Russian President Dmitry Medvedev today replaced the leader of the violent southern region of Ingushetia, a man analysts said had aggravated an Islamist insurgency with his heavy-handed rule.
Fighting between security forces and rebels in Ingushetia has escalated this year, pushing the mainly Muslim region governed by Murat Zyazikov towards a civil war which could destabilise the entire north Caucasus.
Zyazikov, a former KGB-colonel handpicked by former Russian president Vladimir Putin to govern Ingushetia from 2002, was replaced by Yunis-Bek Yevkurov, a relatively unknown deputy chief of staff for the Volga-Urals military district, as Ingushetia's interim president, the Kremlin announced.
Zyazikov denied earlier news agency reports that he had been sacked.
"I absolutely voluntarily resigned in order to transfer to other work," he told the Interfax news agency. "I will work in Moscow."
The Kremlin later released a statement stating Medvedev had accepted Zyazikov's resignation request, but Moscow-based analyst Pavel Felgenhauer said the decision would have been taken by Putin, now Russia's prime minister.
"Zyazikov was a Putin protege at the FSB (successor to the KGB) and this decision would have been made by Putin," he said.
"The situation in Ingushetia is out of control," Felgenhauer added, speaking of the region which borders Chechnya.
"The vast majority of the people are against Zyazikov and that has helped the underground Islamists. There is lots of personal anger against him."
Residents of Ingushetia's main city Nazran celebrated news of Zyazikov's departure in the streets – normally deserted at night.
Rusting cars sped over potholes and played loud music while groups of men danced and waved Ingushetia's flag.
"I hope that everything in Ingushetia will stabilise now," one policeman said. "Everything that is happening here is in the hands of Moscow."
In a village outside Nazran a group of old men said they had been waiting for this moment for a long time.
"If we had a normal president we would have order here. There can be nobody as bad as Zyazikov," one man said.
Kidnappings, murder and bomb attacks have become a part of everyday life in Ingushetia as security forces combat increasing rebel activity by clamping down on locals, heavy-handed tactics which people and human rights workers say has boosted support for the insurgents.
Human rights groups estimate that 93 people had been killed up to the end of August this year in Ingushetia, Russia's smallest region with a population of 470,000.
This man, Yevkurov, is unknown to us. If a reader should have more information about him, do not hesitate to submit.
vrijdag 31 oktober 2008
Stolen Russian nuclear weapons
Moscow denies Pentagon claims of 'stolen' Russian nuclear weapons
Russia's Foreign Ministry denied on Friday claims by the U.S. defense secretary that large amounts of Russian nuclear weapons had been stolen or misplaced.
Speaking in Washington on Tuesday at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, Robert Gates expressed concern that some Russian nuclear weapons from the former Soviet arsenal may not be fully accounted for.
"I have fairly high confidence that no strategic or modern tactical nuclear weapons have leaked beyond Russian borders," Gates said.
"What worries me are the tens of thousands of old nuclear mines, nuclear artillery shells and so on, because the reality is the Russians themselves probably don't have any idea how many of those they have or, potentially, where they are," he added.
"Such allegations are entirely groundless," the ministry's press and information department said in a statement.
"Despite all the difficulties that our country faced in the early 1990s, Russia maintained very high standards of ensuring the safety and physical protection of its nuclear arsenals," the statement said.
"In this respect, we would like to reiterate that in a joint statement on nuclear security signed by the Russian and U.S. leaders in Bratislava in 2005 both sides acknowledged that the protection of nuclear facilities in both countries meets modern norms and requirements," it said.
In his remarks, Gates also supported the necessity of new talks with Moscow on further strategic arms reductions, which have been advocated by both current U.S. presidential candidates, Republican John McCain and Democrat Barack Obama.
Negotiated and signed in 1991, the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START) is scheduled to expire on December 5, 2009. Under that accord, the United States and Russia have significantly reduced their number of nuclear warheads and delivery vehicles.
Many experts believe that if START expires without replacement verification measures, the two countries will be "flying blind" in their nuclear relations.
dinsdag 28 oktober 2008
Russia promises to support the ruble
Russia promises to support the ruble
Russia will not allow the ruble to fall dramatically, an influential government minister said Monday in response to rising fears that the national currency is headed for a devaluation.
A sharp drop in the ruble would mean that Russia "has broken its promises to the people," said First Deputy Prime Minister Igor Shuvalov. "Everything that people have earned should be safe."
If necessary, Russia will continue to spend billions of dollars to shore up its currency, and the band within which the ruble trades is not going to be widened, said Shuvalov, the top deputy to Prime Minister Vladimir Putin.
Many Russians have rushed to convert their savings into dollars as they did in the 1998 economic crisis when the value of the ruble dropped fourfold and inflation surged to 80 percent.
They have withdrawn rubles from their bank accounts and bought dollars at well above the official rates as fears mounted that the Kremlin would allow the ruble to float against international currencies and prove unable to prevent a crash.
The ruble has declined steadily since the Aug. 7 start of the five-day war with Georgia, losing some 13 percent of its value against the dollar. Without intervention by the Central Bank, which began in early September, it might have fallen farther and faster.
The Central Bank is estimated to have spent as much as $15 billion per week in recent weeks to buy rubles and support the exchange rate.
Shuvalov said Monday that Russia still has more than $500 billion in foreign currency and gold reserves, and the government is "not afraid of running out of money."
The ruble has come under pressure as the government starts to feel the impact of falling oil prices. Until this summer, the ruble had been gaining for several years on the back of higher commodities prices, especially oil and gas. The ruble strengthened to 23.14 against the dollar in July, its highest level in 9 years. But the currency's fortunes have reversed dramatically in the past three months and traded at 27.3 rubles at the MICEX stock exchange on Monday.
Russia's Central Bank pegs the ruble to a so-called "currency basket" of the dollar and the euro, allowing it to float only within a narrow range. The dollar accounts for 55 percent and the euro for 45 percent in the basket. The aim is to avoid the economic shock of sudden swings in the currency's value.
Unlike the dollar, the euro has lost some 8 percent against the ruble in the past six months.
In an attempt to restore confidence in the ruble, the Kremlin-friendly Izvestia newspaper published a guide Monday on investing during the financial crisis that discouraged readers from buying the dollar.
"If you believe in the U.S. currency well, good luck," the article said. "Remember that all the talk about diversification is for professionals."
Izvestia quoted an economics expert as saying that a higher dollar is a "temporary thing" and that the United States will not announce a default but "might decide to take $50 and $100 bank notes out of circulation," turning all of your dollar savings into a "souvenir."
The newspaper suggested investing into "something with good prospects" such as paying rent and utilities bills for three months ahead and paying off all loans. Another piece of advice was to "invest this money in your own beloved self" by splashing out on a health club membership or expensive medical treatment.
Russia will not allow the ruble to fall dramatically, an influential government minister said Monday in response to rising fears that the national currency is headed for a devaluation.
A sharp drop in the ruble would mean that Russia "has broken its promises to the people," said First Deputy Prime Minister Igor Shuvalov. "Everything that people have earned should be safe."
If necessary, Russia will continue to spend billions of dollars to shore up its currency, and the band within which the ruble trades is not going to be widened, said Shuvalov, the top deputy to Prime Minister Vladimir Putin.
Many Russians have rushed to convert their savings into dollars as they did in the 1998 economic crisis when the value of the ruble dropped fourfold and inflation surged to 80 percent.
They have withdrawn rubles from their bank accounts and bought dollars at well above the official rates as fears mounted that the Kremlin would allow the ruble to float against international currencies and prove unable to prevent a crash.
The ruble has declined steadily since the Aug. 7 start of the five-day war with Georgia, losing some 13 percent of its value against the dollar. Without intervention by the Central Bank, which began in early September, it might have fallen farther and faster.
The Central Bank is estimated to have spent as much as $15 billion per week in recent weeks to buy rubles and support the exchange rate.
Shuvalov said Monday that Russia still has more than $500 billion in foreign currency and gold reserves, and the government is "not afraid of running out of money."
The ruble has come under pressure as the government starts to feel the impact of falling oil prices. Until this summer, the ruble had been gaining for several years on the back of higher commodities prices, especially oil and gas. The ruble strengthened to 23.14 against the dollar in July, its highest level in 9 years. But the currency's fortunes have reversed dramatically in the past three months and traded at 27.3 rubles at the MICEX stock exchange on Monday.
Russia's Central Bank pegs the ruble to a so-called "currency basket" of the dollar and the euro, allowing it to float only within a narrow range. The dollar accounts for 55 percent and the euro for 45 percent in the basket. The aim is to avoid the economic shock of sudden swings in the currency's value.
Unlike the dollar, the euro has lost some 8 percent against the ruble in the past six months.
In an attempt to restore confidence in the ruble, the Kremlin-friendly Izvestia newspaper published a guide Monday on investing during the financial crisis that discouraged readers from buying the dollar.
"If you believe in the U.S. currency well, good luck," the article said. "Remember that all the talk about diversification is for professionals."
Izvestia quoted an economics expert as saying that a higher dollar is a "temporary thing" and that the United States will not announce a default but "might decide to take $50 and $100 bank notes out of circulation," turning all of your dollar savings into a "souvenir."
The newspaper suggested investing into "something with good prospects" such as paying rent and utilities bills for three months ahead and paying off all loans. Another piece of advice was to "invest this money in your own beloved self" by splashing out on a health club membership or expensive medical treatment.
maandag 27 oktober 2008
Cooperation between Russia and China
Russia and China are planning to sign a memorandum of cooperation in the oil sector, Deputy Prime Minister Igor Sechin said at a second round of talks on Russia-China energy dialogue.
"A memorandum, drafted to tackle problems in the oil sector, says that a working group will be formed, to be led by Energy Minister Sergei Shmatko on the Russian side and by the head of the State Energy Department on the Chinese side, Sechin said.
The Russian-Chinese energy dialogue has been developing "in the right direction," he said. Joint ventures have been set up in China and Russia. The state pipeline operator Transneft (RTS: TRNF) has drafted a plan to lay a branch of the East Siberia - Pacific Ocean oil pipeline (ESPO) to China, he also said.
"The technical aspect of the project is being negotiated with the Chinese side. Transneft and China National Petroleum Corporation (CNPC) are to start discussing the terms of this project soon," Sechin said.
Russia and China are in intensive talks on cooperation in the gas and in the electricity and nuclear energy sectors, he said.
Chinese Vice Premier Wang Qishan in turn said that Russia and China had reached mutual understanding on several key energy projects. "The two countries have held four rounds of talks on contract energy projects. We have come to terms on some key projects, which makes top-level decision-making possible," he said.
Wang also said that "stronger practical cooperation between the two countries" is particularly important in conditions of a global financial crisis. Relations with Russia "remain China's key foreign- policy priority," he said.
The second round of talks was also attended by Energy Minister Sergei Shmatko, Rosneft (RTS: ROSN) head Sergei Bogdanchikov, Transneft head Nikolai Tokarev and the chief executives of other companies.
"A memorandum, drafted to tackle problems in the oil sector, says that a working group will be formed, to be led by Energy Minister Sergei Shmatko on the Russian side and by the head of the State Energy Department on the Chinese side, Sechin said.
The Russian-Chinese energy dialogue has been developing "in the right direction," he said. Joint ventures have been set up in China and Russia. The state pipeline operator Transneft (RTS: TRNF) has drafted a plan to lay a branch of the East Siberia - Pacific Ocean oil pipeline (ESPO) to China, he also said.
"The technical aspect of the project is being negotiated with the Chinese side. Transneft and China National Petroleum Corporation (CNPC) are to start discussing the terms of this project soon," Sechin said.
Russia and China are in intensive talks on cooperation in the gas and in the electricity and nuclear energy sectors, he said.
Chinese Vice Premier Wang Qishan in turn said that Russia and China had reached mutual understanding on several key energy projects. "The two countries have held four rounds of talks on contract energy projects. We have come to terms on some key projects, which makes top-level decision-making possible," he said.
Wang also said that "stronger practical cooperation between the two countries" is particularly important in conditions of a global financial crisis. Relations with Russia "remain China's key foreign- policy priority," he said.
The second round of talks was also attended by Energy Minister Sergei Shmatko, Rosneft (RTS: ROSN) head Sergei Bogdanchikov, Transneft head Nikolai Tokarev and the chief executives of other companies.
Opec for gas?
Russia, Iran and Qatar, the three nations accounting for over 60 percent of global natural gas reserves, have agreed to set up a gas cartel on the line of the Organisation of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (Opec).
The three largest gas exporters want prices up, given their recent dramatic decline after the summer peak. Unfortunately, they have no power to change that now, as gas prices are regulated by the oil and petrochemicals markets since there is no such thing as an independent gas market. The new gas alliance established in Iran's capital Oct 21 is in fact a "big gas troika."
The Opec-style gas cartel will be finalized Nov 18 in Moscow with adoption of the group's charter, a document which has been in the works for two years ever since Iran initiated the idea. In fact, gas producing nations have had a discussion platform since 2001, the Gas Exporting Countries Forum (GECF) comprising 16 member states. But it has no charter, its decisions are not binding on its members and it is no more than a talking club. Adopting a single charter has been the long-standing stumbling block for a "gas Opec."
Iran wants the gas cartel to be modelled after the original Opec, setting quotas for gas production thus pushing prices up while further damaging the US economy. Moscow, in turn, is trying to avoid aggressive policies suggesting that the new organization should manage joint gas projects and gas transportation issues.
The latter is especially important for Russia and its gas export monopoly, Gazprom, whose chief Alexei Miller represented Russia at the Tehran meeting. It is crucial for Russia that central Asian gas goes through Russia on the way to Europe rather than bypass it via the Caspian seabed or go through Iran. Alongside these geopolitical factors, there are other practical issues for the proposed cartel to grapple with. Gazprom's gas supplies to Europe have been contracted for the next one decade to three. Iran's gas industry is so disorganized that, despite its huge reserves, the country has to export Turkmen gas under some of its export projects.
Turkmenistan, for its part, has shown a rather cool attitude toward the proposed gas cartel. Qatar is a new player on the global gas market. Most of its projects are still in the works and involve liquefied natural gas (LNG) deliveries also to Europe, and that too, under long-term contracts. If it tries to limit those deliveries, its niche will be immediately seized by rivals - Libya, Algeria and others. It follows from the above that there is no global gas market. There is not a European gas market either. There are no "global" gas prices - they are set individually for each contract (usually a long-term). As a result, the proposed gas cartel cannot influence gas prices through restrictive quotas. By restricting exports, gas-producing countries would only harm themselves by cutting their own incomes. Gas prices in Europe are based on the market value of crude oil and petrochemicals, which gas producers do not control.
The despair of the three countries richest in the commodity is easy to understand. Oil prices have plummeted to half their summer peak, and natural gas followed suit. Miller and his counterparts are getting desperate because they cannot influence the process. However, the very idea of establishing some sort of gas cartel is bound to raise concerns with European consumers, further complicating Gazprom's investments in Europe, as if European partners were not already wary of dealing with the Russian monopoly. The Russian government must certainly realize that a "gas Opec" is a harmful idea. Energy Minister Sergei Shmatko said earlier this month that the wording was inappropriate because Russia has no intention of regulating gas prices or production levels.
The three largest gas exporters want prices up, given their recent dramatic decline after the summer peak. Unfortunately, they have no power to change that now, as gas prices are regulated by the oil and petrochemicals markets since there is no such thing as an independent gas market. The new gas alliance established in Iran's capital Oct 21 is in fact a "big gas troika."
The Opec-style gas cartel will be finalized Nov 18 in Moscow with adoption of the group's charter, a document which has been in the works for two years ever since Iran initiated the idea. In fact, gas producing nations have had a discussion platform since 2001, the Gas Exporting Countries Forum (GECF) comprising 16 member states. But it has no charter, its decisions are not binding on its members and it is no more than a talking club. Adopting a single charter has been the long-standing stumbling block for a "gas Opec."
Iran wants the gas cartel to be modelled after the original Opec, setting quotas for gas production thus pushing prices up while further damaging the US economy. Moscow, in turn, is trying to avoid aggressive policies suggesting that the new organization should manage joint gas projects and gas transportation issues.
The latter is especially important for Russia and its gas export monopoly, Gazprom, whose chief Alexei Miller represented Russia at the Tehran meeting. It is crucial for Russia that central Asian gas goes through Russia on the way to Europe rather than bypass it via the Caspian seabed or go through Iran. Alongside these geopolitical factors, there are other practical issues for the proposed cartel to grapple with. Gazprom's gas supplies to Europe have been contracted for the next one decade to three. Iran's gas industry is so disorganized that, despite its huge reserves, the country has to export Turkmen gas under some of its export projects.
Turkmenistan, for its part, has shown a rather cool attitude toward the proposed gas cartel. Qatar is a new player on the global gas market. Most of its projects are still in the works and involve liquefied natural gas (LNG) deliveries also to Europe, and that too, under long-term contracts. If it tries to limit those deliveries, its niche will be immediately seized by rivals - Libya, Algeria and others. It follows from the above that there is no global gas market. There is not a European gas market either. There are no "global" gas prices - they are set individually for each contract (usually a long-term). As a result, the proposed gas cartel cannot influence gas prices through restrictive quotas. By restricting exports, gas-producing countries would only harm themselves by cutting their own incomes. Gas prices in Europe are based on the market value of crude oil and petrochemicals, which gas producers do not control.
The despair of the three countries richest in the commodity is easy to understand. Oil prices have plummeted to half their summer peak, and natural gas followed suit. Miller and his counterparts are getting desperate because they cannot influence the process. However, the very idea of establishing some sort of gas cartel is bound to raise concerns with European consumers, further complicating Gazprom's investments in Europe, as if European partners were not already wary of dealing with the Russian monopoly. The Russian government must certainly realize that a "gas Opec" is a harmful idea. Energy Minister Sergei Shmatko said earlier this month that the wording was inappropriate because Russia has no intention of regulating gas prices or production levels.
zaterdag 25 oktober 2008
Russia blocks google
By JEREMY KIRK
Russian regulators will not let Google buy a local online advertising company, halting a $140 million deal agreed to in July.
Google planned to acquire Zao Begun, which has a search and contextual video and text advertising business. Begun is owned by Rambler Media, a Russian company that own various Web sites and runs a search engine.
Google said it is reviewing the decision of Russia's Federal Antimonopoly Service (FAS) and hasn't decided how to react.
"We are very disappointed to hear that FAS has come to this decision," Google said in a statement. "We strongly believe that this acquisition will enable us to significantly improve opportunities for Russian users, advertisers and publishers as well as the entire industry."
Google's plans to grow its online advertising business, which comprises nearly all of the company's revenue, has run into other obstacles with regulators.
The U.S. Department of Justice is investigating a plan for Yahoo to show Google search ads. That deal formed as Yahoo was under intense pressure earlier this year as Microsoft tried to acquire the company.
Yahoo and Google planned to start the program this month, but it has been delayed pending the DOJ review. Critics say it could drive up the costs of advertising and also gives the two companies too much control over the online advertising market. Google has said ads are purchased by auction, and neither company sets prices.
The rejection of the deal in Russia underscores the difficulty Google is having in some markets. While it dominates search in Western countries, Google faces strong competition from local search engines in places such as South Korea, China and Russia.
Google picked a strong partner in Russia: Begun runs a network with 40,000 advertisers covering 143,000 Russian-language Web sites. When the deal was announced, Rambler also signed an additional agreement to use Google's AdSense technology on its main portal.
Efforts to reach Rambler Media were unsuccessful.
Russia vs Georgia
Yesterday I finally started reading an article by Jonathan Littell in Die Zeit. Jonathan Littell is the author of "Les bienveillantes", a magnificent book about a SS-officer, Maximilien Aue. The article was translated in German (from French).
This journalist went almost immediately after the desastrous events starting the 7th of August to Georgia.
The article is very neutral and is a must read for everyone who is interested in the Sovjet-style propagande style Poetin and others still use.
In the following days I will try to quote a few passages out of the article.
This journalist went almost immediately after the desastrous events starting the 7th of August to Georgia.
The article is very neutral and is a must read for everyone who is interested in the Sovjet-style propagande style Poetin and others still use.
In the following days I will try to quote a few passages out of the article.
vrijdag 24 oktober 2008
Russia criticizes US sanctions on arms trader
Russia criticizes US sanctions on arms trader
Russia's foreign minister sharply criticized U.S. sanctions against Russia's state arms trader Friday, saying the move won't make Moscow shift any closer to the U.S. stance on Iran's controversial nuclear program.
The United States has imposed sanctions on the Russian arms monopoly Rosoboronexport along with a dozen of other firms from China, Sudan, Venezuela and other countries for their alleged roles in supplying sensitive technology to Iran, North Korean and Syria.
"If some people in Washington think that such action could make Russia more complaisant to accept the U.S. approaches to settling the Iranian nuclear problem, they are mistaken," Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said at a news conference.
He denounced the sanctions as an example of the U.S. unilateralism and Washington's attempts to apply its domestic laws to the world.
"It proceeds from the philosophy of the unipolar world," Lavrov said. "Russia will demand an end to such practice that is absolutely incompatible with a modern world order."
He added that Russia's cooperation with Iran and other countries has been in line with the international law.
The U.S. decision and Russia's strong criticism of it reflected a growing chill in bilateral ties, which have been badly strained over U.S. missile defense plans in Poland and the Czech Republic, Russia's war in Georgia and other disputes.
The U.S. State Department said the decision Thursday was made because a U.S. law bans the transfer of technology that may help those nations develop missiles or mass destruction weapons.
The U.S. move ban government agencies from dealing with the firms targeted by the sanctions.
Russia has maintained close ties with Iran and is building its first nuclear power plant in the southern Iranian port of Bushehr, which is expected to go on line next year. Russia has backed limited U.N. sanctions aimed at forcing Iran to suspend its uranium enrichment program, but has staunchly opposed the U.S. push for harsher measures.
Russia has also sold air defense missiles and other weapons to Iran, contracts that have drawn a strong U.S. and Israeli criticism.
Lavrov added the U.S. sanctions will hurt bilateral ties. "We will take this into account in our relations with the United States in the trade and economic and other spheres," Lavrov said.
Rosoboronexport spokesman Vyacheslav Davidenko criticized the move as an attempt to sideline an arms competitor.
"We consider it as another example of unfair competition," he said in remarks broadcast by the state Rossiya television.
The United States has imposed similar sanctions against several Russian companies in the past, including Rosoboronexport in 2006.
zondag 19 oktober 2008
Russia has hardly any friends
The Axis of Moscow
It's lonely out there for Vladimir Putin.
Where would Russia be without Daniel Ortega? Even more isolated than the Kremlin now finds itself after its August adventure in Georgia.
Two months after the war in the Caucasus, Mr. Ortega's Nicaragua is the lone country to follow Moscow's recognition of the "independence" -- in effect, Russian annexation -- of Georgia's South Ossetia and Abkhazia provinces. Given Russia's serious diplomatic onslaught, that's an embarrassing outcome for Vladimir Putin.
Consider the rogue's gallery that refused to go along: Hugo Chávez's Venezuela, the Castros' Cuba, Bolivia, Iran and Syria. The club of seven authoritarian former Soviet republics known as the Collective Security Treaty Organization also demurred. Even Moscow's puppet autocrat in Belarus, Aleksander Lukashenko, deferred to his toothless parliament; in other words, nyet, for now. Russia was rebuffed by China and India at the Shanghai Cooperation Organization.
There is of course a long line of goons happy to take military, energy or economic handouts from the Kremlin, though the dramatic drop in oil prices and Russian stocks will limit its ability to buy people off. Mr. Lukashenko could well be holding out his support for cheaper natural gas. But Russia's erratic and aggressive behavior in the Caucasus has apparently given even him pause about its possible intentions against Belarus.
In addition to Mr. Ortega, Russia did manage recognition by Hamas, Hezbolla
h and the Moldovan regions of Gaugazia and Trans-Dniester. But that is little solace for a Kremlin whose bigger goal in the war was to declare a Monroe-ski Doctrine for its "near abroad" and lead a new anti-American block. Fyodor Lukyanov, the editor of Russia in Global Affairs, summed up the strategy: "Our long effort to become part of the West is over. The aim now is to be an independent power in a multipolar world in which Russia is a major player."
It's hard to be a major player when all you have is very minor friends.
Source: the wall street journal
It's lonely out there for Vladimir Putin.
Where would Russia be without Daniel Ortega? Even more isolated than the Kremlin now finds itself after its August adventure in Georgia.
Two months after the war in the Caucasus, Mr. Ortega's Nicaragua is the lone country to follow Moscow's recognition of the "independence" -- in effect, Russian annexation -- of Georgia's South Ossetia and Abkhazia provinces. Given Russia's serious diplomatic onslaught, that's an embarrassing outcome for Vladimir Putin.
Consider the rogue's gallery that refused to go along: Hugo Chávez's Venezuela, the Castros' Cuba, Bolivia, Iran and Syria. The club of seven authoritarian former Soviet republics known as the Collective Security Treaty Organization also demurred. Even Moscow's puppet autocrat in Belarus, Aleksander Lukashenko, deferred to his toothless parliament; in other words, nyet, for now. Russia was rebuffed by China and India at the Shanghai Cooperation Organization.
There is of course a long line of goons happy to take military, energy or economic handouts from the Kremlin, though the dramatic drop in oil prices and Russian stocks will limit its ability to buy people off. Mr. Lukashenko could well be holding out his support for cheaper natural gas. But Russia's erratic and aggressive behavior in the Caucasus has apparently given even him pause about its possible intentions against Belarus.
In addition to Mr. Ortega, Russia did manage recognition by Hamas, Hezbolla
h and the Moldovan regions of Gaugazia and Trans-Dniester. But that is little solace for a Kremlin whose bigger goal in the war was to declare a Monroe-ski Doctrine for its "near abroad" and lead a new anti-American block. Fyodor Lukyanov, the editor of Russia in Global Affairs, summed up the strategy: "Our long effort to become part of the West is over. The aim now is to be an independent power in a multipolar world in which Russia is a major player."It's hard to be a major player when all you have is very minor friends.
Source: the wall street journal
zaterdag 18 oktober 2008
Who is Zaza Miminoshvili?
Who is Zaza Miminoshvili? Zaza Miminoshvili is a guitar player who organises a benefit performance on the 19/20/21th of October for those Georgians who fell victim to the Russian agression starting the 7th of August.
For every ticket being sold, 8 euro goes to children from Gori and Tschikinvali who are now getting shelter in Tbilisi.
Miminoshvili made it during a recent interview in die Zeit clear that the benefit performance is meant to help all the reguees: from South Ossetia, Abchazia and Georgia proper.
For all my German readers (who must be with thousands :-), go and see him:
19th October Berlin, Kulturbrauerei: 20.00
20th October Hamburg, Fabrik: 20.00
21th October Bremen, Moments: 20.00
For every ticket being sold, 8 euro goes to children from Gori and Tschikinvali who are now getting shelter in Tbilisi.
Miminoshvili made it during a recent interview in die Zeit clear that the benefit performance is meant to help all the reguees: from South Ossetia, Abchazia and Georgia proper.
For all my German readers (who must be with thousands :-), go and see him:
19th October Berlin, Kulturbrauerei: 20.00
20th October Hamburg, Fabrik: 20.00
21th October Bremen, Moments: 20.00
vrijdag 17 oktober 2008
Russia and Europe too soon to kiss and make up
Russia and Europe too soon to kiss and make up
Summary: The European Union should not give Russia a new partnership deal until it genuinely withdraws from Georgia.
RUSSIA announced this week that, just as it promised, it had pulled all its troops in Georgia back to the two disputed territories of Abkhazia and South Ossetia. Many European Union leaders were swift to praise the Kremlin for meeting the conditions it agreed with France’s Nicolas Sarkozy some six weeks ago—and almost as quick to suggest a return to business as usual.
A majority now want to start talks in November on a new “partnership and co-operation agreement”. Their none-so-subtle message is: forget about the pesky Georgian president, Mikheil Saakashvili, who was anyway responsible for starting the war on August 7th, and attend instead to the more urgent task of repairing relations with our biggest energy supplier.
The West needs to keep talking to Russia about many things, notably efforts to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons and further reductions in Russia’s and America’s own nuclear arsenals.
Yet it would be wrong to heed calls from the likes of Germany, Italy and their allies to start talks now on a new partnership agreement, as if the Georgian war had never happened. The main reason for this is that the troop withdrawal is largely bogus.
The Russians have stationed almost 8,000 troops in the two enclaves.
Villages in South Ossetia and beyond have been brutally cleansed of their Georgian inhabitants. And Abkhaz forces have retaken the Kodori Gorge, previously controlled by the Georgians. This does not come close to a pull-back to pre-August 7th positions, which is what the EU originally stipulated before embarking on a new partnership agreement. Moreover, the Russians still refuse to allow any of the 200-odd ceasefire monitors deployed by the EU into the two disputed territories.
Some regard Georgia and the Caucasus as small, faraway and so unimportant. They are, on the contrary, a strategically vital region that could play a critical role in the EU’s future energy security. And, as Mr Saakashvili has often said, if the Russians think they can escape unpunished for the invasion and occupation of parts of his country, that could embolden further adventurism. The war was popular with ordinary Russians: the popularity of President Dmitry Medvedev and the prime minister, Vladimir Putin, has risen even as financial markets have tanked. There are plenty of Russian citizens and passport-holders in such neighbours as Ukraine, Belarus and the Baltics whom the Kremlin might easily find a sudden need to “protect”, just as it did in South Ossetia.
Besides, this is not just about the Caucasus. Both Mr Medvedev and his foreign minister, Sergei Lavrov, have muttered belligerent things about Russia’s neighbours and the West in general. Its short war with Georgia seems to have confirmed Russia’s prejudice that it can cow its neighbours—including some members of the EU—by threatening or even using force. The Russians continue to treat the supply of energy as another weapon in their armoury. There can be no genuine partnership with the EU while Russia thinks this way.
Neighbourhood watch
The EU should be urgently seeking to put more substance into the neighbourhood policy that defines its dealings with Russia’s near-abroad. For all his annoying arrogance, Mr Saakashvili is a democratically elected president who has liberalised Georgia’s economy and cracked down on corruption. Ukraine’s democracy may sometimes resemble a tragicomedy (it is currently preparing for its third parliamentary election in the space of three years), but it is vigorous for all that. Even the autocratic Armenia and Azerbaijan may now look more to the West than they did before the war in Georgia. Belarus, widely known as Europe’s last dictatorship, is shifting its ground a little—as the EU recognised this week when it decided to relax its visa ban on the country’s leaders.
The EU could help these countries by offering financial aid, more open trade deals and easier visa conditions. It should also hold out to them prospect of eventual membership. This is less provocative than the notion of letting any of them into NATO, which has surely receded into the future after the Georgian war. But as experience in the Balkans has shown, the lure of eventual EU membership is a good way to foster liberal, market-based democracy and to defuse territorial and ethnic disputes. As for Russia, its help is still needed on some vital global issues. But for the EU to go ahead with new “partnership” talks now would send a message of astounding pusillanimity. At the very least, Russia needs first to live up to its promises to withdraw properly from Georgia and to let the EU’s monitors into the disputed enclaves.
Summary: The European Union should not give Russia a new partnership deal until it genuinely withdraws from Georgia.
RUSSIA announced this week that, just as it promised, it had pulled all its troops in Georgia back to the two disputed territories of Abkhazia and South Ossetia. Many European Union leaders were swift to praise the Kremlin for meeting the conditions it agreed with France’s Nicolas Sarkozy some six weeks ago—and almost as quick to suggest a return to business as usual.
A majority now want to start talks in November on a new “partnership and co-operation agreement”. Their none-so-subtle message is: forget about the pesky Georgian president, Mikheil Saakashvili, who was anyway responsible for starting the war on August 7th, and attend instead to the more urgent task of repairing relations with our biggest energy supplier.
The West needs to keep talking to Russia about many things, notably efforts to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons and further reductions in Russia’s and America’s own nuclear arsenals.
Yet it would be wrong to heed calls from the likes of Germany, Italy and their allies to start talks now on a new partnership agreement, as if the Georgian war had never happened. The main reason for this is that the troop withdrawal is largely bogus.
The Russians have stationed almost 8,000 troops in the two enclaves.
Villages in South Ossetia and beyond have been brutally cleansed of their Georgian inhabitants. And Abkhaz forces have retaken the Kodori Gorge, previously controlled by the Georgians. This does not come close to a pull-back to pre-August 7th positions, which is what the EU originally stipulated before embarking on a new partnership agreement. Moreover, the Russians still refuse to allow any of the 200-odd ceasefire monitors deployed by the EU into the two disputed territories.
Some regard Georgia and the Caucasus as small, faraway and so unimportant. They are, on the contrary, a strategically vital region that could play a critical role in the EU’s future energy security. And, as Mr Saakashvili has often said, if the Russians think they can escape unpunished for the invasion and occupation of parts of his country, that could embolden further adventurism. The war was popular with ordinary Russians: the popularity of President Dmitry Medvedev and the prime minister, Vladimir Putin, has risen even as financial markets have tanked. There are plenty of Russian citizens and passport-holders in such neighbours as Ukraine, Belarus and the Baltics whom the Kremlin might easily find a sudden need to “protect”, just as it did in South Ossetia.
Besides, this is not just about the Caucasus. Both Mr Medvedev and his foreign minister, Sergei Lavrov, have muttered belligerent things about Russia’s neighbours and the West in general. Its short war with Georgia seems to have confirmed Russia’s prejudice that it can cow its neighbours—including some members of the EU—by threatening or even using force. The Russians continue to treat the supply of energy as another weapon in their armoury. There can be no genuine partnership with the EU while Russia thinks this way.
Neighbourhood watch
The EU should be urgently seeking to put more substance into the neighbourhood policy that defines its dealings with Russia’s near-abroad. For all his annoying arrogance, Mr Saakashvili is a democratically elected president who has liberalised Georgia’s economy and cracked down on corruption. Ukraine’s democracy may sometimes resemble a tragicomedy (it is currently preparing for its third parliamentary election in the space of three years), but it is vigorous for all that. Even the autocratic Armenia and Azerbaijan may now look more to the West than they did before the war in Georgia. Belarus, widely known as Europe’s last dictatorship, is shifting its ground a little—as the EU recognised this week when it decided to relax its visa ban on the country’s leaders.
The EU could help these countries by offering financial aid, more open trade deals and easier visa conditions. It should also hold out to them prospect of eventual membership. This is less provocative than the notion of letting any of them into NATO, which has surely receded into the future after the Georgian war. But as experience in the Balkans has shown, the lure of eventual EU membership is a good way to foster liberal, market-based democracy and to defuse territorial and ethnic disputes. As for Russia, its help is still needed on some vital global issues. But for the EU to go ahead with new “partnership” talks now would send a message of astounding pusillanimity. At the very least, Russia needs first to live up to its promises to withdraw properly from Georgia and to let the EU’s monitors into the disputed enclaves.
donderdag 16 oktober 2008
Russian businessmen invade Alaska
Russian Gazprom's top managers have visited Alaska to look into projects in the US state, Gazprom said Tuesday.
The Russian gas giant could share its expertise in Alaska as climatic conditions at its traditional gas production regions in northern Russia are similar to those in Alaska, it said in a statement.A Gazprom delegation consisting of CEO Alexei Miller, his deputies Valery Golubev and Alexander Medvedev and others, met with representatives of Alaska's natural resources department, management of Arctic Slope Regional Corporation, which represents local business interests, and ConocoPhillips CEO Jim Mulva.
"Gazprom is ready to provide its abilities and experience. I think in the future we could conduct joint scientific research," Miller said in televised comments broadcast by Russian Vesti news channel from Anchorage, Alaska.Miller in June 2008 disclosed his company's interest in joining a planned project to build a gas pipeline from Alaska to the Lower 48 US states."Our interests are not limited to the European continent only...Gazprom has unique experience, knowledge and modern technology and is the leading company in transporting gas by pipeline.
That is why we are interested in such a large-scale project as construction of the gas pipeline from Alaska," he said in a speech at the St Petersburg International Economic Forum.
Mulva said at the time that ConocoPhillips would study Gazprom's proposal.
There are two rival planned pipeline projects in Alaska, one led by TransCanada and the other by two North Slope producers, BP and ConocoPhillips.
Miller said Tuesday timeframes for both projects envisage implementation by around 2018. Gazprom said in a statement that besides the two planned pipeline projects in Alaska there should be opportunities considered for the construction of an LNG plant in Alaska.
Gazprom also suggested that a complex plan for gas production, transportation and supply system in Alaska would be "rational" for the development of the state's hydrocarbons. Gazprom is leading a similar unified plan in Russia, for the development of East Siberian and Far Eastern gas fields.
The Russian gas giant could share its expertise in Alaska as climatic conditions at its traditional gas production regions in northern Russia are similar to those in Alaska, it said in a statement.A Gazprom delegation consisting of CEO Alexei Miller, his deputies Valery Golubev and Alexander Medvedev and others, met with representatives of Alaska's natural resources department, management of Arctic Slope Regional Corporation, which represents local business interests, and ConocoPhillips CEO Jim Mulva.
"Gazprom is ready to provide its abilities and experience. I think in the future we could conduct joint scientific research," Miller said in televised comments broadcast by Russian Vesti news channel from Anchorage, Alaska.Miller in June 2008 disclosed his company's interest in joining a planned project to build a gas pipeline from Alaska to the Lower 48 US states."Our interests are not limited to the European continent only...Gazprom has unique experience, knowledge and modern technology and is the leading company in transporting gas by pipeline.
That is why we are interested in such a large-scale project as construction of the gas pipeline from Alaska," he said in a speech at the St Petersburg International Economic Forum.
Mulva said at the time that ConocoPhillips would study Gazprom's proposal.
There are two rival planned pipeline projects in Alaska, one led by TransCanada and the other by two North Slope producers, BP and ConocoPhillips.
Miller said Tuesday timeframes for both projects envisage implementation by around 2018. Gazprom said in a statement that besides the two planned pipeline projects in Alaska there should be opportunities considered for the construction of an LNG plant in Alaska.
Gazprom also suggested that a complex plan for gas production, transportation and supply system in Alaska would be "rational" for the development of the state's hydrocarbons. Gazprom is leading a similar unified plan in Russia, for the development of East Siberian and Far Eastern gas fields.
dinsdag 14 oktober 2008
Iceland starts talks with Russia on huge Loan
Oct. 14 (Bloomberg) -- Iceland's delegation started talks in Moscow today to secure an emergency loan of as much as 4 billion euros ($5.47 billion) from Russia after the island's three largest banks collapsed.
A six-person delegation lead by Sigurdur Sturla Palsson, the head of the central bank's international department, flew to the Russian capital yesterday, a spokeswoman for Iceland's Moscow Embassy said. The talks may last a number of days, said an official at Russia's Finance Ministry.
Iceland was the first NATO member to appeal for Russian aid after the global financial crisis led to the collapse of Kaupthing Bank hf, Landsbanki Island hf and Glitnir Bank hf with debts equivalent to as much as 12 times the size of the Nordic country's economy.
``This is a wake-up call for the U.S.,'' Vladimir Matias, managing partner at Asset Capital Partners in Moscow, told Bloomberg Television. ``It needs now to decide what do to, to intervene and possibly help Iceland and build a political bridge before the Russians.''
While Russia's stock markets suffered their worst rout since the 1998 default, the world's largest energy exporter has weathered the global credit crunch with $546 billion in currency reserves, the third largest after China and Japan.
No Support
Icelandic Prime Minister Geir Haarde complained last week that his country hadn't received financial support from its allies in Europe and North America.
Iceland may also become the first western nation to seek aid from the International Monetary Fund since 1976. Loans from the IMF and Russia ``are not mutually exclusive,'' Haarde said on Oct. 9.
Icelandic Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Urdur Gunnarsdottir, speaking in a phone interview from Reykjavik, said that talks with Russia would last at least two days, adding that discussions with the IMF are continuing.
Russian President Dmitry Medvedev's top economic adviser, Arkady Dvorkovich, said last week that Russia wanted to help stabilize Iceland.
``Global turmoil affects Russia a lot,'' Dvorkovich said in an interview with Bloomberg Television. ``We are part of Europe and we want Europe to be stable.''
A six-person delegation lead by Sigurdur Sturla Palsson, the head of the central bank's international department, flew to the Russian capital yesterday, a spokeswoman for Iceland's Moscow Embassy said. The talks may last a number of days, said an official at Russia's Finance Ministry.
Iceland was the first NATO member to appeal for Russian aid after the global financial crisis led to the collapse of Kaupthing Bank hf, Landsbanki Island hf and Glitnir Bank hf with debts equivalent to as much as 12 times the size of the Nordic country's economy.
``This is a wake-up call for the U.S.,'' Vladimir Matias, managing partner at Asset Capital Partners in Moscow, told Bloomberg Television. ``It needs now to decide what do to, to intervene and possibly help Iceland and build a political bridge before the Russians.''
While Russia's stock markets suffered their worst rout since the 1998 default, the world's largest energy exporter has weathered the global credit crunch with $546 billion in currency reserves, the third largest after China and Japan.
No Support
Icelandic Prime Minister Geir Haarde complained last week that his country hadn't received financial support from its allies in Europe and North America.
Iceland may also become the first western nation to seek aid from the International Monetary Fund since 1976. Loans from the IMF and Russia ``are not mutually exclusive,'' Haarde said on Oct. 9.
Icelandic Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Urdur Gunnarsdottir, speaking in a phone interview from Reykjavik, said that talks with Russia would last at least two days, adding that discussions with the IMF are continuing.
Russian President Dmitry Medvedev's top economic adviser, Arkady Dvorkovich, said last week that Russia wanted to help stabilize Iceland.
``Global turmoil affects Russia a lot,'' Dvorkovich said in an interview with Bloomberg Television. ``We are part of Europe and we want Europe to be stable.''
maandag 13 oktober 2008
EU presidency cautious about resuming Russia talks
French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner was cautious Monday about the likelihood of the European Union quickly resuming talks with Russia on a new strategic partnership.
"We are going to discuss it again today," he said, before chairing talks with his EU counterparts in Luxembourg. But he noted that a ceasefire deal ending the Russia-Georgia conflict in August was not being entirely respected.
While still contesting Russia’s backing for breakaway Georgian territories, South Ossetia and Abkhazia, the ministers are expected to decide that Russia has kept its commitments by withdrawing troops from a buffer zone around the contested territories.
However, Kouchner and his EU counterparts have suggested that the decision to resume the partnership talks be taken immediately.
Kouchner reaffirmed that Russia had withdrawn its troops from buffer zones near the two breakaway Georgian regions, in line with a French-brokered ceasefire agreement.
"The Russians have withdrawn, and apart from South Ossetia and Abkhazia, there are no more Russia soldiers in Georgia," he said.
"We postponed" the partnership negotiations at an emergency summit on Georgia on Sept. 1, called after Russia recognized the independence of rebel Abkhazia and South Ossetia, he recalled.
But he said that of the six-points in the peace agreement reached on Aug. 12 between French President Nicolas Sarkozy and his Russian counterpart Dmitry Medvedev, "we have fulfilled between two and three" points.
"Problems remain and we will analyze them," he said. "This is not something that can be resolved in two minutes."
Finnish Foreign Minister Alexander Stubb, who is also head of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) said the decision could be taken just ahead of an EU-Russia summit scheduled for Nov. 14.
German deputy foreign minister Guenter Gloser, also arriving for the Luxembourg talks, said "there will always be some people who think the EU is doing Russia a favor" with the negotiations.
"But we must ask whether (the EU) would be doing itself a favor by blocking relations," given, in particular, the importance of Russian fuel supplies to Europe.
British Foreign Secretary David Miliband welcomed the Russian troop withdrawal from the "buffer zones" as "an important step forward" and highlighted the fact that European monitors were able to operate "in a free and open way" in Georgia.
While saying the partnership deal with Russia could be addressed by the EU ministers he added that "at the moment we should be focusing on ensuring that all those elements that were agreed in September, including the Geneva talks, get going with proper speed," he added.
International talks on the Geneva situation, held under UN, OSCE and EU auspices, will begin on Wednesday.
There were, however, some more reticent voices coming from the Baltic states, Poland and Sweden.
Swedish Foreign Minister Carl Bildt recalled that European leaders had agreed on Sept. 1 to freeze the talks until Russian forces withdraw to the positions they held before the outbreak of hostilities in Georgia in early August.
"If you look at the map they aren’t in the positions they had prior to August 7," he told reporters.
"They have made the withdrawal primarily from the buffer zones but there are areas they are occupying now where they were not on the 7th of August."
He refused to say whether Sweden would oppose the resumption of the talks.
Russian troops moved into Georgia on Aug. 8 after Georgia’s offensive to try to bring South Ossetia back under government control.
EU leaders called off talks on a strategic partnership agreement with Russia at a special summit on Sept. 1 and one week later Russia agreed to bring its troops out of the buffer zones.
"We are going to discuss it again today," he said, before chairing talks with his EU counterparts in Luxembourg. But he noted that a ceasefire deal ending the Russia-Georgia conflict in August was not being entirely respected.
While still contesting Russia’s backing for breakaway Georgian territories, South Ossetia and Abkhazia, the ministers are expected to decide that Russia has kept its commitments by withdrawing troops from a buffer zone around the contested territories.
However, Kouchner and his EU counterparts have suggested that the decision to resume the partnership talks be taken immediately.
Kouchner reaffirmed that Russia had withdrawn its troops from buffer zones near the two breakaway Georgian regions, in line with a French-brokered ceasefire agreement.
"The Russians have withdrawn, and apart from South Ossetia and Abkhazia, there are no more Russia soldiers in Georgia," he said.
"We postponed" the partnership negotiations at an emergency summit on Georgia on Sept. 1, called after Russia recognized the independence of rebel Abkhazia and South Ossetia, he recalled.
But he said that of the six-points in the peace agreement reached on Aug. 12 between French President Nicolas Sarkozy and his Russian counterpart Dmitry Medvedev, "we have fulfilled between two and three" points.
"Problems remain and we will analyze them," he said. "This is not something that can be resolved in two minutes."
Finnish Foreign Minister Alexander Stubb, who is also head of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) said the decision could be taken just ahead of an EU-Russia summit scheduled for Nov. 14.
German deputy foreign minister Guenter Gloser, also arriving for the Luxembourg talks, said "there will always be some people who think the EU is doing Russia a favor" with the negotiations.
"But we must ask whether (the EU) would be doing itself a favor by blocking relations," given, in particular, the importance of Russian fuel supplies to Europe.
British Foreign Secretary David Miliband welcomed the Russian troop withdrawal from the "buffer zones" as "an important step forward" and highlighted the fact that European monitors were able to operate "in a free and open way" in Georgia.
While saying the partnership deal with Russia could be addressed by the EU ministers he added that "at the moment we should be focusing on ensuring that all those elements that were agreed in September, including the Geneva talks, get going with proper speed," he added.
International talks on the Geneva situation, held under UN, OSCE and EU auspices, will begin on Wednesday.
There were, however, some more reticent voices coming from the Baltic states, Poland and Sweden.
Swedish Foreign Minister Carl Bildt recalled that European leaders had agreed on Sept. 1 to freeze the talks until Russian forces withdraw to the positions they held before the outbreak of hostilities in Georgia in early August.
"If you look at the map they aren’t in the positions they had prior to August 7," he told reporters.
"They have made the withdrawal primarily from the buffer zones but there are areas they are occupying now where they were not on the 7th of August."
He refused to say whether Sweden would oppose the resumption of the talks.
Russian troops moved into Georgia on Aug. 8 after Georgia’s offensive to try to bring South Ossetia back under government control.
EU leaders called off talks on a strategic partnership agreement with Russia at a special summit on Sept. 1 and one week later Russia agreed to bring its troops out of the buffer zones.
zondag 12 oktober 2008
Russia test-fires ballistic missiles
Russia test-fired long-range ballistic missiles Sunday as President Dmitri Medvedev pledged to build up the country's armed capabilities.The military fired a Topol intercontinental missile from the Plesetsk cosmodrome in northwest Russia at a target thousands of kilometers away in the Kamchatka Peninsula in the Russian Far East. Submarines in the Okhotsk Sea near Japan and the Barents Sea launched ballistic missiles that reached northern Russia and Kamchatka, the state broadcaster Vesti-24 reported.
"This shows that our shield is in order," Medvedev said Sunday at Plesetsk. "We will build up our armed capability, which means we will acquire new weaponry while also launching traditional ballistic missiles."
The purpose of the Plesetsk test launch was to confirm the viability of the Topol rocket, which has been in service with Russian forces for 20 years, Vesti reported. The Topol, with a range of 10,000 kilometers, or 6,200 miles, is part of Russia's response to a planned U.S. missile defense shield in Eastern Europe, the state broadcaster cited experts as saying.
On Saturday, Russia fired a Sineva ballistic missile from a nuclear submarine in the Barents Sea to a record distance of more than 11,500 kilometers to a target in the equatorial region of the Pacific Ocean.
The statement Sunday was the latest pledge by the Russian head of state to revive the might of the armed forces. Medvedev said Saturday that Russia would resume building aircraft carriers and last month announced that Russia would build more new submarines. The president also said that the country's nuclear deterrent should be upgraded within 12 years.
Seeking to assert its power after a decade of oil-fueled economic growth, Russia announced that it would increase defense spending 26 percent to a post-Soviet record of 1.28 trillion rubles, or $48 billion, next year.
Russia must achieve "supremacy in the air, in delivering high-precision strikes against land and sea targets and in the rapid deployment of forces," Medvedev said late last month.
Russia has stepped up protests since the Czech Republic and Poland agreed to host elements of a U.S. missile-defense system. Amid a chill in ties with the West caused by an August war with neighboring Georgia, Russia has warned it would respond militarily by targeting the sites.
vrijdag 10 oktober 2008
Ethnic cleansing in ethnic Georgian villages
LONDON (AP) — Russia and Georgia could be suspended from Europe's top human rights body unless the two countries uphold their obligations to prevent abuses in the aftermath of their short but fierce war, the group's head said Monday.
Terry Davis, secretary-general of the Council of Europe, told The Associated Press that both countries breached their obligations when they went to war in August over the breakaway Georgian province of South Ossetia.
Davis did not go into detail but the council's parliamentary assembly last week expressed concern over what it called "credible reports of acts of ethnic cleansing committed in ethnic Georgian villages in South Ossetia."
Davis said the parliamentary assembly made clear "we're not prepared to have business as usual."
He said that unless the rights situation in Georgia improved both their memberships in the 47-nation grouping could be in jeopardy.
"If there is no improvement in the situation, if we are not satisfied that Georgia and Russia are now fulfilling their obligations, then we will have to consider what action to take," Davis said at the sidelines of a legal conference hosted by the Council of Europe in London.
"That action could be — could be — suspension of a member country from the council," he said.
Davis said he wanted the council to publish a report on Russia-Georgia conflict within the next month that evaluates both sides on a range of human rights issues.
The council has never suspended a country before. However Russia's voting rights in the council's assembly were revoked eight years ago over rights violations in Chechnya. The voting rights were restored a year later.
The Council of Europe was set up after World War II to promote cooperation and human rights. Its parliamentary arm meets several times a year to debate democracy and rights issues.
Members include nearly every country in wes
Terry Davis, secretary-general of the Council of Europe, told The Associated Press that both countries breached their obligations when they went to war in August over the breakaway Georgian province of South Ossetia.
Davis did not go into detail but the council's parliamentary assembly last week expressed concern over what it called "credible reports of acts of ethnic cleansing committed in ethnic Georgian villages in South Ossetia."
Davis said the parliamentary assembly made clear "we're not prepared to have business as usual."
He said that unless the rights situation in Georgia improved both their memberships in the 47-nation grouping could be in jeopardy.
"If there is no improvement in the situation, if we are not satisfied that Georgia and Russia are now fulfilling their obligations, then we will have to consider what action to take," Davis said at the sidelines of a legal conference hosted by the Council of Europe in London.
"That action could be — could be — suspension of a member country from the council," he said.
Davis said he wanted the council to publish a report on Russia-Georgia conflict within the next month that evaluates both sides on a range of human rights issues.
The council has never suspended a country before. However Russia's voting rights in the council's assembly were revoked eight years ago over rights violations in Chechnya. The voting rights were restored a year later.
The Council of Europe was set up after World War II to promote cooperation and human rights. Its parliamentary arm meets several times a year to debate democracy and rights issues.
Members include nearly every country in wes
donderdag 9 oktober 2008
Russia aiding Iran in nuclear program
PARIS — International nuclear inspectors are investigating whether a Russian scientist helped Iran conduct complex experiments on how to detonate a nuclear weapon, according to European and American officials.
As part of the investigation, inspectors at the International Atomic Energy Agency are seeking information from the scientist, whom they believe acted on his own as an adviser on experiments described in a lengthy document obtained by the agency, the officials said.
The officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the investigation is underway, said that the document appeared authentic, without explaining why, but made clear that they did not think the scientist was working on behalf of the Russian government.
Still, it is the first time that the nuclear agency has suggested that Iran might have received help from a foreign weapons scientist in developing nuclear arms.
The American and European officials said the new document, written in Farsi, is part of an accumulation of evidence that Iran has worked toward developing a nuclear weapon, despite Tehran’s claims that its atomic work over the last two decades is aimed solely at producing electrical power.
Last February, in a closed-door briefing in the agency’s headquarters in Vienna, the agency’s chief nuclear inspector presented diplomats from dozens of countries with a trove of newly declassified evidence — documents, sketches and even a video — that he said raised questions about whether Iran has tried to design a weapon.
Among the data presented by Olli Heinonen, the chief inspector, were indications that the Iranians had worked on exploding detonators that are critical for the firing of most nuclear weapons.
When the Iranian envoy at the briefing called the charges “groundless” and protested that the tests were for conventional arms, Mr. Heinonen replied that the experiments were “not consistent with any application other than the development of a nuclear weapon.” He called the shape and timing involved in the firing systems and detonators “key components of nuclear weapons.”
At the same time, however, Mr. Heinonen acknowledged that the agency “did not have sufficient information at this stage to conclude whether the allegations are groundless or the data fabricated.”
The new document currently under investigation offers further evidence of such experiments, Western officials said.
Iranian officials have said repeatedly that the documents the agency is using in its investigation of Iran’s past nuclear activities are fabrications or forgeries, and that any experiments were not related to nuclear weapons.
Iran has said the same about the new evidence, although the I.A.E.A. has not shown the full document to officials in Tehran. Instead, Iran has been given only five pages of excerpts that have been translated from Farsi into English.
The Western officials said that the conditions under which the inspectors obtained the document prohibited them from revealing it in full to the Iranians, out of fear that it could expose the source of the document.
These restrictions present a dilemma for Mohamed ElBaradei, the agency’s director, who is pressuring Iran to reveal its past nuclear activity. “I cannot accuse a person without providing him or her with the evidence,” he said in an interview last year.
Although officials would not say how they obtained the new document, it was first publicly mentioned in an agency report last May as one of 18 documents presented to Iran in connection with alleged nuclear weapons studies.
It was described as a “five-page document in English” dealing with experimentation with a complex initiation system to detonate a substantial amount of high explosives and to monitor the detonation with probes. There was no indication that the document was a translation of a much longer and more comprehensive document in Farsi.
The original document is described by officials familiar with it as a detailed narrative of experiments aimed at creating a perfectly-timed implosion of nuclear material.
According to experts, the two most difficult challenges in developing nuclear weapons is creating the bomb fuel and figuring out how to compress and detonate it.
An agency report last month revealed that Iran may have received “foreign expertise” in its detonator experiments.
A senior official with links to the agency said at the time that a foreign government was not involved. He also ruled out the involvement of Libya and the remnants of the network run by Abdul Qadeer Khan, the Pakistani metallurgist who built the world’s largest black-market sales operation for nuclear technology. But he refused to comment further.
European and American officials now say that the “foreign expertise” was a reference to the Russian scientist, but offered only scant details. They said the scientist is believed to have helped guide Iranians in the experiments, but that he was not the author of the document.
Nor is he thought to have been affiliated with the civilian electric power plant that is being rebuilt by Russia at the Iranian port of Bushehr, and which Russia has agreed to fuel with nuclear material, officials said.
Russia says it opposes any effort by Iran to obtain a weapon, but cooperation by Russian companies and individuals with some aspects of Iran’s nuclear program dates back years.
In the late 1990’s, Russia’s scientific and technical elite, reeling from the collapse of the Soviet Union, forged ties to Iran, which paid hard currency for aid in weapon and technical programs. Western experts say the assistance extended to Tehran’s atomic efforts, but there was never any proof in those years of a Russian link to nuclear weapons development.
“The Iranians were very active in recruiting and paying Russian scientists to provide them with assistance in their nuclear program,” said Gary S. Samore, a National Security Council official during the Clinton administration who now directs studies at the Council on Foreign Relations.
Dr. Samore said he had no recollection of Russian aid in the design of Iranian nuclear arms but added that it could have happened. “There was so much back and forth,” he said in an interview. “It’s plausible to me that they at some point paid a Russian nuclear expert to provide assistance.”
Asked about the potential contribution of the Russian scientist in detonator experimentation, a senior Russian official who has long followed Iran’s nuclear program said, “It is difficult for me to add anything.”
As part of the investigation, inspectors at the International Atomic Energy Agency are seeking information from the scientist, whom they believe acted on his own as an adviser on experiments described in a lengthy document obtained by the agency, the officials said.
The officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the investigation is underway, said that the document appeared authentic, without explaining why, but made clear that they did not think the scientist was working on behalf of the Russian government.
Still, it is the first time that the nuclear agency has suggested that Iran might have received help from a foreign weapons scientist in developing nuclear arms.
The American and European officials said the new document, written in Farsi, is part of an accumulation of evidence that Iran has worked toward developing a nuclear weapon, despite Tehran’s claims that its atomic work over the last two decades is aimed solely at producing electrical power.
Last February, in a closed-door briefing in the agency’s headquarters in Vienna, the agency’s chief nuclear inspector presented diplomats from dozens of countries with a trove of newly declassified evidence — documents, sketches and even a video — that he said raised questions about whether Iran has tried to design a weapon.
Among the data presented by Olli Heinonen, the chief inspector, were indications that the Iranians had worked on exploding detonators that are critical for the firing of most nuclear weapons.
When the Iranian envoy at the briefing called the charges “groundless” and protested that the tests were for conventional arms, Mr. Heinonen replied that the experiments were “not consistent with any application other than the development of a nuclear weapon.” He called the shape and timing involved in the firing systems and detonators “key components of nuclear weapons.”
At the same time, however, Mr. Heinonen acknowledged that the agency “did not have sufficient information at this stage to conclude whether the allegations are groundless or the data fabricated.”
The new document currently under investigation offers further evidence of such experiments, Western officials said.
Iranian officials have said repeatedly that the documents the agency is using in its investigation of Iran’s past nuclear activities are fabrications or forgeries, and that any experiments were not related to nuclear weapons.
Iran has said the same about the new evidence, although the I.A.E.A. has not shown the full document to officials in Tehran. Instead, Iran has been given only five pages of excerpts that have been translated from Farsi into English.
The Western officials said that the conditions under which the inspectors obtained the document prohibited them from revealing it in full to the Iranians, out of fear that it could expose the source of the document.
These restrictions present a dilemma for Mohamed ElBaradei, the agency’s director, who is pressuring Iran to reveal its past nuclear activity. “I cannot accuse a person without providing him or her with the evidence,” he said in an interview last year.
Although officials would not say how they obtained the new document, it was first publicly mentioned in an agency report last May as one of 18 documents presented to Iran in connection with alleged nuclear weapons studies.
It was described as a “five-page document in English” dealing with experimentation with a complex initiation system to detonate a substantial amount of high explosives and to monitor the detonation with probes. There was no indication that the document was a translation of a much longer and more comprehensive document in Farsi.
The original document is described by officials familiar with it as a detailed narrative of experiments aimed at creating a perfectly-timed implosion of nuclear material.
According to experts, the two most difficult challenges in developing nuclear weapons is creating the bomb fuel and figuring out how to compress and detonate it.
An agency report last month revealed that Iran may have received “foreign expertise” in its detonator experiments.
A senior official with links to the agency said at the time that a foreign government was not involved. He also ruled out the involvement of Libya and the remnants of the network run by Abdul Qadeer Khan, the Pakistani metallurgist who built the world’s largest black-market sales operation for nuclear technology. But he refused to comment further.
European and American officials now say that the “foreign expertise” was a reference to the Russian scientist, but offered only scant details. They said the scientist is believed to have helped guide Iranians in the experiments, but that he was not the author of the document.
Nor is he thought to have been affiliated with the civilian electric power plant that is being rebuilt by Russia at the Iranian port of Bushehr, and which Russia has agreed to fuel with nuclear material, officials said.
Russia says it opposes any effort by Iran to obtain a weapon, but cooperation by Russian companies and individuals with some aspects of Iran’s nuclear program dates back years.
In the late 1990’s, Russia’s scientific and technical elite, reeling from the collapse of the Soviet Union, forged ties to Iran, which paid hard currency for aid in weapon and technical programs. Western experts say the assistance extended to Tehran’s atomic efforts, but there was never any proof in those years of a Russian link to nuclear weapons development.
“The Iranians were very active in recruiting and paying Russian scientists to provide them with assistance in their nuclear program,” said Gary S. Samore, a National Security Council official during the Clinton administration who now directs studies at the Council on Foreign Relations.
Dr. Samore said he had no recollection of Russian aid in the design of Iranian nuclear arms but added that it could have happened. “There was so much back and forth,” he said in an interview. “It’s plausible to me that they at some point paid a Russian nuclear expert to provide assistance.”
Asked about the potential contribution of the Russian scientist in detonator experimentation, a senior Russian official who has long followed Iran’s nuclear program said, “It is difficult for me to add anything.”
Don't be fooled by Russia
Europe shouldn't give Russia too much credit for pulling troops out of Georgian buffer zones. The move doesn't go far enough in proving that Moscow wants to be a true European partner, writes Ingo Mannteufel (deutsche Welle).
Ahead of his meeting with French President Nicolas Sarkozy in Evian, Russian President Dmitry Medvedev proudly announced that Russia -- as promised -- will pull its troops out of the Georgian buffer zone ahead of the deadline. The move is an attempt by Russia to show itself as a stable and constructive partner for the European Union and to make up for a loss of trust that has emerged over the past few months.
President Medvedev is able to present himself as relaxed and in control since Russia doesn't really lose much by withdrawing its troops from the buffer zone. The move doesn't play a role at all when regarded from the military's strategic point of view. The Russian army will continue to secure the Abkhaz and South Ossetian regions with 7,600 troops set to remain there for the long-term.
From a diplomatic-political standpoint, Russia also hasn't given an inch of ground with the troops' withdrawal. The principle of Georgia's territorial integrity continues to be held in disdain by Moscow's recognition of Abkhazia and South Ossetia's independence.
No change in Russian policy
The pullout of soldiers from the buffer zone ahead of the agreed deadline should be seen as an expression of Russia's current strategy. Russia has achieved the preliminary goals it set for the conflict by militarily securing the breakaway provinces Abkhazia and South Ossetia and diplomatically recognizing them. Now Moscow is hoping to achieve even more by showing itself to be a constructive partner for the European Union.
But the fundamental problem remains. Russia took advantage of Georgia's aggression against the separatist regime in South Ossetia to recognize the independence of pro-Russian regions. By doing so, Moscow, for the first time since the breakup of the Soviet Union 17 years ago, violated the legal sanctity of international borders of territories that used to belong to the USSR.
This is not only a threatening situation for Georgia that won't please President Mikhail Saakashvili, it is also a dangerous development for the Eurasian continent.
These developments make a Caucasus stability package, which will hopefully be negotiated in Geneva next week by representatives from Russia, the EU and other involved parties -- including South Ossetia and Abkhazia and Georgia, absolutely essential. This is the only way to achieve lasting peace in the region. The European Union should makes its Russia policy dependent on constructive participation from Moscow during these talks -- not on the withdrawal of Russian soldiers from a buffer zone they created for themselves.
Ahead of his meeting with French President Nicolas Sarkozy in Evian, Russian President Dmitry Medvedev proudly announced that Russia -- as promised -- will pull its troops out of the Georgian buffer zone ahead of the deadline. The move is an attempt by Russia to show itself as a stable and constructive partner for the European Union and to make up for a loss of trust that has emerged over the past few months.
President Medvedev is able to present himself as relaxed and in control since Russia doesn't really lose much by withdrawing its troops from the buffer zone. The move doesn't play a role at all when regarded from the military's strategic point of view. The Russian army will continue to secure the Abkhaz and South Ossetian regions with 7,600 troops set to remain there for the long-term.
From a diplomatic-political standpoint, Russia also hasn't given an inch of ground with the troops' withdrawal. The principle of Georgia's territorial integrity continues to be held in disdain by Moscow's recognition of Abkhazia and South Ossetia's independence.
No change in Russian policy
The pullout of soldiers from the buffer zone ahead of the agreed deadline should be seen as an expression of Russia's current strategy. Russia has achieved the preliminary goals it set for the conflict by militarily securing the breakaway provinces Abkhazia and South Ossetia and diplomatically recognizing them. Now Moscow is hoping to achieve even more by showing itself to be a constructive partner for the European Union.
But the fundamental problem remains. Russia took advantage of Georgia's aggression against the separatist regime in South Ossetia to recognize the independence of pro-Russian regions. By doing so, Moscow, for the first time since the breakup of the Soviet Union 17 years ago, violated the legal sanctity of international borders of territories that used to belong to the USSR.
This is not only a threatening situation for Georgia that won't please President Mikhail Saakashvili, it is also a dangerous development for the Eurasian continent.
These developments make a Caucasus stability package, which will hopefully be negotiated in Geneva next week by representatives from Russia, the EU and other involved parties -- including South Ossetia and Abkhazia and Georgia, absolutely essential. This is the only way to achieve lasting peace in the region. The European Union should makes its Russia policy dependent on constructive participation from Moscow during these talks -- not on the withdrawal of Russian soldiers from a buffer zone they created for themselves.
woensdag 8 oktober 2008
Russia sells arms to terrorist nations
Israeli PM gets no promises on Russian arms sales
MOSCOW (AP) — Israel's prime minister said Tuesday he received assurances that Russia would not allow Israel's security to be threatened, but offered no indication he won the concrete promises he sought on Russian arms sales or sanctions on Iran.
Israel is concerned that Russia could sell its enemies, Iran and Syria, advanced S-300 anti-aircraft missile systems. That would make any strike at Iran's first nuclear power plant — which Russia is helping to build — more difficult.
Iran's president has vowed that Israel should be "wiped off the map" — and Israel fears that the nuclear program Iran says is to produce power is actually meant to manufacture weapons.
"We dealt with weapons sales, or the possibility of weapons sales," Ehud Olmert told reporters after a Kremlin meeting with Russian President Dmitry Medvedev. "The highest levels of Russian government understand well the Israeli position and are aware of the ramifications that such sales would have on stability in the region."
Olmert said Israel and Russia agreed to set up a forum to "upgrade their strategic dialogue" and discuss potential Russian arms sales. But he gave no indication that Medvedev had offered anything more concrete.
Russia has been against imposing more U.N. sanctions on Iran, and Olmert did not say that had changed. Medvedev said "he opposes a nuclear Iran" and expressed "sharp criticism" of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's fiery rhetoric toward Israel, Olmert said.
"He said Russian policy will continue to be one that will never, in any circumstances, hurt Israel's security," Olmert said.
Olmert came to Russia with little time remaining in office and little clout. Plagued by corruption charges, he has announced he will step down as soon as his successor, Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni, forms a new government or elections are held.
Underscoring Olmert's lame-duck status, he and Medvedev did not hold a joint news conference and Prime Minister Vladimir Putin did not bother to meet with him.
Officially, Olmert's office was told that Putin would be in his hometown of St. Petersburg celebrating his birthday.
The Kremlin put out a cursory statement after the talks, saying Medvedev had praised the "economic cooperation between the two countries."
In recent months Israel has done its best to make Russia happy. It has distanced itself from Georgia, announcing even before Georgia's August war with Russia that it was cutting weapons sales to Tbilisi.
Israel later further restricted defense contacts and even instructed defense consultants not to visit the Caucasus nation.
Olmert said he discussed Georgia with Medvedev, but offered few details, saying only that Medvedev said he "appreciates Israel's careful and responsible stance during the Caucasus crisis."
Before Olmert's trip, the Israeli government announced it was returning a czarist-era Jerusalem building — the Sergei Courtyard_ to Russian ownership.
The two nations also recently mutually dropped visa requirements for travelers.
MOSCOW (AP) — Israel's prime minister said Tuesday he received assurances that Russia would not allow Israel's security to be threatened, but offered no indication he won the concrete promises he sought on Russian arms sales or sanctions on Iran.
Israel is concerned that Russia could sell its enemies, Iran and Syria, advanced S-300 anti-aircraft missile systems. That would make any strike at Iran's first nuclear power plant — which Russia is helping to build — more difficult.
Iran's president has vowed that Israel should be "wiped off the map" — and Israel fears that the nuclear program Iran says is to produce power is actually meant to manufacture weapons.
"We dealt with weapons sales, or the possibility of weapons sales," Ehud Olmert told reporters after a Kremlin meeting with Russian President Dmitry Medvedev. "The highest levels of Russian government understand well the Israeli position and are aware of the ramifications that such sales would have on stability in the region."
Olmert said Israel and Russia agreed to set up a forum to "upgrade their strategic dialogue" and discuss potential Russian arms sales. But he gave no indication that Medvedev had offered anything more concrete.
Russia has been against imposing more U.N. sanctions on Iran, and Olmert did not say that had changed. Medvedev said "he opposes a nuclear Iran" and expressed "sharp criticism" of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's fiery rhetoric toward Israel, Olmert said.
"He said Russian policy will continue to be one that will never, in any circumstances, hurt Israel's security," Olmert said.
Olmert came to Russia with little time remaining in office and little clout. Plagued by corruption charges, he has announced he will step down as soon as his successor, Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni, forms a new government or elections are held.
Underscoring Olmert's lame-duck status, he and Medvedev did not hold a joint news conference and Prime Minister Vladimir Putin did not bother to meet with him.
Officially, Olmert's office was told that Putin would be in his hometown of St. Petersburg celebrating his birthday.
The Kremlin put out a cursory statement after the talks, saying Medvedev had praised the "economic cooperation between the two countries."
In recent months Israel has done its best to make Russia happy. It has distanced itself from Georgia, announcing even before Georgia's August war with Russia that it was cutting weapons sales to Tbilisi.
Israel later further restricted defense contacts and even instructed defense consultants not to visit the Caucasus nation.
Olmert said he discussed Georgia with Medvedev, but offered few details, saying only that Medvedev said he "appreciates Israel's careful and responsible stance during the Caucasus crisis."
Before Olmert's trip, the Israeli government announced it was returning a czarist-era Jerusalem building — the Sergei Courtyard_ to Russian ownership.
The two nations also recently mutually dropped visa requirements for travelers.
Abonneren op:
Posts (Atom)