The Rise of the Russian Empire: Russo-Armenian Relations

[Illuminator]

Re: The Rise of the Russian Empire: Russo-Armenian Relations

change the x's in the URL or it will not work...lousy filter

[Armenian]

Re: The Rise of the Russian Empire: Russo-Armenian Relations

Saakashvili critic`s death `suspicious`

The death of a Georgian billionaire and government critic is being treated as suspicious by British police. 52-year-old Badri Patarkatsishvili died at his home near London on Tuesday night. He was accused of plotting a coup last year before running against President Saakashvili in January`s election. Patarkatsishvili’s family say he died of a heart attack, although a police spokesperson says they treat any unexpected death as suspicious. A post mortem is due to be carried out later in the day. Patarkatsishvili's personal doctor has reportedly told Ria Novosti that he suffered no heart-related diseases. “Badri Patarkatsishvili’s death was confirmed today by his friend Boris Berezovsky. I don’t know if he was killed or died from natural causes. But I know one thing for sure – the government was responsible for his death,” Gogi Tsulaula, a member of ‘Our Georgia’ party, said.

Georgian rebel minister Irakly Okruashvili says the death looks suspicious to him. "I would like to wait for an official comment. It seems strange that so many deaths are happening in February. I have not contacted Patarkatsishvili personally for five months and I regret this," Okruashvili said. Badri Patarkatsishvili made a fortune and a name for himself during his business ventures with Russian tycoon Boris Berezovsky. In 1992, Patarkatsishvili became a Deputy Director General of the Logovaz Group. In 2006 he sold 100% of his share of the Russian Kommersant editorial house to Russian tycoon Alisher Usmanov. Patarkatsishvili played a key role in the Georgian opposition. In 2007 he became embroiled in a major political scandal in the country and was accused of plotting a coup against President Mikhail Saakashvili's government.

He had remained in London ever since. "Now most of the opponents of Saakashvili's regime are either in prison or in exile or hiding somewhere," Vyacheslav Nikonov, the President of the Russian Political Foundation, said. Patarkatsishvili was wanted in Russia for his part in an attempted jail break of ex-vice General Director of Aeroflot, Nikolay Glushkov. On December 23 an article in the British Times claimed the Georgian tycoon feared for his life. The paper quoted an audio-tape with a conversation, which allegedly took place between the intended hitman and an official from the Georgian Interior Ministry. The Times said Patarkatsishvili alerted police to the supposed plot. Russia's State Duma deputy and Britain's main suspect in the poisoning of former Russian security officer Aleksandr Litvinenko in London in 2006, Andrey Lugovoy, said the death of Patarkatsishvili is a great loss. "I knew him for over 15 years and as far as I know he didn't have any major health problems. All this is strange but you never know what life can bring," he said. "I think that his death, the heart attack that he had, is possibly connected with what's been going on with Georgia over the past two or three months. It might have affected his health. He was a real patriot," Lugovoy stressed. Former Georgian President Eduard Shevardnadze also says the death of Badri Patarkatsishvili is a big loss for Georgia.

“I knew him for a long time. He is not the sort of man to be involved in a murder or a coup. Of course, his death will raise suspicions; he was not an old man,” he said. According to Shevardnadze, there will be opposition rallies tomorrow. “This is not surprising. They'll of course accuse the government,” Shevardnadze said. “I think if the opposition speaks out about the sudden death of Badri, they have reasons to do this. We have lost not only an outstanding businessman, but a person who's established a fund for the poor, he helped a lot,” he added. Patarkatsishvili was born in Tbilisi in 1955 and graduated from Georgia's State Polytechnic Institute. Badri Patarkatsishvili is survived by his wife and two daughters.

Georgian mystery

The death of Badri Patarkatsishvili is not the first suspicious death in Georgian politics. One of the leaders of Georgia's Rose Revolution and the country's former Prime Minister, Zurab ZhVAnia was found dead in early 2005. His body was discovered in the home of a colleague in Georgia, slumped in an armchair in the kitchen. Police claimed Zhvania died of carbon monoxide poisoning due to an inadequately ventilated gas heater. Although his death was ruled accidental, Zhvania's family continues to question the results of the investigation.

Source: http://www.russiatoday.ru/news/news/20877

[Armenian]

Re: The Rise of the Russian Empire: Russo-Armenian Relations

U.S. Weakness and Russia's Window of Opportunity

All U.S. presidents eventually become lame ducks, though the lameness of any particular duck depends on the amount of power he has left to wield. It not only is an issue of the president’s popularity, but also of the opposition’s unity and clarity. In the international context, the power of a lame duck president depends on the options he has militarily. Foreign powers do not mess with American presidents, no matter how lame one might be, as long as the president retains military options.

The core of the American presidency is in its role as commander in chief. With all of the other presidential powers deeply intersecting with that of Congress and the courts, the president has the greatest autonomous power when he is acting as supreme commander of the armed forces. There is a remarkable lot he can do if he wishes to, and relatively little Congress can do to stop him — unless it is uniquely united. Therefore, foreign nations remain wary of the American president’s military power long after they have stopped taking him seriously in other aspects of foreign relations.

There is a school of thought that argues that President George W. Bush is likely to strike at Iran before he leaves office. The sense is that Bush is uniquely indifferent to either Congress or public opinion and that he therefore is likely to use his military powers in some decisive fashion, under the expectation and hope that history will vindicate him. In that sense, Bush is very much not a lame duck, because if he wanted to strike, there is nothing legally preventing him from doing so. The endless debates over presidential powers — which have roiled both Republican and Democratic administrations — have left one thing clear: The courts will not intervene against an American president’s use of his power as commander in chief. Congress may cut off money after the fact, but as we have seen, that is not a power that is normally put to use.

Yet for all this, Bush is a lame duck commander in chief. He has the inherent legal power, but his military power is so limited that any action he might take — in Iran, for example — would be shaped and constrained by those limitations, and therefore, unlikely to achieve a meaningful goal. The problem for Bush, of course, is that he is fighting two simultaneous wars, one in Iraq and one in Afghanistan. These wars have sucked up the resources of the U.S. Army to a remarkable degree. Units are either engaged in these theaters of operation, recovering from deployment or preparing for deployment. To an extraordinary degree, the United States does not have a real strategic reserve in its ground forces, the Army and the Marines. A force could probably be scraped up to deal with a limited crisis, but U.S. forces are committed and there are no more troops to scatter around.

The Air Force and Navy could be used against Iran, such as a naval blockage of Iran’s ports. But this assumes that foreign powers such as the Chinese, Russians or Europeans would respect the blockade. Would the United States be prepared to seize or sink third-power ships that run the blockade? In addition, for a blockade to work, Turkey, Armenia and Azerbaijan would have to collaborate and the Iraqi and Afghan border would have to be sealed. The United States has no troops for that mission. Airstrikes are, of course, a possibility, though air campaigns have not been particularly successful in forcing regime change historically — and there are no follow-on ground forces with which to invade.

Most important, if the United States went after Iran, not only would the U.S. Army and Marines be tapped out, the United States would be throwing all of its chips on the table, with few reserves left. With all U.S. forces engaged in a line from the Euphrates to the Hindu Kush, the rest of the world would be wide open to second-tier powers. This is Bush’s strategic problem — the one that shapes his role as commander in chief. He has committed virtually all of his land forces to two wars. His only reserves are the Air Force and Navy. If they were sucked into a war in Iran, it would limit U.S. reserves for other contingencies. In all likelihood, the president will not attack Iran, gossip notwithstanding.

Thus, Bush is a lame duck commander in chief as well. Even if he completely disregards the politics of his position, which he can do, he still lacks the sheer military resources to achieve any meaningful goal without the use of nuclear weapons. But his problem goes beyond the Iran scenario. Lacking ground forces, the president’s ability to influence events throughout the world is severely impaired. Moreover, if he were to throw his air forces into a non-Iranian crisis, all pressure on Iran would be lifted. The United States is strategically tapped out. There is no land force available and the use of air and naval forces without land forces, while able to achieve some important goals, would not be decisive.

The United States has entered a place where it has almost no room to maneuver. The president is becoming a lame duck in the fullest sense of the term. This opens a window of opportunity for powers, particularly second-tier powers, that would not be prepared to challenge the United States while its forces had flexibility. One power in particular has begun to use this window of opportunity — Russia. Russia is not the country it was 10 years ago. Its economy, fueled by rising energy and mineral prices, is financially solvent. The state has moved from being a smashed relic of the Soviet era to becoming a more traditional Russian state: authoritarian, repressive, accepting private property but only under terms it finds acceptable. It also is redefining its sphere of influence in the former Soviet Union and reviving its military.

For example, a Russian aircraft recently fired a missile at a Georgian village. Intentionally or not, the missile was a dud, though it clearly was meant to signal to the Georgians — close allies of the United States and unfriendly to Russian interests in the region — that not only is Russia unhappy, it is prepared to take military action if it chooses. It also clearly told the Georgians that the Russians are unconcerned about the United States and its possible response. It must have given the Georgians a chill.

The Russians planted their flag under the sea at the North Pole after the Canadians announced plans to construct armed icebreakers and establish a deepwater port from which to operate in the Far North. The Russians announced the construction of a new air defense system by 2015 — not a very long time as these things go. They also announced plans to create a new command and control system in the same time frame. Russian long-range aircraft flew east in the Pacific to the region of Guam, an important U.S. air base, causing the United States to scramble fighter planes. They also flew into what used to be the GIUK gap (Greenland-Iceland-United Kingdom) probing air defenses along the Norwegian coast and in Scotland.

Most interestingly, they announced the resumption of patrols in the Atlantic, along the U.S. coast, using Blackjack strategic bombers and the old workhorse of the Russian fleet, the Bear. (The balance does remain in U.S. favor along the East Coast). During the Cold War, patrols such as these were designed to carry out electronic and signal intelligence. They were designed to map out U.S. facilities along the Eastern seaboard and observe response time and procedures. During the Cold War they would land in Cuba for refueling before retracing their steps. It will be interesting to see whether Russia will ask Cuba for landing privileges and whether the Cubans will permit it. As interesting, Russian and Chinese troops conducted military exercises recently in the context of regional talks. It is not something to take too seriously, but then they are not trivial.

Many of these are older planes. The Bear, for example, dates back to the 1950s — but so does the B-52, which remains important to the U.S. strategic bomber fleet. The age of the airframe doesn’t matter nearly as much as maintenance, refits, upgrades to weapons and avionics and so on. Nothing can be assumed from the mere age of the aircraft. The rather remarkable flurry of Russian air operations — as well as plans for naval development — is partly a political gesture. The Russians are tired of the United States pressing into its sphere of influence, and they see a real window of opportunity to press back with limited risk of American response. But the Russians appear to be doing more than making a gesture.

The Russians are trying to redefine the global balance. They are absolutely under no illusion that they can match American military power in any sphere. But they are clearly asserting their right to operate as a second-tier global power and are systematically demonstrating their global reach. They may be old and they may be slow, but when American aircraft on the East Coast start to scramble routinely to intercept and escort Russian aircraft, two things happen. First, U.S. military planning has to shift to take Russia into account. Second, the United States loses even more flexibility. It can’t just ignore the Russians. It now needs to devote scarce dollars to upgrading systems along the East Coast — systems that have been quite neglected since the end of the Cold War.

There is a core assumption in the U.S. government that Russia no longer is a significant power. It is true that its vast army has disintegrated. But the Russians do not need a vast army modeled on World War II. They need, and have begun to develop, a fairly effective military built around special forces and airborne troops. They also have appeared to pursue their research and development, particularly in the area of air defense and air-launched missiles — areas in which they have traditionally been strong. The tendency to underestimate the Russian military — something even Russians do — is misplaced. Russia’s military is capable and improving.

The increased Russian tempo of operations in areas that the United States has been able to ignore for many years further pins the United States. It can be assumed that the Russians mean no harm — but assumption is not a luxury national security planners can permit themselves, at least not good ones. It takes years to develop and deploy new systems. If the Russians are probing the Atlantic, Pacific and Arctic again, it is not the current threat that matters, but the threat that might evolve. That diverts budget dollars from heavily armored trucks that can survive improvised explosive device attacks, and cuts into the Air Force and Navy.

The Russians are using the window of opportunity to redefine, in a modest way, the global balance and gain some room to maneuver in their region. As a result of their more assertive posture, American thoughts of unilateral interventions must decline. For example, getting involved in Georgia once was a low-risk activity. The risk just went up. Taking that risk while U.S. ground forces are completely absorbed in Iraq and Afghanistan is hard for the Americans to justify — but rather easy for the Russians.

This brings us back to the discussion of the commander in chief’s options in the Middle East. The United States already has limited options against Iran. The more the Russians maneuver, the more the United States must hold what forces it has left — Air Force and Navy — in reserve. Launching an Iranian adventure becomes that much more risky. If it is launched, Russia has an even greater window of opportunity. Every further involvement in the region makes the United States that much less of a factor in the immediate global equation.

All wars end, and these will too. The Russians are trying to rearrange the furniture a bit before anyone comes home and forces them out. They are dealing with a lame duck president with fewer options than most lame ducks. Before there is a new president and before the war in Iraq ends, the Russians want to redefine the situation a bit.

Source: http://www.stratfor.com/russias_window_opportunity

[Armenian]

Re: The Rise of the Russian Empire: Russo-Armenian Relations

Russian Air Force starts drills in 'northern latitudes'

Russia's Air Force announced on Wednesday the launch of a tactical exercise involving long-range aviation in "northern latitudes" to rehearse interoperability in air patrol missions. "The active phase of the tactical exercise has started under the command of long-range aviation commander Maj. Gen. Pavel Androsov," said Col. Alexander Drobyshevsky, an aide to the Air Force commander. He did not say exactly where the exercise was being conducted or whether it was in Russia or outside its borders. The drill, including two heavy-bomber regiments and one aerial tanker regiment, is practicing midair refueling, flights over uncharted terrain and in difficult weather conditions, as well as landings on off-base, alternate airfields. Over 30 Tu-95 (Bear) strategic bombers, Il-78 (Midas) four-engine aerial refueling tankers, and Tu-22 (Blinder) supersonic bombers are participating in the exercise. Drobyshevsky earlier said that more than 20 airplanes would participate in the drill. Last August, Russia resumed long-range patrol missions of strategic bombers, which were suspended in 1992 following the breakup of the Soviet Union. It said air patrol areas would include zones of commercial shipping and economic activity and would be conducted on a permanent basis. NATO has requested that Russia give it advanced warning of military exercises.

Source: http://en.rian.ru/russia/20080213/99114808.html

[Armenian]

Re: The Rise of the Russian Empire: Russo-Armenian Relations

Armenia only strategic ally for Russia in South Caucasus

A significant breakthrough occurred in the Russian-Armenian relations during past eight years, said Nikolay Ryzhkov, member of the RF Federation Council, co-chair of the Russian-Armenian commission for interparliamentary cooperation. “Frequent presidential visits as well as conduction of the Year of Russia in Armenia and the Year of Armenia in Russia helped the relationship, he said. “Russia and Armenia enjoy good political relations. Undoubtedly, the atmosphere is created by our leaders. There are possibilities to fortify our military base in Gyumri, to develop economic and humanitarian contacts,” Mr Ryzhkov said. “At the moment we are all awaiting the February 19 presidential election. The shift of power in our countries will take place almost simultaneously and I am hopeful that the policy of past eight years formed owing to activities of Presidents Kocharian and Putin will undergo no changes,” he went on. “When I was Prime Minister I treated all of three South Caucasian republics equally. Now, the situation is different. Armenia is Russia’s only strategic ally in the South Caucasus. I am confident that the RF leadership will not allow losing such a partner,” Mr Ryzhkov said in an interview with RIA Novosti.

Source: http://www.panarmenian.net/news/eng/?nid=24844

[Armenian]

Re: The Rise of the Russian Empire: Russo-Armenian Relations

DOES MOSCOW BACK ARMENIA’S EMBATTLED LEADERS?

As the outcome of Armenia’s upcoming presidential election looks increasingly unpredictable, Russia is exercising unusual caution in backing a transfer of power from outgoing President Robert Kocharian to his chief lieutenant, Prime Minister Serge Sarkisian. Moscow has only indirectly and timidly endorsed Sarkisian’s presidential bid, avoiding the kind of aggressive pre-election interference to which it has resorted in other former Soviet republics, notably Ukraine. Kocharian and Sarkisian have moved Armenia even closer to Russia during their decade-long joint rule and have reason to expect a payback from the Kremlin in the run-up to the February 19 vote. It came in the form of a February 6 visit to Yerevan by Russian Prime Minister Viktor Zubkov, which officially focused on bilateral commercial relations. The two sides signed a number of agreements that will further reinforce Russia’s economic presence in the South Caucasus state. In particular, Russia’s state railway formally assumed long-term management of Armenia’s rail network.

The two governments also agreed to set up a joint venture that will explore and develop Armenia’s uranium reserves. More importantly, the Russians reaffirmed their strong interest in the planned construction of a new Armenian nuclear plant, which is expected to replace the existing Soviet-era facility at Metsamor by 2016. Sergei Kiriyenko, head of the state nuclear energy agency, Rosatom, said Russian companies are well placed to win a relevant tender by the authorities in Yerevan (Kommersant, February 7). Speaking at a joint news conference after the talks, Zubkov and Sarkisian welcomed a 65% surge in Russian Armenian trade which totaled about $700 million in 2007 and may well pass the $1 billion mark this year. Zubkov said Moscow will help expand a rail-ferry service between the Georgian Black Sea port of Poti and Russia’s Port-Kavkaz, which was launched last year and mainly caters for cargos shipped to and from landlocked Armenia (Armenian Public Television, February 6). Few observers doubt that the main purpose of Zubkov’s visit, the second in less than six months, was to boost Sarkisian’s electoral chances in a country where pro-Russian sentiment has traditionally run high. As an unnamed Armenian government official quoted by Moskovskii Komsomolets on February 7 explained, “The authorities are alarmed by street protests staged by the [Armenian] opposition every day. They are attended by more and more people. The visit by your prime minister will demonstrate to the electorate on whose side Russia is.”

Moscow has clearly not been interested in regime change in Yerevan until now. After all, Sarkisian, who also co-chairs a Russian-Armenian inter-governmental commission on economic cooperation, has played a key role in the signing of controversial agreements that have left virtually the whole of Armenia’s energy sector and other industries under Russian control in the last several years. Several Russian dailies quoted an unnamed official accompanying Zubkov as saying that a “continuity of power” is essential for the development of Russian-Armenian relations. Vyacheslav Nikonov, a prominent pro-Kremlin pundit, agreed. “Strategically, Sarkisian's nomination [for the Armenian presidency] suits Moscow, which has given him support at the top level,” Nikonov wrote in a February 7 commentary for RIA-Novosti agency. “It would be appropriate to take steps that would demonstrate our readiness to render Armenia substantial economic assistance,” he said.

Yet Moscow is treading more carefully that one would expect. Neither President Vladimir Putin, nor his handpicked successor, Dmitry Medvedev, have made any public statements in support of Sarkisian’s election victory so far. Even Zubkov stopped short of explicitly doing that in Yerevan. “This was a very successful visit,” he told reporters before flying back Moscow. “Whatever the course of the elections, everything should work out for Sarkisian. He is doing his job sincerely and wholeheartedly.” “It remained unclear to journalists whether he was referring to the work of the intergovernmental commission headed by Sarkisian or the upcoming presidential elections in Armenia,” Nezavisimaya gazeta commented the next day. Nor is it clear why another top Russian official, State Duma speaker Boris Gryzlov, did not even talk to journalists during a separate trip to Yerevan a week earlier.

Sarkisian is in even greater need of Russian backing now that his election victory no longer seems a forgone conclusion. His most formidable challenger, former president Levon Ter-Petrosian, has pulled massive crowds during the ongoing election campaign and has even won over some government loyalists. Ever since his dramatic political comeback in September 2007, Ter-Petrosian has been at pains to differentiate himself from the staunchly pro-Western leaders of democratic revolutions in Georgia and Ukraine and to express his commitment to maintaining close ties with Russia. Speaking at a news conference on January 11, he emphasized the fact that Armenia had agreed to a long-term presence of Russian in troops on its soil and signed a comprehensive friendship treaty with Russia during his rule.

At the same time, Ter-Petrosian made it clear that he believes that the Russian-Armenian relationship has ceased to be one of two equal allies since his resignation in 1998, implying that his country will be less subservient to its former Soviet master if he returns to power. The Russians will also hardly like the former president’s enduring belief that the best guarantee of Armenia’s national security is “normal” relations with all neighboring states, rather than a military alliance with Russia or any other foreign power. Furthermore, Ter-Petrosian reportedly (and unexpectedly) left for Moscow on February 11 and was rumored to have met Medvedev. Such a meeting, if it really took place, could have far-reaching consequences for the Armenian election results.

But as things stand now, the Kremlin is not lending the Armenian prime minister the kind of vocal support which Ukraine’s Viktor Yanukovych enjoyed before and during the 2004 Orange Revolution. In the end, Yanukovych’s aggressive promotion by Putin proved fruitless and further complicated Russian-Ukrainian ties. Writing in Polit.ru ahead of Zubkov’s arrival in Yerevan, Russian analyst Sergei Markedonov warned that a similar “crude interference” in the Armenian presidential race could only antagonize many Armenians angry at their rulers. “Moscow had better not succumb to the ‘Ukrainian temptation’ and support only the ‘correct’ candidate against ‘incorrect,’ ‘orange’ and other ‘colored’ ones,” he said.

Source: http://jamestown.org/edm/article.php?article_id=2372797

[Armenian]

Re: The Rise of the Russian Empire: Russo-Armenian Relations

Rice calls some Russian rhetoric 'reprehensible'

Some recent Russian rhetoric on post-Cold War Europe has been "reprehensible" and Moscow should know it can no longer intimidate its neighbors, U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said on Wednesday. Rice was responding to comments by Russian President Vladimir Putin, including a statement on Tuesday that Russia could train its nuclear missiles on Ukraine if that former Soviet republic joined the NATO military alliance. "The unhelpful and really, I will use a different word, reprehensible rhetoric that is coming out of Moscow is unacceptable, and it's not helpful to a relationship that actually has some positive aspects," Rice told a Senate committee hearing.

She said the United States and Russia had been able to work together on reducing the North Korean nuclear threat, as well as on Iran, the Middle East and terrorism. But when it came to issues involving the post Cold War structure in Europe, "we get this kind of rhetoric" from Russia, Rice told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Indiana Republican Sen. Richard Lugar asked why Putin was being invited to attend a NATO summit in Bucharest in April, saying his presence could "intimidate" some members of the alliance, which now includes several former Soviet republics and ex-Soviet satellite states.

RUSSIA HAS "NO VETO"

"NATO will do what it must as an alliance and Russia has no veto," Rice responded. "We are absolutely devoted to the independence and sovereignty of Ukraine and of other states that were once a part of the Soviet Union." "The Soviet Union had all these parts but that was another point in time and it is gone forever, and I hope that Russia understands that," she added. Rice said the summit would be an opportunity for the alliance to communicate "that NATO is a strong and unified alliance that is not going to see a return to the Cold War, and that means neither to Russia's ability to intimidate neighbors, nor to the times when we had an implacably hostile relationship with the Soviet Union." At the April NATO summit in Bucharest, the alliance is considering issuing an invitation to three Balkan countries -- Croatia, Albania and Macedonia -- to join.

Speaking about those three countries, Rice said "should they meet the standard, it is our view that they ought to be invited for membership," but the United States would reserve final judgment until it consulted with allies. She gave a similar answer on whether Ukraine and Georgia, both former Soviet republics, should be offered a spot in NATO's "Membership Action Plan," a preliminary step toward joining the alliance. She said states should receive such status "as they become able and capable of carrying out the responsibilities that go with them." Separately, a senior U.S. official sought to downplay concern in Washington about a Russian bomber mission near a U.S. aircraft carrier last weekend. "There is absolutely no one that I know of that's hyperventilating over this situation," the defense official said about the weekend bomber flights south of Japan. The incident did not indicate Russia was a threat, he said.

Source: http://africa.reuters.com/wire/news/usnN13354881.html

[Armenian]

Re: The Rise of the Russian Empire: Russo-Armenian Relations

It now seems that Russian bombers using US Navy ships as virtual targets for their combat training missions has been the least of the Navy's problems in the western reaches of the Pacific Ocean. I wonder why don't we hear of these important developments in the main-stream news media?

Armenian

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

Chinese Navy Confronted USS Kitty Hawk

January 16, 2008

A Chinese attack submarine and destroyer confronted the U.S. carrier Kitty Hawk and its battle group in the Taiwan Strait, sparking a tense 28-hour standoff that brought both sides to a battle-ready position. The American ships were heading to Japan following China’s sudden cancellation of a scheduled Thanksgiving port call in Hong Kong when they encountered the Chinese vessels, according to the Navy Times, which cited a report in a Chinese-language newspaper in Taiwan. The Times reported that the encounter caused the carrier group “to halt and ready for battle, as the Chinese vessels also stopped amid the 28-hour confrontation.”

The encounter ended without incident, however, and the U.S. ships continued on to Japan. The two Chinese vessels were also headed for a port call in Japan. The Chinese destroyer, Shenzhen, is armed with anti-ship missiles, while the Song-class attack sub is equipped with anti-ship missiles and a variety of torpedoes. China has expressed “grave concern” to the U.S. over the Kitty Hawk’s transit through the Taiwan Strait, the Times notes. Beijing claims Taiwan is Chinese territory. But Admiral Timothy Keating, head of the U.S. Pacific Command, told reporters Tuesday: “We don’t need China’s permission to go through the Taiwan Strait. We will exercise our free right of passage whenever and wherever we choose.”

Shortly before the Kitty Hawk battle group was denied entry to Hong Kong, China had refused safe harbor for two U.S. Navy minesweepers seeking refuge from a storm. As Newsmax has reported, some U.S. politicians have rung alarm bells about China's increased military spending and technological revamping of its armed forces. China’s military budget had an average annual growth rate of nearly 16 percent from 1994 to 2004, and China's reported 2006 military budget is about $35 billion, according to Beijing.

But Pentagon sources have said these numbers fail to demonstrate the true scope of the growth, and the real 2006 figure could be as much as $105 billion. In recent years China has upgraded its nuclear-tipped intercontinental ballistic missiles; bought state-of-the-art warships, fighter planes and submarines from Russia; and begun development of a number of so-called "asymmetrical" weapons, including informational warfare and anti-satellite systems. In November, Japanese Prime Minister Yasuo Fukuda warned that China’s continuing military buildup could eventually pose a “major threat” if the Chinese government decides to exercise its power.

Source: http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/C.../16/64821.html

[Armenian]

Re: The Rise of the Russian Empire: Russo-Armenian Relations

VAZGEN MANOUKIAN: AT PRESENT NATO MEMBERSHIP MAY BE HARMFUL FOR ARMENIA

The Presidential Candidate Vazgen Manoukian made this statement in the course of the press conference at the Armenian Center for Trans- Atlantic Initiatives on February 12. In particular, he said that in the visible future Armenia should not consider joining NATO, since it will not enhance our security and will spoil our relations with Iran and Russia instead. As for the improvement of the relations with Turkey within the framework of NATO membership, Vazgen Manoukian brought the example of Turkey and Cyprus, two NATO member countries that unfolded a war against each other. Vazgen Manoukian says he respects NATO and is for close cooperation with this organization but membership is wrong, he thinks. Vazgen Manoukian says in ten years this issue may be solved automatically or become absolutely moot.

In response to the question whether there is a big geopolitical game in the region, and if he admits, what role he thinks Armenia performs in this game, the presidential candidate said our region up to the Persian Gulf is one of the most unstable regions. He reminded that in NATO’s analyses dating from the 1960s our region was viewed as the most likely hotbed of World War III. Vazgen Manoukian says if the local peoples do not promote integration, create a common space, naturally the great powers should become involved in the game. In this context, Armenia performs an important role which is both good and bad, Vazgen Manoukian believes. According to Vazgen Manoukian, it is good if Armenia has created a modern effective system of settlement of internal problems, and realizes its goals, and it is bad if there is no such system and the goals are uncertain.

Vazgen Manoukian also thinks the countries of our region should promote integration to rule out alien military presence. In that case, he thinks, Armenia’s military dependence on Russia will weaken. As for the expected developments in the coming presidential elections, the presidential candidate first said in case of a fair election the government candidate cannot win in one round because he lacks the resource. Vazgen Manoukian also rules out the victory of any candidate of the opposition, and thinks such announcements are clear bluffing. He thinks nobody’s rating is above 20 percent, therefore the main candidates will most probably get equal votes. As to the second round, the presidential candidate says one of the representatives of the opposition will run in the second round, and the opposition candidate will win the second round if the opposition comes together around him. As to who the likely candidate from the opposition is, Vazgen Manoukian declines to tell.

Source: http://www.azg.am/EN/2008021408

In related news:

Russian Embassy Informed That It Does Not Have Information On Ter-Petrosian's Stay In Russia And Recommended To Use The Information Of RIA "Novosti"

Embassy of the Russian Federation informed today that it "does not have information concerning Levon Ter-Petrosian's stay in Russia". Mediamax received the following press-release today from the Russian mbassy: "Ii connection with the media addresses received, we inform that the Embassy does not have information concerning the stay of L.Ter-Petrosian in Russia. As information, the Embassy recommends to use the material of the Russian Information Agency "Novosti": "The representatives of the Russian leadership did not meet with the oppositional presidential candidate of Armenia, Ex-President LevonTer-Petrosian, who visited Moscow this week, RIA Novosti was informed by a source, close to the Russian government. The Russian "Kommersant" informed on Wednesday referring to the staff of Ter-Petrosian that the Ex-President of Armenia was received in Moscow by the First Vice-Prime Minister and a presidential candidate Dmitri Medvedev. "No one from the Russian leadership held meeting with Ter-Petrosian. The highest political level of his meetings in Moscow was Leonid Gozman (Deputy Head of the Political Council of "Union of Right Forces" Party)", the source stated".

Source: http://groong.usc.edu/news/msg220427.html

[Armenian]

Re: The Rise of the Russian Empire: Russo-Armenian Relations

Badri Patarkatsishvili's Last Day

Georgian businessman and opposition politician Badri Patarkatsishvili spent his last day consulting with advisors and business partners, The Times newspaper reports. He met with Lord Peter Goldsmith, former Attorney General of England to discuss his property dispute with Georgian authorities. Russian businessmen Nikolay Glushkov and Yuly Dubov were present at that meeting. The Russians received refugee status in Great Britain after being charged with financial crimes in Russia. everal hours later, Patarkatsishvili's business partner Boris Berezovsky and Lord Timothy Bell, head of the Bell Pottinger Group PR agency, joined them. Both Berezovsky and Patarkatsishvili were clients of Bell. Patarkatsishvili stopped by Berezovsky's office at about 7:00 on his way to his home in Leatherhead. Patarkatsishvili complained to his family of feeling ill after dinner and was going to lie down but died before making it to his bedroom. Berezovsky told journalists that Patarkatsishvili complained about pain in his heart on February 12. Others close to the Georgian say he had no health complaints. His personal doctor, Zaur Kirkitadze, stated that Patarkatsishvili had not heart problems. Preliminary results of Patarkatsishvili's autopsy on February 14 revealed that Patarkatsishvili died of natural causes. His associates say he will be buried in Georgia. Nothing is known of the funeral arrangements.

Source: http://www.kommersant.com/p-12054/Ba...arkatsishvili/