran. Washington requires Moscow’s co-operation to withdraw US equipment from Afghanistan through Russian territory. Just this week Secretary of State John Kerry said Washington and Moscow had agreed to share more intelligence on the Islamic State terrorists.

Remember it was Putin who bailed out Washington and London last year by promoting the deal under which the Assad regime in Syria agreed to jettison its chemical weapons, thereby avoiding the airstrikes that Barack Obama and David Cameron had threatened. Had Damascus fallen, jihadists would have filled the power vacuum.

Escalating sanctions on Russia’s financial, energy and defence sectors drives Moscow closer to Beijing and hurts the European economy………

For Australia, the prospect of the US getting bogged down in Eur­ope dealing with Ukraine while also fighting Islamic State in the Middle East could undermine the so-called pivot that promotes stability and prosperity in Asia. That is not to our advantage……..

Put it this way: why should Australia, a regional middle power with a population of 23 million, pick a fight with a nuclear-armed great power that deems its vital strategic interests are at stake in its near abroad?

A sound policy demands both condemnation of the Russian-backed rebels responsible for shooting down the Malaysian passenger jet and an acknowledgment that the West continues to share many interests with Moscow. Dealing with Putin at the G20 realistically is essential for making sure these interests are served. http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opinion/putinbaiting-may-be-understandable-but-antagonising-moscow-reflects-poor-statesmanship/story-e6frg6zo-1227094311704