The Rise of the Russian Empire: Russo-Armenian Relations

[Armenian]

This mammoth military complex in the middle of nowhere reminds me somewhat of the great Crusader fortresses that were constructed in the name of "God and Christ" in strategic locations throughout the Near East with the sole intent of controlling the region's vital trade routes and isolating Islam. And now, these great western military complexes constructed in the name of "Freedom and Democracy" in strategic locations throughout the world with the sole intent of controlling the region's vital oil/gas routes and isolating Russia. History is circular.

I now also see clearly the urgency of Kosovo's independence. In essence, this was a race against time between the West and Russia. It all makes perfect sense. I simply had not realized just how firmly entrenched US forces had become in the region. It's now obvious that the US will not be leaving Kosovo in the foreseeable future. This base part and parcel of Washington's longterm geostrategic plans for the region in question: a string of modern military base set up in strategically sensitive areas ringing the Russian Federation with the primary intent of isolating Moscow and securing vital oil and gas routs.

It's now obvious why Serbian and Russian politicians are making it clear that they will not seek a military solution to the Kosovo problem. The reality is that any armed attempt to retake Kosovo by Serbian and/or Russian forces will bring them into direct confrontation with US forces, a situation Serbia nor Russia can afford to risk at this time. There are also indicators that Russia and the US have most probably come to an understanding over Kosovo: Kosovo goes to the US camp despite Moscow's disapproval, and Serbia goes more-or-less to Russia, despite West's disapproval. However, in the longterm, this situation may actually end up working in Russia's favor because this will give Moscow better leverage in the disputed autonomous regions of the Caucasus as it also ensures Serbian dependence on Russia. Thus, the battle for Kosovo, in the foreseeable future, will be primarily economic and diplomatic - that is if extremists on either side don't ignite the volatile powder keg.

The danger here is that any armed confrontation in Kosovo could easily turn into a Third World War. I think this is also the reason why Russia, as well as the West obviously, preferred to see a moderate politician in power in Serbia. Russia cannot afford to get into a major war at this time, nor does Serbia. As we have already begun to see, Moscow will resort to diplomatic and economic warfare. In other words, Moscow will resort to using their favorit WMD, Gazprom, and the political situations regarding Abkhazia and South Ossetia.

There is high probability that what Washington is doing in Kosovo they will eventually attempt to do in Georgia as well. Washington may be currently looking for an excuse/pretext, perhaps Moscow's recognition of Abkhazia's and South Ossetia's independence. Recently there were reports in western media sources that more-or-less stated, Russia is in no position to do anything regarding Abkhazia and South Ossetia other than talk, clearly insinuating that the US will get directly involved on the side of Georgia in such a conflict. In my opinion, the scenario would be similar to what happened in Kosovo in 1999: Abkhazia/Ossetia proclaim independence, the West pushes Saakashvili to send in the army. In the ensuing clash of arms, using the pretext of protecting the "territorial integrity" of Georgia, Washington sends in significant military forces to protect Tbilisi from Russian "aggression." Thereafter, US forces will stay. In such a scenario, Russia will find itself in a serious strategic knot: escalate the war to a high intensity global level drawing the US fully into Georgia, or abandon the region and retreat? These types of situations may explain why Moscow has been so seriously concerned about recent developments such as the proposed missile defense system in eastern Europe, Kosovo's independence and Nato expansion into Ukraine and the Caucasus.

It comes as no surprise that the Armenian Republic ties in with all this as well. It is highly probable that had the West been successful in breaking Armenia away from Russia and Iran and imposed their terms and conditions on the isolated and fledgling Armenian state (essentially what Levin Petrostein has been hoping for), the entire south Caucasus region would turn into one great US military base in the name of exploiting Caspian Sea oil/gas and isolating Russia and Iran. In my opinion, such a situation in the Caucasus would threaten the very survival of the Armenian state. A prosperous and a powerful Armenian state can potentially threaten the geostrategic agenda that the West has for the region. It is obvious that in such a scenario Armenia would be kept impoverished and dependent on its immediate neighbors for survival. And, needles to say, Armenia will be forced to make amends with Turkey and Azerbaijan, in detriment of its national interests. The fact if the matter is, Armenia does not have the natural resources in demand, it does not have direct access to the outside world, nor does it control vital oil/gas routes. As a result, the Armenian Republic, in the eyes of the western political/economic elite, is simply in the way, an obstacle.

This is a very dangerous game indeed and we are living in dangerous times. I pray for peace but I am mentally preparing myself for a worst case scenario, a global conflict. I must reiterate, the Russian Federation can be the savior. It simply needs to pull together and consolidate its national resources - social, political, military and natural. I am convinced there is still hope. As the Crusader fortresses were eventually defeated, sooner or later, the West will be chased out of the region as well. I just hope that there will be minimal death and destruction in the process. Time will tell.

Armenian

***********************************

Camp Bondsteel and America's plans to control Caspian oil

By Paul Stuart, 29 April 2002

Camp Bondsteel, the biggest 'from scratch' foreign US military base since the Vietnam War is near completion in the Yugoslav province of Kosovo. It is located close to vital oil pipelines and energy corridors presently under construction, such as the US sponsored Trans-Balkan oil pipeline. As a result defence contractors, in particular Halliburton Oil subsidiary Brown & Root Services, are making a fortune. In June 1999, in the immediate aftermath of the bombing of Yugoslavia, US forces seized 1,000 acres of farmland in southeast Kosovo at Uresevic, near the Macedonian border, and began the construction of a camp. Camp Bondsteel is known as the 'grand dame' in a network of US bases running both sides of the border between Kosovo and Macedonia. In less than three years it has been transformed from an encampment of tents to a self sufficient, high tech base-camp housing nearly 7,000 troops?three quarters of all the US troops stationed in Kosovo.

There are 25 kilometres of roads and over 300 buildings at Camp Bondsteel, surrounded by 14 kilometres of earth and concrete barriers, 84 kilometres of concertina wire and 11 watch towers. It is so big that it has downtown, midtown and uptown districts, retail outlets, 24-hour sports halls, a chapel, library and the best-equipped hospital anywhere in Europe. At present there are 55 Black Hawk and Apache helicopters based at Bondsteel and although it has no aircraft landing strip the location was chosen for its capacity to expand. There are suggestions that it could replace the US airforce base at Aviano in Italy. According to Colonel Robert L. McClure, writing in the engineers professional Bulletin, "Engineer planning for operations in Kosovo began months before the first bomb was dropped. At the outset, planners wanted to use the lessons learned in Bosnia and convinced decision makers to reach base-camp 'end state' as quickly as possible." Initially US military engineers took control of 320 kilometres of roads and 75 bridges in the surrounding area for military use and laid out a base camp template involving soldiers living quarters, helicopter flight paths, ammunition holding areas and so on.

McClure explains how the Engineer Brigade were instructed "to merge construction assets and integrate them with the contractor, Brown & Root Services Corporation," to build not one but two base camps [the other is Camp Monteith] for a total of 7,000 troops. According to McClure, "At the height of the effort, about 1,000 former US military personnel, hired by Brown & Root, along with more than 7,000 Albanian local nationals, joined the 1,700 military engineers." From early July and into October [1999], construction at both camps continued 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Brown & Root Services provides all the support services to Camp Bondsteel. This includes 600,000 gallons of water per-day, enough electricity to supply a city of 25,000 and a supply centre with 14,000 product lines. It washes 1,200 bags of laundry, supplies 18,000 meals per day and operates 95 percent of the rail and airfield facilities. It also provides the camps firefighting service. Brown & Root are now the largest employers in Kosovo, with more than 5,000 local Kosovan Albanians and another 15,000 on its books.

Staff at Camp Bondsteel rarely venture outside the compound and their activities are secretive. Whilst other KFOR patrols are small and mobile with soldiers wearing soft caps and instructed to integrate with the local population, US military personnel leave Bondsteel in either helicopters or as part of infrequent but large heavily armed convoys. In unnamed interviews US troops complain that hostility to their presence is growing as local inhabitants compare the investment in Camp Bondsteel with the continuing decline in their own living standards. Those visiting Camp Bondsteel describe it as a journey through 100 years in time. The area surrounding the camp is extremely poor with an unemployment rate of 80 percent. Then Bondsteel appears on the horizon with its mass of communication satellites, antennae and menacing attack helicopters circling above. Brown & Root pay Kosova workers between $1 and $3 per hour. The local manager said wages were so low because, "We can't inflate the wages because we don't want to over inflate the local economy."

The escalating US presence at Bondsteel was accompanied by increased activity by the Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA). Since its appearance most Serbs, Roma and Albanians opposed to the KLA have been murdered or driven out. Those remaining dare not leave their houses to buy food at the local stores and the need for military escorts stretch from children's swimming pools to tractors taken away for repair. According to observers the KLA continue to act with virtual impunity in the US sector despite the high tech military intelligence facilities at Bondsteel. When US troops arrive at Camp Bondsteel, they are more likely to be met by a Brown & Root employee directing them to their accommodation and equipment areas. According to G. Cahlink in Government Executive Magazine (February 2002), Army peace keepers joke that they're missing a patch on their camouflage fatigues. We need one that says Sponsored by Brown & Root, says a staff sergeant, who, like more than nearly 10,000 soldiers in the region, has come to rely on Brown and Root Services, a Houston based contractor, for everything from breakfast to spare parts for armoured Humvees. The contract to service Camp Bondsteel is the latest in a string of military contracts awarded to Brown & Root Services. Its fortunes have grown as US militarism has escalated. The company is part of the Halliburton Corporation, the largest supplier of products and services to the oil industry.

In 1992 xxxx Cheney, as Secretary of Defence in the senior Bush administration, awarded the company a contract providing support for the US army's global operations. Cheney left politics and joined Halliburton as CEO between 1995 and 2000. He is now US vice president in the junior Bush administration. In 1992 Brown & Root built and maintained US army bases in Somalia earning $62 million. In 1994 Brown & Root built bases and support systems for 18,000 troops in Haiti doubling its earnings to $133 million. The company received a five-year support contract in 1999 worth $180 million per-year to build military facilities in Hungary, Croatia and Bosnia. It was Camp Bondsteel, however, that was dubbed "the mother of all contracts" by the Washington based Contract Services Association of America. "There, We do everything that does not require us to carry a gun," said Brown & Roots director David Capouya. The aim of outsourcing military support and services to private contractors has been to free up more soldiers for combat duties. A US Department of Defence (DoD) review in 2001 insisted that the use of contractors would escalate: "Only those functions that must be done at DoD should be kept at DoD."

In sectors controlled by other Western powers, KFOR soldiers who are living in bombed out apartment blocks and old factories joke, "What are the two things that can be seen from space, One is the Great Wall of China, the other is Camp Bondsteel." More seriously a senior British military officer told the Washington Post, "It is an obvious sign that the Americans are making a major commitment to the Balkan region and plan to stay." One analyst described the US as having taken advantage of favourable circumstances to create a base that would be large enough to accommodate future military plans. Camp Bondsteel has become a key venue for important policy speeches by leading officials of the Bush administration. On June 5, 2001 US Secretary of Defence Donald Rumsfeld explained to troops at Camp Bondsteel what role they played in the new administration's economic strategy. He declared, "How much should we spend on the armed services"... "My view is we don't spend on you, we invest in you. The men and women in the armed services are not a drain on our economic strength. Indeed you safeguard it. You're not a burden on our economy, you are the critical foundation for growth."

[...]

Source: http://forum.armenianclub.com/showth...t=8071&page=83

[Azad]

Originally Posted by Armenian

This mammoth military complex in the middle of nowhere reminds me somewhat of the great Crusader fortresses

Notice... the main entrance is at the bottom left side of the image. Top right a road for future housing. Most importantly the whole complex has deep trenches dug all around (dark color probably around 20 feet wide) it is almost like the old "fortresses" encircled with water.

[Armenian]

Blow to US as Hungary backs Russian pipeline

Hungary yesterday backed a planned Russian gas pipeline crossing south-east Europe, a move that risks angering Budapest's western partners and could threaten the prospects of Nabucco, a rival pipeline supported by the US and the European Union. Ferenc Gyurcsany, the prime minister, announced the move during a visit to Budapest by Dmitry Medvedev, Russia's first deputy prime minister and likely successor to the president, Vladimir Putin. The deal is expected to be signed in Moscow on Thursday. The Hungarian decision puts Gazprom, the Russian gas monopoly, in a strong position to build its proposed $10bn-plus (£5bn, €6.7bn) Southstream pipeline, which would bring gas from Russia across the Black Sea and into the heart of the EU. Having secured the support this year of Bulgaria and Serbia, Gazprom has now obtained agreements for most of the route to Italy, the pipeline's main destination. It is also in a position to build a link to Austria, central Europe's gas hub, where the Russian group already enjoys close links. Gazprom has yet to decide whether to build a separate connection from Bulgaria across Greece and the Adriatic to southern Italy.

Mr Gyurcsany and Mr Medvedev denied that Southstream was a threat to Nabucco, a rival western-backed route that would bring gas from central Asia to Europe via Turkey. Mr Gyurcsany said: "It's in the interests of Hungary to have both pipelines crossing Hungarian territory." The Hungarian section of the pipeline will be owned by a 50-50 joint venture between the government and Gazprom. Mr Medvedev said that for Russia the diversification of routes was important. Moscow is building Southstream and a Baltic Sea route called Nordstream to reduce its dependence on its current principal pipeline running through Ukraine. However, Nabucco's backers are concerned that Southstream is gaining big commercial advantages by signing gas supply deals, leaving Nabucco in a weaker bargaining position. A US official said: "It's important to remain focused on the clear Euro-Atlantic priority, which is Nabucco. It's understandable that countries want to have as many pipelines crossing their territory as possible. But it's a flawed approach because sequencing matters, and you want to put into place some diversification before deepening your dependence on a primary supplier."

The EU is in an awkward position, because while its collective gas policy is to encourage diversification of supply away from Russia, leading EU members, including Germany, France and Italy, have signed bilateral deals with Gazprom. * Mr Medvedev showed support for Serbia yesterday after what he called Kosovo's "illegal" western-backed declaration of independence last week. "We proceed from the understanding that Serbia is a single state with its jurisdiction spanning its entire territory ," he said.

Source: http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/8465fc98-e...0779fd2ac.html

[Armenian]

Kosovo Isn't About Russia

The issue is not whether it is right or wrong to keep baiting Russia, but whether it is right or wrong for the United States to keep rushing headlong into decisions that create more problems than they solve - and whether it is right for the European Union to rubber-stamp those decisions. Russia is incidental to the real issue here, and in fact seems to be baiting the United States and its allies rather more than the United States and Europe are bothering Moscow. Remember the end of the U.S.-led war against Yugoslavia in 1999, when Russian troops entered Kosovo before any NATO allies did? The Russians made their point and left. Now, having taken a clear stand against the United States, the Russians can watch and comment sarcastically as Washington and its allies battle to make an independent Kosovo work.

UN Security Council from ratifying Kosovo’s independence. It will soon be very clear that it is the United States and its allies who have overturned the international system that had been in place for decades. It is also the people in Washington and Brussels who will have to figure out how to make Kosovo viable as an independent state. That’s no small task. It will depend on foreign military and economic aid for the foreseeable future. It is surrounded by countries which - apart from Albania - are all suspicious of it. The pressure for union between Albania and Kosovo is growing, raising neighbors’ suspicions and regional tensions even further. The Kosovar Albanians may not turn out to be the paragons of good governance and guardians of civil society that their well-wishers would want. And minorities around the globe, some of them larger than the Kosovar Albanians, will demand equal treatment.

But apart from the real problems that Kosovo will face, and the ethical ones that its patrons will have to deal with, the biggest issue here is the future of Serbia. This pivotal country in the Balkans is being pushed into national division and isolation by the rush to recognize Kosovo’s independence. Belgrade can be blamed for most of the sorrow that has been heaped upon the Serbs since Slobodan Milosevic’s policies triggered the wars that destroyed multiethnic Yugoslavia. His cancellation of Kosovo’s autonomy and the brutality with which Belgrade dealt with the Kosovars’ rebellion brought the wrath the West upon his head. But the West’s continued humiliation of the Serbs, to their regional rivals’ benefit, seems designed to promote the growth of Serbian nationalism (and thus divide this nation further) and also to sow the seeds of endless tension in the region.

Whether this is the result of strategy or stupidity is equally lamentable: the United States has shown itself to be most reckless with peace while claiming to promote it. Kosovo has declared its independence and several countries, led by the United States, have already recognized it. However long its recognition remains in limbo, the breakaway state will be independent of Serbia but not independent of endless foreign support.

So it is irrelevant whether or not Kosovo should be recognized by more countries. The precedent has been set and a valuable lesson has been given to the world: When the United States want to push forward with a policy that does them no visible good but proves to the world that they can do what they want, whenever they want it, they will go ahead. They have proven even to the most well-intentioned observer that they care little for the medium- or long-term future but only for the present. One day, the United States will have other things to deal with, and Washington will leave Europe to struggle along with Kosovo. Russia may or may not still be involved in the region at that time.

The best way forward would have been for Europe to put Serbia on a fast track to EU membership. While protecting the Kosovars in their de facto independent state, Europe could have made clear to both the Serbs and Kosovar Albanians that Kosovo would be independent on the day that both ethnic groups became members of the European Union. This road was not taken. It would have been long and difficult, but it would have had a certain destination, the dissolution of nationalism and ethnic hostilities in the unique benefits of EU membership. The other road is even more difficult - and no one can guess where it is headed.

Source: http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/p...ut_russia.html

[Armenian]

CENTRAL ASIA: A BIG SECURITY WORRY FOR US INTELLIGENCE AGENCIES

Central Asia is a major area of concern for US intelligence agencies, according to an annual threat assessment presented recently by Director of National Intelligence Michael McConnell. McConnell discussed the Annual Threat Assessment -- a document representing the consensus view of 16 US intelligence agencies that covers all global security threats facing Washington -- with US senators on February 5. While Iraq remains an enduring source of concern, the reviving Islamic radical/terrorist threat in Afghanistan and in the tribal areas of Pakistan topped the list of security worries. "We have seen an influx of new Western recruits into the tribal areas since mid-2006," McConnell told members of the Senate Intelligence Committee. "We assess that al Qaeda’s homeland plotting is likely to continue to focus on prominent political, economic and infrastructure targets designed to produce mass casualties, visually dramatic destruction, significant economic aftershocks, and/or fear among the population."

The Assessment warns that Islamic activism may grow in Central Asia as a result of mounting social and economic discontent. In Uzbekistan, a weaker economy and rising prices for commodities are a potential source of trouble for President Islam Karimov’s authoritarian-minded administration. While Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan remain stable, Turkmenistan is beginning to open up after years of self-imposed isolation, and it has made improvements in human rights. Yet, unfortunately the Assessment disregards both regime fragility and growing external meddling in the region. On Russia, the Threat Assessment drops plentiful hints that US-Russian relations stand to become more confrontational in the coming year. It mentions the Kremlin’s aims to dominate the main oil and gas land distribution networks to Europe and East Asia. Energy has become an instrument of Russian power in terms of its foreign policy and international economic relations, the threat assessment states.

The Report mentions the gradual resurgence of Russia’s military forces in terms of better training, more units with higher rates of readiness, military exercises conducted more frequently, and a higher number of strategic bomber patrols over the Arctic, Atlantic, and Pacific Oceans. The Assessment does not dwell at length on Russia’s aspirations to alter the global economic architecture, and to do away with the Western-dominated post-Bretton Woods system. Russian leader Vladimir Putin called for just that in the 2007 St. Petersburg economic summit. Russia, Iran, Venezuela and other energy producers are moving away from the US dollar as the principal currency of settling energy accounts.

Meanwhile, the Threat Assessment views Iran with caution, in particular the country’s nuclear program. In a report released February 22, the International Atomic Energy Agency expressed concern about Iran’s ability to build nuclear weapons. The Threat Assessment states that Iran is developing and deploying longer range ballistic missiles with the capability to carry a nuclear warhead. The report does not mention, however, the close links between Iran and Russia regarding the development of the Iranian ballistic missile program. According to the London Daily Telegraph, Russia since 2003 has been supplying ballistic missile technology, including missile production capabilities, and technical assistance by Russian engineers.

Iran is also continuing efforts to enhance its ability to enrich uranium, ostensibly for civilian purposes but with the potential for making nuclear weapons. McConnell has reported that Iran may achieve the technical capability to produce enough highly enriched uranium (HEU) for a nuclear weapon within a few years. While the intelligence community is certain that Iran stopped in 2003 its secret work to design a nuclear weapon and to enrich uranium for military purposes, it can’t be certain if Iran has restarted these activities. But there is no doubt that Iran has the scientific know-how, the technical capacity, and the industrial capability to develop nuclear weapons at some future point, McConnell said. A lot of this know-how came from Russia.

Moscow, for example, is building for Iran a $1-billion nuclear reactor in Bushehr. The US State Department has accused Iran of using the Bushehr project as a cover for a weapons program. There are also media reports that Iran is either negotiating the purchase of, or has already acquired S-300 long-range surface-to-air (SAM) missile systems. These SAM systems would be deployed to defend the Bushehr nuclear power plant and other key sites like the Natanz nuclear enrichment facility, analysts believe. Iran also has a chemical weapons program, and it is engaged in research on biological weapons. Teheran’s development of a ballistic missile arsenal and its acquisition of anti-ship cruise missiles are intended to serve as a strategic deterrent in the Persian Gulf, especially at the Strait of Hormuz. Iran would be capable of closing the Strait, and thereby cause considerable disruption to oil exports, in the event of a conflict. In addition, US bases and naval forces in the region would face a serious tactical threat. Iran’s arsenal could also be used to intimidate its neighbors into "withholding support for US policy."

Tehran’s development of longer-range ballistic missiles with the capacity to reach Europe might also to deter NATO countries from permitting US military forces to use bases on their territory during a potential US-Iranian clash. A significant reason why Russia might be assisting Iran’s ballistic missile and nuclear programs could be to support Tehran’s deterrence capability, thereby intimidating NATO countries that host US bases. Russia and Iran also have similar views on using energy as a geopolitical tool, with both expressing interest in establishing a natural gas cartel, along the lines of OPEC. Such an entity would aim to challenge the established international economic system, dominated by Western industrialized countries.

While the Threat Assessment is sober-minded on many points, it avoids one obvious conclusion involving Russia’s strategic intentions; by re-emphasizing military and economic power, and challenging the West, Moscow, aided and abetted by Teheran, is seeking to change the post-Communist balance of power in Europe, the Middle East, and in the world at large, and is challenging American post-Cold War hegemony. Whether it will succeed or not is a different question. It’s also up in the air whether American policy makers sufficiently comprehend the Kremlin’s capabilities and intentions, and, if they do, whether they can muster the political will that can help frustrate Russian plans.

Source: http://www.eurasianet.org/department...v022508b.shtml

[skhara]

It's now obvious why Serbian and Russian politicians are making it clear that they will not seek a military solution to the Kosovo problem. The reality is that any armed attempt to retake Kosovo by Serbian and/or Russian forces will bring them into direct confrontation with US forces, a situation Serbia nor Russia can afford to risk at this time. There are also indicators that Russia and the US have most probably come to an understanding over Kosovo: Kosovo goes to the US camp despite Moscow's disapproval, and Serbia goes more-or-less to Russia, despite West's disapproval. However, in the longterm, this situation may actually end up working in Russia's favor because this will give Moscow better leverage in the disputed autonomous regions of the Caucasus as it also ensures Serbian dependence on Russia. Thus, the battle for Kosovo, in the foreseeable future, will be primarily economic and diplomatic - that is if extremists on either side don't ignite the volatile powder keg.

In my opinion, the Serbs cannot just do nothing. There are options available to them. For one, Belgrade + Moscow, must ensure that the Kosovo Serbs are armed to the teeth. Were I sitting in Belgrade or Moscow right now, I would be planning a paramilitary insurrection. Maybe, that is in fact what they are doing. If there is a "great game" going on -- what is Russia's move? I think it is imperative that Serbia is brought into the CSTO. They keep talking "Europe, Europe". Forget Europe when the question is your national survival.

Bring Russians into Serbia to protect this nation from any possible NATO aggression, arm the Kosovo Serbs, begin a paramilitary insurrection. Under these conditions, we can bet that nothing will be going through Kosovo, and will be nothing but an economic drag on the United States, and hardly will generate profits.

[Armenian]

Skahar, I agree. But would the Serbian leadership today risk destroying Serbia over Kosovo? Don't think that if an insurgency begins in Kosovo, Serbia will be able to stay out of the crisis. Russia will help without doubt, but it will not get 'directly' involved, at this time. In the end, there is a real risk that Serbia can get devastated and Kosovo will remain firmly in Western hands. This is not a street fight, nor is it a family dispute. If you are going to pick a war to fight, you must be 100% sure you can win. In my opinion, this Kosovo situation will be a decades long political ordeal similar to Palestine, Taiwan, northern Cyprus and Nagorno Karabagh. If a war over Kosovo occurs it will be incidental, not by design.

Originally Posted by skhara

In my opinion, the Serbs cannot just do nothing. There are options available to them. For one, Belgrade + Moscow, must ensure that the Kosovo Serbs are armed to the teeth. Were I sitting in Belgrade or Moscow right now, I would be planning a paramilitary insurrection. Maybe, that is in fact what they are doing. If there is a "great game" going on -- what is Russia's move? I think it is imperative that Serbia is brought into the CSTO. They keep talking "Europe, Europe". Forget Europe when the question is your national survival. Bring Russians into Serbia to protect this nation from any possible NATO aggression, arm the Kosovo Serbs, begin a paramilitary insurrection. Under these conditions, we can bet that nothing will be going through Kosovo, and will be nothing but an economic drag on the United States, and hardly will generate profits.

[Armenian]

Originally Posted by Armanen

Great assessment of the situation, but I must ask, do you really think at this time or in the near future the u.s. could spare itself to send troops to georgia if the situation which you discribed occurs? I happen to think it can not especially in light of that fact that u.s. forces will be in iraq for the foreseeable future, not to mention afghanistan. This article recently published shows that even top american military analysts both tied to the pentagon and those not, agree that the military is "stretched dangerously thin and a country ill-prepared for the next fight."Also, the article touches upon, but does not go in detail about the infighting found between the various cliques within the pentagon/DoD.

Armanen, much of the talk you see and hear about the US military being at a "breaking point" has to do with internal politics in Washington, or attempts by the US armed forces committee to solicit more funds for the military. You are not looking at the big picture and you are underestimating the war making capabilities of NATO and the US. If any problems occur in the Balkans and/or Georgia, it won't be the US acting alone. In the Balkans, as you can see, the US has conditioned the Albanians and Bosnians to work for Americans, and, if need be, to die for it. What's more, there are already hundreds of thousands of highly trained and armed US and NATO forces already stationed throughout Europe. These forces can respond to any hostility without taking US troops out of other theaters of operation. To fund such an ordeal the US government will just have to borrow another few trillions dollars from the Federal Reserve. The US Dollar is in essence a worthless piece of paper that they keep printing. Thus, money spent is money invested. According to the article regarding Bondsteel, Rumsfeld is said to have stated: "My view is we don't spend on you, we invest in you. The men and women in the armed services are not a drain on our economic strength. Indeed you safeguard it. You're not a burden on our economy, you are the critical foundation for growth."

What Washington is attempting in regions across the world, politically, financially and militarily is for longterm gains. The situation in Georgia will be similar as well. Hostilities there can potentially involve NATO, US troops based in Europe and regional pro-American forces such as Chechens, Georgians and Turks. Therefore, there is a lot NATO and US forces can do in the region without adding additional stress to the US military. As a matter of fact, war in the Caucasus and/or the Balkans will see US and NATO forces acting primarily as "command and control" with heavy reliance on air forces and missiles attacks, while the ground forces will constitute primarily of regional allies. In my opinion, war in the Balkans and/or the Caucasus can be much easier logistically/administratively than, let's say, a war against Iran, which will require hundreds of thousand of US troops and massive amounts of military ordnance. So, putting politics aside, the West is fully capable of causing havoc in the Balkans and the Caucasus. Moscow knows this, Belgrade know this.

[Armenian]

Originally Posted by Merv

Armenian: It was obvious that the US was there to stay in Bondsteel, back in 1999, when they built a church and a McDonalds in the base. Did you not know about Bondsteel at all, or just not what the article discusses? People are trying to geostrategically understand why Kosovo is so important to the US. Many suggestions were made: human rights (nonsense), Trepca mines minerals (nonsense), and a pipeline running through the region. The only one of the three that made sense to me was a pipeline, but why was Kosovo so crucial? Can't a pipeline run through Macedonia (occupied by NATO before 1999) and Albania (stooge state) to get to the Adriatic? Why was Kosovo so crucial? That is the difficult part for me to understand. The other issue I'm wondering about is that a trans-Balkan pipeline benefits most strongly Italy, so why is the US pushing it so strongly, considering the fact that it is Germany, UK, and France that are the big 3 of the EU? It would make much more sense to me if the US was obstructing the Nordstream pipeline running along the Baltic. Unless someone in Rome is pushing things... On the other hand, corrupt Western politicians may be financed by the Kosovo Albanian mafia drug money. Afghanistan since NATO occupation has shot up in opium production, and the Albanians distribute it to Europe. But what are the likelihoods that so many top policy leaders in Europe and the US are being financed by drug money? All of this is very hard for me to understand...any ideas?

In my opinion, all of the factors you outlined above fits into the general formula. However, again, you are missing the underlying factor in all this - the West's longterm fear of Russia. I have a lot of posts in this thread regarding this topic. The West has a serious fear of Russia's ability to control the economic lifeline of western Europe via its natural resources, and western Europe is 'directly' and 'critically' tied to US power - military, political, and financial. What's more, you are not taking into serious consideration that there is a potential for Moscow to create an alliance of Slavic/Orthodox nations in eastern Europe. And this, again, is a longterm threat to the West. Some time around 1990 I heard a Washington based military intelligence official stating more-or-less: With the Soviet Union collapsing we fear the rise of Orthodox nation, a new Byzantium... At the time it sounded interesting to me. I did not make much of it, however, it did stay in my mind. Now, looking back and assessing the geopolitical situations of the region in question, it makes perfect sense.

I knew of the US/NATO base in Kosovo, however, I had not paid attention to just how extensive it was in size and character. It's a massive modern fortress and its existence makes perfect sense once you realize what the US wants in the region: control of the region's vital oil/gas trade routes and keeping Moscow away. There are pipeline projects, such as the Nabucco and the Trans-Balkan, envision exploiting Caspian Sea region and Central Asian gas and oil. These projects are designed to serve the economy of the entire West, including the US. Thus, it does not only benefit Italy. What's more, you don't know what they have planned for the future. You are only looking at what currently exists. These projects are implemented gradually. These are very longterm economic plans that are designed to ensure the global primacy of the West. Besides which, pipelines can easily be extended and/or its route altered. You simply need to better understand the nature of the political/financial elite in the West and how they implement their agendas.

Nevertheless, this is how the picture looks thus far: US and EU work on conditioning close ties with regional allies - Bosnians and Albanians. To counter this, Moscow has been working on signing energy contracts with eastern European Slavs and Orthodox peoples. US and EU establish longterm bases in the Balkans. To counter this, Russia may set up similar bases in Belarus and Serbia. US is attempting to gain a foothold in Central Asia and the Caucasus. To counter this, Moscow is attempting to reassert itself in Central Asia and the Caucasus. US and EU want to extend their political, military and economic reach into eastern Europe - Moscow wants to buy into the energy sector of western Europe. Serbia has always been pro-Russia. Nations like Croatia, Bosnia and Albania have always been pro-West... Even in the early 90s one could see where the future geopolitical lines would fall. If this all sound simple, in a sense, it is.

In short: US forces in Kosovo are there to ensure that the region's pro-Russian forces stay in check and the oil/gas routes flow unhindered to the West. I also feel as if they somewhat sped up the recognition of Kosovo's independence because of Russia's fast resurgence. In my opinion, it was a race between Russia and the West. And all this is intrinsically tied to the proposed missile defense system being planned for central Europe; the eastward expansion of NATO; and "democracy and freedom" movements in so-called "totalitarian" states of Eurasia. However, Russia's political/economic/military resurgence and Moscow's recent inroads into the energy sector of the Europe has become a serious issue for the West. This is a great game and the tensions between "East" and "West" will escalate.

[Armenian]

Thank you, Angessa. My best wishes for you and your family.

Originally Posted by Angessa

I am sorry but I 'm not that informed, he told me enough that he could so I would not worry. But it was not near Tartus, Tartus is where the militery fleet and operations centers are. It was near the Israel border. Instances of misfire and other such things are common place and rarely make the world news. But most don't actually believe that they are misfires I remember a few months ago when Israel hit several U.N personal and good amount died. Yet know one was charged or even a inspection over the adictdent. Thank you for the warm comment bringing honor to me. We have aways been loyal to the emperor(monarch) and russia and will aways be ready to fight to the death for are home. Well most see us as Russians but we actually see us a different ethic group or clan. I never really had any problem or heard something negatively except from american skinheads for some reason. We actually speak a different dialect of Russian called Kuban or Black Sea Balachka. But we are the most loyal warriors of Russian empire and are duty to defend Russia. For the socio political situation, we play a very large role. Many Kuban formed voluntary armies and fought for Abkhazia and South Ossetia Freedom from Georgian rule. Which is one of the big reasons why those areas want to be annexed into Russia. There also talk of sending voluntary soldiers to Kosovo at present. My prayers and Loving regards Angessa

[Armanen]

Originally Posted by Armenian

Armanen, much of the talk you see and hear about the US military being at a "breaking point" has to do with internal politics in Washington, or attempts by the US armed forces committee to solicit more funds for the military. You are not looking at the big picture and you are underestimating the war making capabilities of NATO and the US. If any problems occur in the Balkans and/or Georgia, it won't be the US acting alone. In the Balkans, as you can see, the US has conditioned the Albanians and Bosnians to work for Americans, and, if need be, to die for it. What's more, there are already hundreds of thousands of highly trained and armed US and NATO forces already stationed throughout Europe. These forces can respond to any hostility without taking US troops out of other theaters of operation. To fund such an ordeal the US government will just have to borrow another few trillions dollars from the Federal Reserve. The US Dollar is in essence a worthless piece of paper that they keep printing. Thus, money spent is money invested. According to the article regarding Bondsteel, Rumsfeld is said to have stated: "My view is we don't spend on you, we invest in you. The men and women in the armed services are not a drain on our economic strength. Indeed you safeguard it. You're not a burden on our economy, you are the critical foundation for growth."

What Washington is attempting in regions across the world, politically, financially and militarily is for longterm gains. The situation in Georgia will be similar as well. Hostilities there can potentially involve NATO, US troops based in Europe and regional pro-American forces such as Chechens, Georgians and Turks. Therefore, there is a lot NATO and US forces can do in the region without adding additional stress to the US military. As a matter of fact, war in the Caucasus and/or the Balkans will see US and NATO forces acting primarily as "command and control" with heavy reliance on air forces and missiles attacks, while the ground forces will constitute primarily of regional allies. In my opinion, war in the Balkans and/or the Caucasus can be much easier logistically/administratively than, let's say, a war against Iran, which will require hundreds of thousand of US troops and massive amounts of military ordnance. So, putting politics aside, the West is fully capable of causing havoc in the Balkans and the Caucasus. Moscow knows this, Belgrade know this.

I do not for one second underestimate the powers behind the pentagon and american war machine, for I know what they have done, are doing, and will continue to do. These people have been at it for at least 300 years, and don't look ready to stop yet.

What you are describing in the Balkans and Caucasus is in essence a proxy war, and I agree it would be the most likely method employed by the u.s. & nato. While the u.s. would not have to commit or lose much manpower to any regional conflicts in the two above mentioned areas, they would nonetheless put themselves at risk of having to bail out their regional allies if things do not go their way. I realize that they also have the option of leaving them to fend for themselves, but if the situation really got out of hand and is as serious to "western" interests as we believe, then I really doubt that they would just cut their losses and leave. If needs be they will do it whether they can or not, I do not underesitmate them, but I am not yet sure they, as of today, have the will to rush into such a potentially costly mess for them.

Also, there are signs that there may be a thaw in the relations between Moscow and tiflis, and if the trend continues (I do not think it will), georgia would not be willing to play america's stooge in a proxy war with Russia unless Russia annexed Abkhazia and S. Ossetia. I know the georgian leadership has traditionally been short sighted but surely they must realize that america does have the reputation of leaving its "allies" high and dry when their interests are no longer being served. Also the fact that Russia borders them and will be here for the long run, whereas if georgia doesn't get its act together they may end up losing the rest of their territories.


In conclusion I'd say you have hit it on the bulleye, the major regions to watch in the upcoming 5, 10, 25 years will be the Balkans, Cacuasus, Central Asia, and the Far East.

[skhara]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/7265036.stm

Russian passion for stocks and shares

Russia's enthusiasm for capitalism is evident at the thriving Micex stock exchange in the heart of Moscow.

The exchange has seen its volumes double every year since it opened in its present form in 2005, and it now trades $17bn (412bn roubles) worth of equities, bonds, derivatives and currencies every day.

But visitors to the building will not meet any excited bankers shouting and waving their hands.

Like most modern exchanges, Micex operates entirely by computer.

Planned economy

Western investors account for about 30% of Micex's trade, reflecting foreign enthusiasm for the new Russian economy.

In 2007, foreign direct investment in Russia amounted to $52bn, or about 5% of Russia's Gross Domestic Product.

Many international banks expect that figure to rise.

Micex official Elena Kochetkova wants to encourage more foreign trade, but she admits the operation would probably shock the communists of the Soviet era.

"I prefer not to talk about politics," she says. "But as a Russian person, I appreciate my history. Russia used to be a planned economy with no stocks.

"We're glad the exchange has been successful, and within ten years we hope the wealth of our people will increase."

Soviet repression

n the pre-Soviet era, Russia was regarded as a world leader in terms of finance.

The first mention of the construction of an exchange in Merchant's yard in Moscow dates back to 1790, and by the middle of the 19th Century there was a thriving trade.

Moscow's main stock exchange even survived the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917, although the centralised Soviet economy later choked demand for long-term credit, the lifeblood of exchange activity.

But when the communist system collapsed in the early 1990s, the financial markets developed rapidly, with much less control and regulation than similar operations in the West.

Now, Micex claims its systems are in line with international standards, and it ranks as the 17th largest stock exchange in the world.

Progress

Some investors have been worried by signs of government interference in business.

The former chairman of the oil company Yukos, Mikhail Khodorkovsky, was jailed for fraud and tax evasion and his company was taken away by the state.

However, Alexei Rybnikov, the chief executive of Micex, says other business people should not be worried.

"I think it is a bit of a misunderstanding, portraying the situation as if the Russian government is reversing the privatisation trend and trying to get back state ownership in recently privatised Russian companies," he says.

"What the state is actually doing right now is putting together various state-owned assets to form state-owned holding companies which control some of the sectors of the Russian economy."

As further evidence that the government is keen to privatise some of its assets, he points out that many companies which are majority owned by the state, such as the gas giant Gazprom, have shares listed on the exchange.

Mr Rybinkov remains proud of Russia's progress.

"We have a lot of economic freedom, we have modern and well developed capital markets. We are much closer to capitalism than we were 15 years ago," he says.

[skhara]

I find this bit interesting. I wonder how credible it is. Although this is exactly what I would be doing in their place. First and foremost, Serbia has to be fully secured. With Russia essentially taking control of Serbia's energy sector, they have get a military presence there and make Serbia an outpost for Russian geo-strategic interests.


http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.p...w&pageId=57373

Putin offers nukes to Serbia
Missile threat escalates as Russia goes to polls

LONDON – MI6 agents have monitored secret meetings between top Serbian officials and Russian President Vladimir Putin's anointed successor, Dmitry Medvedev, to discuss the installation of Russian nuclear missiles to contribute to what he told a Moscow election rally this weekend would "help to ensure Serbian security."

The president-in-waiting – no one seriously believes any other candidate will win this coming Sunday's election – also will ensure that President Vladimir Putin will become the nation's prime minister, effectively remaining the real power behind Medvedev after stepping down from the presidency.

"In fact Putin's descent into the prime minister's chair is the most interesting facet of the current situation. Putin has not revealed the motivation behind the decision to exchange his role as 'popularity god' for one of a simple bureaucrat," reveals an MI6 report.

The author, a senior analyst, concludes: "The acceptance of the prime minister's job is no more than a front – ensuring he remains the powerful puppeteer behind the puppet."

Certainly Putin's hand can be deduced in the threat to plant nuclear missiles in the region – so as to provide Russia with its own version of America's Star Wars.

In the past week, Medvedev's offer to provide missiles has escalated an already tense situation in the region. If Russian missiles are installed in Serbia, it could spread. Kosovo could become the first testing ground for Russia's new president as he continues to support the ever-deepening confrontation between Moscow and the West.

Joseph Farah's G2 Bulletin is the premium, online intelligence news source edited and published by the founder of WND

[Armenian]

Originally Posted by skhara

I find this bit interesting. I wonder how credible it is. Although this is exactly what I would be doing in their place...

The site looks like a political tabloid. I wouldn't take it seriously. Giving Serbia economic, diplomatic and military support is one thing. Giving them nukes? I don't think so.

[Armenian]

Russia Quietly Starts to Shift Its Oil Trade Into Rubles

Americans surely found little to celebrate when the price of oil settled above $100 a barrel last week. They could, though, be thankful that oil is still priced in dollars, making the milestone of triple-digit oil prices noteworthy at all. Russia, the world’s second-largest oil-exporting nation after Saudi Arabia, has been quietly preparing to switch trading in Russian Ural Blend oil, the country’s primary export, to the ruble from the dollar. Industry analysts and officials, however, say that this change, if it comes, is still some time off. The Russian effort began modestly this month, with trading in refined products for the domestic market. Still, the effort to squeeze the dollar out of Russian oil sales is yet another project notable for swagger and ambition by the Kremlin, which has already wielded its energy wealth to assert influence in Eastern Europe and former Soviet states.

“They are serious,” said Yaroslav Lissovolik, the chief economist at Deutsche Bank in Moscow. “This is something they are giving priority to.”

Oil trading is nearly always denominated in dollars. When Middle Eastern oil is sold to Asia, for example, the price is set in dollars. Similarly, Russia’s large trade with Western Europe and the former Soviet states in crude oil and natural gas is conducted in dollar-denominated contracts. Gazprom, the natural gas monopoly, set the price of gas in Ukraine at $179 per 1,000 cubic meters in 2008, for example. There are no proposals yet to switch gas pricing away from dollars. As a result, companies and countries that buy petroleum products are encouraged to hold dollar reserves to pay for their supplies, coincidentally helping the American economy support its trade deficit. Russia would like to change this practice, at least among its customers, as a means of elevating the importance of the ruble, a new source of national pride after gaining 30 percent against the dollar during the current oil boom. In a speech on economic policy this month, Dmitri A. Medvedev, a deputy prime minister and the likely successor to President Vladimir V. Putin in elections on March 2, said Russia should seize opportunities created by the weak dollar.

“Today, the global economy is going through uneasy times,” Mr. Medvedev said. “The role of the key reserve currencies is under review. And we must take advantage of it.” He asserted that “the ruble will de facto become one of the regional reserve currencies.”

Other oil-exporting countries are also chafing at dealing in the weakening dollar. Since 2005, Iran, the world’s fourth-largest oil exporter, has tried to open a commodity exchange to trade oil in currencies other than the dollar. The Iranian ambassador to Russia said Iran might choose rubles to free his country from “dollar slavery.” To be sure, some economists have dismissed the project as improbable, given the exotic nature of a security — oil futures contracts denominated in rubles — that would blend currency risk with the dollar-based global oil market. Ruble-denominated futures contracts for Ural Blend, the main Russian grade, would be attractive only if the dollar continues to depreciate, said Vitaly Y. Yermakov, research director for Russian and Caspian energy at Cambridge Energy Research Associates. “There is a big distance between the desire to trade commodities for rubles and the ability to do so,” he said. All this has not stopped the Kremlin from trying.

In a sign of the government’s seriousness, a new glass-and-marble high-rise home for a ruble-denominated commodity exchange is rising this spring in a prestigious district in St. Petersburg, Russia’s second-largest city after Moscow. The exchange will occupy three floors of the 16-story tower on Vasilievsky Island, one of the islands that make up the historic city center. The director of the St. Petersburg exchange, Viktor V. Nikolayev, said that the intention was to move slowly and gain market acceptance; the government will not strong-arm sellers or buyers onto the exchange, even in an industry dominated by the state. Web-based trading for refined products like gasoline or diesel is being introduced in three phases for domestic customers, beginning with government buyers like the Russian navy or municipal bus companies. Private brokers will be allowed to trade in March; futures contracts will be introduced in April. Mr. Nikolayev said no timeline had been established for trading for export on the exchange, which also handles grain, sugar, mineral fertilizer, cement and esoteric financial products like Russian government beef and pork import quotas — all in rubles.

“We are in Russia, and the currency is rubles, not euros, not dollars,” he said. “We don’t want to depend on the rise or fall of the dollar.” “We will trade in rubles, to strengthen the ruble,” he said.

Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/27/bu...=worldbusiness