The U.S. withdrawal from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty has left Russian politicians and analysts struggling to work out what direction Russian-American cooperation will take.

Relations between the two countries could develop and become a full-scale partnership in all areas, many say, even going as far as to include possible joint work on missile-defense projects and the creation of a military-political alliance. Or, others argue, the rapprochement between the two countries that has only just begun could end up frozen. Many analysts say that Russia's movement toward integration with Western democracies, which is supported by President Vladimir Putin, will depend on what happens with Russian-American relations.

"We have to support the president now when he is trying to turn the country toward the West," said Grigory Yavlinsky, leader of the liberal Yabloko party. "But we mustn't forget that his political resources are not bottomless, and that the American administration's latest step has used up a good portion of it."

That the Americans would withdraw from the 1972 ABM Treaty had long been anticipated, but President George Bush's official announcement was unexpected nonetheless. The Russian reaction was quite restrained even in comparison to the reaction of some of the United States' NATO allies. Russia has called the decision a mistake, but hopes it won't put an end to closer relations that had begun to develop between the two countries.

Analysts say that Russia's calm reaction is to Putin's merit. Putin made a balanced and restrained statement on the issue a couple of hours after Bush announced the American decision. But analysts also say this has put a strain on Putin's capacity to influence public opinion because, after decades of Cold War, a negative reaction would have been more natural and instinctive.

"We have to realize that it is only Putin's position that gives some popularity to the idea of potentially closer relations between Russia and America," Yavlinsky said. "So it would be good to know what the American side can offer in the way of genuine cooperation – economic, trade, scientific and perhaps even military cooperation."

Sergei Rogov, the director of the United States and Canada Institute, who took part, along with Yavlinsky, in a roundtable on prospects for developing Rus-sian-American relations, said the public in both countries had to support the development of a strategic partnership. Rogov noted that the joint statement made during Putin's recent visit to the United States "contained a whole score of expressions never before used to describe Russian-American relations.

"There are words that were never before used by Russia or the United States about how our relations are ‘based on commitment to democratic values,'" Rogov said. "Or, for example, ‘We support the creation of a free and peaceful Euro-Atlantic community.' And these are not just empty statements; it would have been unthinkable to describe Russian-American relations in these terms in the past."

The U.S. withdrawal from the ABM Treaty disrupted the roundtable's agenda. Initially, the roundtable had planned to draw up an appeal to representatives of Russian society in response to an initiative from the U.S. Congress. In November, 142 congressmen put their signatures to a report called "U.S.-Russia Partnership:A New Time, A New Beginning," which they gave to Bush and Putin. The report set out real prospects for Russian-American cooperation in all directions.

But, despite the shift of emphasis made to the roundtable agenda by the ABM issue, the idea of appealing to Russian society was still examined. The politicians and political analysts who originally planned to take part in the roundtable were joined by Foreign Ministry officials and Russian missile-defense specialists, who looked at the prospects for theoretical and practical missile-defense cooperation between Russia and the United States.

"We have a lot of interesting technology projects," said chief designer Boris Vinogradov. "Unfortunately, lack of financing means we haven't been able to develop them, but we will still be in a solid position for years to come."

Vinogradov backed up the often-repeated idea that it is virtually impossible to create a guaranteed missile-defense system and noted that, at the same time, threats to global stability are on the rise.

Edward Lozansky, the head of the U.S.-based Kontinent publishing house and a former member of Ronald Reagan's team, responded to his Russian colleagues' criticism of the U.S. position on missile defense at the roundtable. Lozansky said that the U.S. missile-defense plans were not intended to create a new threat but, like the Reagan-era Star Wars program, would lead to new technological breakthroughs.

"Ultimately, the program isn't about whether or not a strategic missile-defense system will emerge," Lozansky said. "Star Wars' main achievement was 700 major new technological advances and huge investment in the high-tech sector."

The possibility of having Russian designers and manufacturers participate in the development of a missile-defense system with the Americans is one of the most-discussed issues now. Specialists say that Russia has something to offer, but the question is whether the United States would be willing to allocate some of the billions of dollars it plans to spend on the project to Russian researchers.