This article is from the source 'nytimes' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/17/world/europe/putin-puts-tough-image-before-words.html

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Putin Puts Tough Image Before Words Putin Puts Tough Image Before Words
(2 months later)
PARIS — President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia is known for a peculiar muscular pose, carefully cultivated over the past 14 years. He shows it off at news conferences or at his desk, standing up or sitting down, not to mention bare-chested on horseback. It’s not hard to read the body language: Mr. Putin likes a manly image. PARIS — President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia is known for a peculiar muscular pose, carefully cultivated over the past 14 years. He shows it off at news conferences or at his desk, standing up or sitting down, not to mention bare-chested on horseback. It’s not hard to read the body language: Mr. Putin likes a manly image.
That’s an important starting point for his recent extraordinary remarks about Hillary Rodham Clinton. Asked by two French journalists on June 4 about her comparison of Russia’s seizure of Crimea to Hitler’s aggression in the 1930s, Mr. Putin scoffed. “It’s better not to argue with women,” he said. “When people push boundaries too far, it’s not because they are strong but because they are weak. But maybe weakness is not the worst quality for a woman.”That’s an important starting point for his recent extraordinary remarks about Hillary Rodham Clinton. Asked by two French journalists on June 4 about her comparison of Russia’s seizure of Crimea to Hitler’s aggression in the 1930s, Mr. Putin scoffed. “It’s better not to argue with women,” he said. “When people push boundaries too far, it’s not because they are strong but because they are weak. But maybe weakness is not the worst quality for a woman.”
Leaving aside the blatant sexism, Mr. Putin strayed into what for him is potentially dangerous territory. If pushing boundaries too far is a sign of weakness, then what to say about Mr. Putin’s own policies in Ukraine? When Russia annexes Crimea, when it gives tacit support to attacks by pro-Russian separatists on Ukrainian border posts, isn’t that — literally — about testing the frontiers of a neighboring sovereign state? Does that make it muscle-flexing by a weak man?Leaving aside the blatant sexism, Mr. Putin strayed into what for him is potentially dangerous territory. If pushing boundaries too far is a sign of weakness, then what to say about Mr. Putin’s own policies in Ukraine? When Russia annexes Crimea, when it gives tacit support to attacks by pro-Russian separatists on Ukrainian border posts, isn’t that — literally — about testing the frontiers of a neighboring sovereign state? Does that make it muscle-flexing by a weak man?
There’s something about Mr. Putin’s body language that draws attention, and it’s not always flattering. President Obama once described his “slouch” as the behavior of the “bored kid at the back of the classroom.” Mrs. Clinton has described him as a “tough guy with a thin skin.” Things got even more personal in 2008 when she said Mr. Putin, as an ex-K.G.B. man, couldn’t possibly have a soul. He retorted by saying that “at a minimum, heads of state should have a head.”There’s something about Mr. Putin’s body language that draws attention, and it’s not always flattering. President Obama once described his “slouch” as the behavior of the “bored kid at the back of the classroom.” Mrs. Clinton has described him as a “tough guy with a thin skin.” Things got even more personal in 2008 when she said Mr. Putin, as an ex-K.G.B. man, couldn’t possibly have a soul. He retorted by saying that “at a minimum, heads of state should have a head.”
“Hard men present hard choices — none more so than President Vladimir Putin,” Mrs. Clinton wrote in her new book, “Hard Choices.”“Hard men present hard choices — none more so than President Vladimir Putin,” Mrs. Clinton wrote in her new book, “Hard Choices.”
Mr. Putin’s behavior with other leaders is often seen as a clue to the quality of his personal relationships with them. In theory, he and Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany should have an excellent rapport; each speaks the other’s language, and the two countries have strong economic ties. And yet twice (most recently in the thick of the Ukrainian crisis), well aware of Ms. Merkel’s deep-seated fear of dogs, he let his big, black Labrador Koni into the room with her, even sniff her legs, and watched with a peculiarly passive expression.Mr. Putin’s behavior with other leaders is often seen as a clue to the quality of his personal relationships with them. In theory, he and Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany should have an excellent rapport; each speaks the other’s language, and the two countries have strong economic ties. And yet twice (most recently in the thick of the Ukrainian crisis), well aware of Ms. Merkel’s deep-seated fear of dogs, he let his big, black Labrador Koni into the room with her, even sniff her legs, and watched with a peculiarly passive expression.
On the occasions when he and Mr. Obama have sat together for photographers, the chill has been almost visible. Mr. Obama denies that he has a bad relationship with the Russian president, but it is clearly not a good one. For one thing, relations between the United States and Russia are strained. For another, Mr. Obama is a good six inches taller than Mr. Putin, an advantage probably not lost on someone who seems to put such stock in projecting an image of power. On the occasions when he and Mr. Obama have sat together for photographers, the chill has been almost visible. Mr. Obama denies that he has a bad relationship with the Russian president, but it is clearly not a good one. For one thing, relations between the United States and Russia are strained. For another, Mr. Obama is a good six inches taller than Mr. Putin, an advantage probably not lost on someone who seems to put such stock in projecting an image of power.
Then again, Mr. Obama is not exactly pals with any of his fellow leaders. His cool demeanor is both admired and resented by his international counterparts, some of whom remember — not always fondly — the back-rubbing bonhomie of his predecessor, George W. Bush. It was, after all, Mr. Bush who in 2001 took the measure of Mr. Putin’s soul, and found him to be “very straightforward and trustworthy.”Then again, Mr. Obama is not exactly pals with any of his fellow leaders. His cool demeanor is both admired and resented by his international counterparts, some of whom remember — not always fondly — the back-rubbing bonhomie of his predecessor, George W. Bush. It was, after all, Mr. Bush who in 2001 took the measure of Mr. Putin’s soul, and found him to be “very straightforward and trustworthy.”
So much for the importance of personal relations. Having established this rapport, Mr. Bush went on to invade Iraq and push vigorously for Ukraine and Georgia to join the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, two moves that tripped up relations not only with Russia, but also with France and Germany. So much for the importance of personal relations. Having established this rapport, Mr. Bush went on to invade Iraq and push vigorously for Ukraine and Georgia to join the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, two moves that tripped up relations not only with Russia, but also with France and Germany.
In the interview aired on French television, Mr. Putin reiterated his bottom-line view that the prospect of NATO membership for Ukraine, and in particular the strategic peninsula of Crimea, was something Russia wasn’t ready to accept as the crisis escalated last winter. In the interview aired on French television, Mr. Putin reiterated his bottom-line view that the prospect of NATO membership for Ukraine, and in particular the strategic peninsula of Crimea, was something Russia wasn’t ready to accept as the crisis escalated last winter.
In the end, international diplomacy has little to do with personal relations — be they warm and fuzzy, or cold and muscular — and everything to do with perceived national interests, timing and capability. But that doesn’t mean that leaders shouldn’t watch their language.In the end, international diplomacy has little to do with personal relations — be they warm and fuzzy, or cold and muscular — and everything to do with perceived national interests, timing and capability. But that doesn’t mean that leaders shouldn’t watch their language.