As the glare of publicity fades from the final scenes of the 1990 summit between President Bush and Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev, the event's outcome can begin to be viewed in a realistic light.
There is an unfortunate tendency to invest summit meetings with more meaning than they actually contain - as if solutions to all the world's problems are hanging in the balance. No summit can do that.While the encounter was more friendly than any in memory and productive in many ways, it did not remotely solve all the problems existing between the two superpowers. Many issues remain. Particularly knotty problems involve disarmament, the military status of a united Germany, the future of Lithuania.
Smiles and handshakes are very well, but optimism and friendliness - while a huge improvement over suspicion and antagonism - are not be themselves the answers to issues dividing the Soviet Union and the United States. There are several reasons for this.
First of all, neither Bush nor Gorbachev can ignore political realities at home. The two men do not always have total support among their countrymen for all their ideas.
Bush has Congress - a cacophony of voices dominated by the opposition party - a huge budget deficit and many domestic needs. He also must face re-election. Gorbachev has a collapsing economic system, a restless population, a nation that could disintegrate and enemies who would like to topple him from power.
Even if each survives all the challenges - and Gorbachev has the bigger task since the Soviet economy is in total disarray - neither man will be permanently at the helm of his nation. Changes in leadership will come eventually.
Against that day, the more ties, the more shared interests, the more agreements, the more exchanges, the more tolerance - and the less armaments - the better the chances to continue and even improve peaceful relationships.
As Gorbachev noted after the summit, the meeting produced an agreement to get together on a regular basis, perhaps yearly, and to do so with less formality. That is the real value of such encounters; they are steps in a process, rather than an end unto themselves.
Undoubtedly there will be future setbacks and differences. The sudden freeing of Eastern Europe, the collapse of the Soviet economic system, the admission by Moscow of old misdeeds, the granting of new tolerance and the search for new methods do not mean that the Soviet Union will always be in full retreat.
The summit was a frank and meaningful exchange of views and concerns. There is a clear desire by both parties to improve relationships. To be of value, that improvement must stretch over many years.
Americans - a notoriously impatient people - should remain level-headed about the summit and not succumb to euphoria now or dis-couragement and Cold War mentality later when inevitable obstacles arise in U.S.-Soviet relationships.
This is only one step in a long journey to peace and understanding.