The Rise of the Russian Empire: Russo-Armenian Relations

[Armenian]

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

China plans US$1.1bil Russia oil pipeline



China, the world's biggest energy consumer after the United States, will spend eight billion yuan (US$1.1bil) to construct a section of a crude oil pipeline to transport the fuel from neighbouring Russia. The Chinese section of the pipeline would be 965km long and construction would start this year and finish in 2010, China Planned Projects Web site, an affiliate of the National Development and Reform Commission, said on its website.

China is bolstering ties with Russia to secure energy supplies for an economy that expanded 11.9% in the second quarter, the fastest pace in 12 years. Russia plans to transport 15 million tonnes of crude a year to China through the pipeline in its initial phase. China National Petroleum Corp, the country's biggest oil company, signed an agreement with OAO Transneft to build a spur off Russia's trans-Pacific pipeline to pump oil to China, the China News Agency reported.

The Chinese company would invest in the construction of the branch pipeline, Andrei Dementiev, deputy head of Russia's Ministry of Energy & Industry. The volume of oil transported through the pipeline would double in the second stage of the project, Russia's Energy Minister Viktor Khristenko said. Work on the spur to China would start within 208 days after China transferred its first payment toward construction costs, the Russian Interfax news agency reported. – Bloomberg

Source: http://biz.thestar.com.my/news/story...5&sec=business

[Armenian]

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

Symposium: China Rising



The recent China-Russia joint military exercises were clearly a symbol of China’s military objectives. Without doubt, the communist regime is in an arms race with the United States and is intent on overtaking the U.S. as the world’s superpower. Many observers also believe that China is preparing for war, knowing that the U.S. represents the only obstacle to its expansionist objectives. Peking recently indicated its seriousness by threatening to use nuclear weapons against the U.S. if it interferes with China’s plan to militarily conquer Taiwan.

How dangerous is this situation? What threat does China real pose and how must we deal with it? What do we do if China acts militarily against Taiwan?

To discuss these and other issues with us today, Frontpage Symposium has assembled a distinguished panel of experts. Our guests today are:

Al Santoli, the President of the Asia America Initiative in Washington, DC. He is editor of the China in Focus and Asia in Focus weekly e-publications. He also is director of the successful Development for Peace program in the Autonomous Region of Muslim Mindanao in the Philippines;

Gurmeet Kanwal, a Senior Fellow at the Institute of Security Studies that is part of the Observer Research Foundation in New Delhi;

Prof. Dan Goure, the Vice President with the Lexington Institute, a nonprofit public-policy research organization headquartered in Arlington, Virginia. He is involved in a wide range of issues as part of the institute’s national security program. He was a member of the 2001 Department of Defense Transition Team and spent two years in the U.S. Government as the director of the Office of Strategic Competitiveness in the Office of the Secretary of Defense;

Patrick Devenny, a Henry M. Jackson National Security Fellow at the Center for Security Policy with an expertise in international terrorism and Asian security affairs;

and

Frederick W. Stakelbeck, Jr., an expert in bilateral and trilateral alliances and their impact upon U.S. national security. He has been published extensively on matters relating to China. His work has also appeared in In the National Interest and the Globalist and he is a frequent contributor to The American Thinker and Global Politician.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

FP: Al Santoli, Gurmeet Kanwal, Prof. Dan Goure, Patrick Devenny and Frederick W. Stakelbeck, Jr., welcome to Frontpage Symposium.

Mr. Santoli, let’s begin with you. Kindly give us a brief overview of the danger and threat that China poses to the U.S. and the West. Is it overrated or underrated?

Santoli: China is clearly undergoing a dramatic arms build-up, utilizing a number of modernized strategic and space-based weapons systems, as well as a blue water navy, that are offensive in their application. Chinese political and military officials have repeatedly stated that the United States is their "principal enemy." All Chinese modernization planning and development has been focused on how to defeat the United States for supremacy in the Asia Pacific region, and in other parts of the world where competition over strategic natural resources are becoming increasingly competitive.

In considering China's intentions externally, one must consider its repressive internal policies against open political and social organizations and against religious believers. We face the same type of repetition of history as in the early to mid-1930s when much of Europe and the United States ignored Germany's repressive policies and military modernization.

We must also consider the strategic "Multi-Polar" alliance between China, Russia and Iran which is military in nature and directed against the United States. Taiwan is more important to world peace than its geographical position as a strategic island in Southeast Asia. Taiwan is the first ethnic-Chinese government and society to have held peaceful democratic elections. Its system can be a model for mainland China. For war to be ultimately averted, there must be change inside of China, with those elements of social, political and religious reformers overcoming the repression of the 2% of the population Communist Party and there back-up in the military and paramilitary police. The solution cannot be imposed by the West, it must be Chinese in nature. But we can help the situation with a firm commitment to helping defend Taiwan's democracy.

FP: Mr. Kanwal, do you agree with Mr. Santoli’s assessment? And please help illuminate what a “firm commitment to helping defend Taiwan’s democracy” would entail.

Kanwal: China calls its ongoing quest for superpower status a “peaceful rise”. However, while its lips say one thing, its body language is different. China has not hesitated to use strong muscle power throughout the last 50 years to settle international disputes. It is the only major Asian country that has fought wars with all of its land neighbors and claims to have done so in self-defence.

It was involved in a vicious war in Korea in the 1950s. In 1962 China fought a border war with India that shattered illusions of peaceful co-existence for many decades to come. It fought with Russia over a disputed island in the Assuri River. It invaded Vietnam to teach it a lesson and then quite inexplicably withdrew.

China always speaks of the peaceful re-unification of Taiwan with the mainland but does not hesitate to issue dire threats at the smallest sign of Taiwan’s quest for self-determination. It has fired surface-to-surface missiles into the Taiwan Straits and regularly practices amphibious landings. China has taken physical possession of some of the disputed Spratly Islands in the South China Sea even though several other nations have much stronger claims. China was the world’s leading proliferator of nuclear weapons till recently when A Q Kahn’s antics propelled Pakistan to the top and it inherited that dubious distinction. Hence, China’s emerging military capabilities must be seen in the light of its likely intentions in future.

FP: Fair enough, so what will the U.S. have to do to confront these “likely intentions” and, as I asked earlier, what would a “firm commitment to helping defend Taiwan’s democracy” entail? Dr. Goure?

Goure: The consistent position of the U.S. government is that it will oppose any attempt to change Taiwan's status by force. The credibility of this position depends on a willingness and capability to use force to counter any Chinese aggression. China must know that it cannot win a war with the United States. Beijing could choose to escalate, but it could not win.

China is developing a military capability to deter or, if necessary, deny U.S. intervention on behalf of Taiwan. The necessary response is a U.S. military posture that defeats Chinese aims. This means, first, forces that can gain and hold the seas and air spaces in and around Taiwan, specifically, nuclear attack submarines and stealthy aircraft such as the F-22. Second, it requires theater and strategic missile defenses. Finally, this strategy necessitates the ability to hold at risk strategic targets throughout China. Capabilities such as the cruise missile firing SSGNs, long-range strategic bombers and global strike systems satisfy this requirement.

FP: So just a second, we are actually considering a real war between the U.S. and China and Dr. Goure is suggesting that China cannot win. Mr. Devenny what would a war between the U.S. and China look like and are we certain we would “win”? In a situation where a few nuclear bombs are exchanged doesn’t everyone lose? Or might this not necessarily be nuclear?

Devenny: Yes, nuclear war, even a limited exchange, would have a disastrous effect on both nations, particularly China, considering the marked superiority of the American nuclear arsenal. Luckily, such a possibility is fairly remote. No massive Chinese ICBM build up has been reported, and extensive financial investment overseas is hardly the modus operandi of a country actively planning for thermonuclear conflict. Dr. Goure is correct; the Chinese would invariably lose were a war to escalate to a true state-on-state level.

To avoid this outcome, the Chinese would hypothetically initiate a sharp, quick battle over Taiwan that they could, conceivably, “win”. Using submarines such as their recently procured Kilos, the PRC would attempt to close down the island’s shipping lanes, while concurrently achieving air dominance. Were they to be successful in this attempt, a U.S. President would be forced to weigh the desirability of fighting a war 7,000 miles away, over a battered island nation surrounded by modern warships and hundreds of fighter aircraft.

I would like to stress at this point however that the PRC buildup by no means suggests hostilities are inevitable, or even likely. After all, China reaps other benefits from its expanded military capabilities, namely additional leverage in Taiwan’s domestic political arena, an increased willingness of American politicians to rein in pro-independence forces on the island, and a certain marshal prestige that could siphon off some of their own population’s latent political dissatisfaction.

FP: Mr. Stakelbeck, can you expand on Mr. Devenny’s point about China reaping “other benefits” from its expanded military capabilities? Do you agree with his angle on this? Kindly expand on why this minimizes the chance of hostilities.

Stakelbeck: I agree with Mr. Devenny, specifically his point that hostilities between China and Taiwan are not inevitable. In addition to the three important benefits noted, expanded military capabilities have had several additional benefits for China.

First, not only have China's military capabilities forced Taiwan's domestic population to recognize the mainland's growing power, but it has dissuaded Taiwan's potential allies in Asia from coming to its aid more vigorously. In fact, China's military capabilities have fostered the creation of organizations such as the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) and other Asia-specific arrangements.

Second, strange as it may seem, China's expanded military capabilities have inadvertently increased economic integration between China and Taiwan. Both economies have become increasingly inter-connected on several distinct levels. Bilateral cooperation will only expand, as China's military capabilities begin to slowly influence economic policy decisions made by Taiwan's business and government leaders. The Taiwanese business sector, with an eye on investment in China, will try not to offend Beijing, realizing that any invasion would all but destroy the enormous gains already made and eliminate any chance for market competitiveness in the future.

Third, it is only logical for the Taiwanese military hierarchy to question whether it is better to join China in a great "Asian brotherhood" of nations, rather than to fight it in a war that will almost certainly destroy the island's delicate infrastructure. Taiwan's failure to reach a consensus on American military hardware sales proves once again that there is uncertainty at the highest levels of Taiwan's military and political leadership.

Taken collectively, all of these points minimize the chance of hostilities between China and Taiwan.

Source: http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID={5D3AEE6F-609E-493F-A4B8-082A21BD4102}

To be continued:

[Armenian]

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

Continuation:

Symposium: China Rising

FP: Fair enough, so what’s going on with China and Russia holding their first joint military exercises? Should we be worried?

Santoli: The goal of the Russia-China military exercises, as well as the numerous public and secret military and political deals signed between Putin and Hu, should raise serious concern. Pan-Asian political/military cooperation between Russia and China encompasses from the Silk Road energy routes in Central Asia across to Vladivistok on the Pacific, opposite Japan and Alaska.

In addition, Russia has enabled the Chinese People’s Liberation Armed Forces [PLA] with state-of-the-art Sukhoi 27 and Sukhoi 30 fighter bombers, and in-flight refueling capability. And Russia’s assistance to the People’s Liberation Navy’s quiet submarine force, combined with the miniaturization of warheads technology and MIRV’ing capability that China bought or stole from the US has substantially increased its nuclear strike capability against the United States. Equally significant are the hand-held lasers that Russia has helped provide the Chinese Army that can be used on a tactical battlefield to blind US forces, ship crews, pilots and miniature anti-satellite satellites can blind US Command and Control in the case of conflict.

Chinese leaders throughout the reign of the Communist Party have repeatedly shown that they are willing to launch political, economic and military campaigns that caused suffering and death of countless Chinese citizens. The US and our allies must be able to convince Beijing that they cannot militarily defeat the forces of freedom. That is getting increasingly more difficult, due to our sticky and expensive involvements in other areas of the world.

The current generation of “spoiled brat” Chinese Communist leaders have shown a ruthless tendency against internal religious believers and political dissenters. In order to hold on to their power, they may exploit nationalism and launch attacks in any given direction, not only toward Taiwan, with power-hungry military-industrial cadre in support. Potential social disruption in China, caused by the Communist Party’s corruption, mismanagement and callousness to the well being of their own citizens, could also be a factor leading to external war against a “common” enemy

Many of those Americans who currently say that the Chinese Communists value their economic integration more than lust for power, are forgetting the mistakes made by the best and brightest in the US and Western Europe in the 1930s who claimed a similar view of Nazi Germany before World War II. The competition over oil and other scarce natural resources are also vital flashpoints for conflict, more significant than the Taiwan political issue. Also, control of North Korea after the demise of Kim Jong-il will also pit the PRC, Russia, Japan and the US-South Korea in competition for influence in North Asia. In one of the bilateral security agreements between Russia and China since 2001, Moscow pledged to rush emergency military assistance to the PLA in the instance of a conflict over Taiwan. And the Russian sale of Sunburn anti-Aegis ship missiles to the PLA is part of a military strategy to destroy US aircraft carriers and Aegis radar destroyers in a Pacific conflict.

In addition, China and Russia are supporting anti-American despots such as Fidel Castro and Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez with weapons and training for insurgency forces that could bog us down in our own hemisphere. And the electronic spy and warfare bases operated by Russia and China in Cuba pose a threat to our vital defense, homeland security and economic communications.

Kanwal: Mr. Santoli’s formulation that there is a deep military nexus between China and Russia is questionable. In fact, it would be wrong to deduce that China is concentrating exclusively on enhancing its military power. Military power is now only one element of a nation’s ability to influence and shape the international environment. The Chinese leaders have for long propounded the concept of ‘comprehensive national power’. The Chinese are acutely conscious of the fact that they cannot hope to match the military muscle of the West for many more decades and they have been quick to realize that, in future, as the world becomes increasingly globalized, interdependent and wired, economic power will be the predominant determinant of a nation’s global status and its relative weight in the new world order. Hence, the Chinese are working assiduously towards becoming an economic superpower.

Simultaneously, China is modernizing its military forces to prepare for an option of the last resort, should Taiwan suddenly declare independence, and Russia is its foremost supplier of military hardware. The Chinese are unlikely to either invade Taiwan to secure its merger with the mainland or launch even missile and air strikes as such action will have huge economic repercussions. New FDI will almost certainly stop; projects in the pipeline will be put on hold; some MNCs may even pull out; and, the stock market will inevitably crash. However, as Mr. Devenny has said, a naval and air blockade of Taiwan, though it would be likely to invite UN sanctions, may appear attractive to the Chinese leadership. Cyber attacks, for which China has been preparing since the first Gulf War in 1991, are even more likely as these can completely disrupt the economy and provide inherent deniability.

The Russia-China joint military exercises are politically important but not militarily significant. These are likely to be aimed at assessing inter-operability challenges for joint patrolling, preparing for joint search-and-rescue and future cooperation as part of multinational intervention forces. Despite the Chinese purchase of large quantities of Russian military hardware over several decades, there has been no major military and strategic cooperation between the two countries. The relationship is basically a patron-client, buyer-seller relationship with limited transfer of technology to manufacture under license. It will be recalled that the Chinese had debunked former Russian Prime Minister Primakov’s proposal of a China-Russia-India triangle.

FP: Mr. Devenny?

Devenny: I tend to side more with Mr. Kanwal concerning the limited nature of both the joint exercises and the overall relationship. While closer relations between Russia and China should be of some concern to Americans, they stem more from a temporary confluence of interests than any grand geo-strategic plan, as Mr. Santoli alludes to. Both nations - especially a declining Russia - fear the recent expansion of American influence into Central Asia, which has historically been within their sphere of influence. The anti-democratic leadership of the two nations also share a deep mistrust of Western political reforms and their "liberalizing" effects, as they are keenly aware that such ideas only serve to undermine their own domestic support structures.

These fears represent the adhesive that have kept the two powers together temporarily. However, the relationship is hampered by historical rivalries, as formal alliances have been perennial non-starters. Were China to accelerate its economic march into Central Asia, you would invariably see Russian cooperation with China decline. Additionally, were China to gain access to the European arms market, the fire sale on Russian weapons would wane considerably (probably the only positive result of such a development).

Stakelbeck: Although the China-Russia bilateral military relationship remains somewhat immature at this time, it would be dangerous to assume that the relationship could not become more intimate; giving the “Peace Mission 2005” joint military exercise a higher degree of relevance.

Recognizing the limitations of confronting the U.S. unilaterally, China and Russia are quietly calibrating their existing military relationship to allow for the pursuit of more ambitious endeavors in the future. This includes the continued sale of advanced Russian weaponry and equipment to China designed specifically to confront U.S. forces in the Pacific.

At any given moment, a regional or global confrontation, perhaps over oil and natural gas resources or Taiwan, could accelerate unfortunate changes in the dynamics of the China-Russia military arrangement making a military solution more feasible. Moreover, American or allied military action against rogue nuclear regimes in North Korea and Iran would only deepen the military relationship between China and Russia.

The development of formal, geostrategic entities such as the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), of which China and Russia are key participants, magnifies the difficulties confronting the U.S. The active solicitation and recruitment of marginalized governments in Central Asia and the Middle East against perceived U.S. hegemony is reason for genuine concern and should prompt a coordinated diplomatic and intelligence response from Washington.

FP: Ok gentleman, we are going into our final round. Mr. Santoli, first, feel free to make a rejoinder to the debate that has broken out here about the temporary Chinese-Soviet military romance. Second, let us suppose that President Bush assembles all of you as an advisory panel on China and he asks you what to do first. What do you tell him?

Santoli: The Chinese are cognizant of the rise and fall of empires throughout their own history and realize that although economic power is key to developing and sustaining international political power, a nation state must have the ability to defend itself against or destroy powerful rivals. China's new generation of war planners fully appreciate the need to integrate economics, communications, aerospace and electronic and cyber dominance with the ability to project conventional and nuclear military

For the academics and economists who are unfamiliar with Chinese military writings and strategy, I would ask them to seek information on a term popular in the highest-level Chinese military circles -- "Assassin's Mace." This is used in reference to new weapons systems being developed to defeat the United States militarily, where "the weak can defeat the strong" using pin-point targeted surprise new weapons systems. Where some US analysts dismiss an "inferior" Russia, it would be foolish to underestimate the quality of their military-industrial scientists and engineers who are collaborating with some of the best and brightest technicians in China, whose performances have been respected in some of the most prestigious science and technology university programs throughout the West.

One would also be foolish to dismiss the political/military partnership between Russia and China. In many Chinese histories and famous novels, the Emperor or protagonist seeks to isolate and defeat its rivals, one at a time. This includes making temporary non-sentimental alliances with those one owes revenge, in order to first defeat the stronger rival before redressing vengeance on the erstwhile ally. Thus the current anti-US alliance that been began developing dating back to the Yeltsin era between Russia and China, when the initial weapons deals were made to target US strengths. The US success in the Balkans War brought the two Eurasian Powers together, this was further expanded by the eastern expansion of NATO, the role of US forces in Afghanistan and Central Asia, the Sino-Soviet relationship with both Saddam Hussein and Iran.

Russian motivation for this alliance is more than just a matter of "weapons sales". Throughout history, the lust for revenge can be blind. Around 5 years ago, while I still worked in Congress, I had a very pointed discussion with on of Putin's key US watchers [i.e. from the same organization of origin]. I asked him why Russians were risking their own future by arming the PLA. His response became very emotional: "We know we are Riding the Tiger. But I witnessed the delegations of US businessmen led by Ron Brown [Clinton Admin Commerce Secretary] who came to Russia and how they conspired with our billionaire tycoons to exploit the Russian people." It would be unwise to underestimate the Russian leaders' desire to reclaim empire and seek revenge against the US for the humiliation of losing the Cold War and the eastward expansion of NATO. It may also have something to do with the region's fear of a re-militarized Japan as an ally of the United States.

The scope of the August 18-25 Russo-Sino military exercise on Shandung peninsula -- opposite the two Koreas and Japan on the Yellow, north of Shanghai and very far away from Taiwan is historic and breath taking. The Reuters reports that 100,000 troops are involved including many paratroopers and naval infantry to practice landing exercises on a hostile foreign territory to "stabilize a country" outside their own territory... Strategic bombers, in-flight refuelling for state-or-the-art Sukhoi jet fighters, submarines, naval infantry landing craft, battalions of paratroopers from both armies and 100 battle tanks are being used. Could this exclusively mean an invasion of Taiwan? If you look at the geography of the exercise and instability and threat of potential conflict in North Korea with a potential US-Japan war against the nuclear armed "Hermit Kingdom," this exercise can be seen a totally different tactical and strategic light.

The issue of cyber and electronic warfare is being perfected by both China and Russia. For the past 6 years China has been conducting cyber war experiments across the Taiwan Strait, targeting banking systems, military communications and government offices. Most cyber attacks against the US Government have been traced back to China and Russia based sites. The CW and EW bases operated by China and Russia in Cuba in fact pose potential tragedy as

Recommendation: Although this may sound impolitique, it would be wise for the United States to send a clear message to China and Russia and all other adversaries that violation of the Monroe Doctrine will not be tolerated. A quiet but devastating US cyber strike against the Cuban-based CW and EW bases could eliminate them without threat of to innocent civilians or risking a highly publicized confrontation.

[...]

Source: http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID={5D3AEE6F-609E-493F-A4B8-082A21BD4102}

[Armenian]

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

The west may yet come to regret its bullying of Russia

Putin has no interest in a new cold war and is struggling to modernise his economy. Yet he is rebuffed and insulted. Countries too have feelings. So I am told by a Russian explaining the recent collapse in relations between Vladimir Putin and his one-time western admirers. "We have done well in the past 15 years, yet we get nothing but rebuffs and insults. Russia's rulers have their pride, you know."

The truth is that Putin, like George Bush and Tony Blair, has an urgent date with history. He can plead two terms as president in which he has stabilised, if not deepened, Russian democracy, forced the pace of economic modernisation, suppressed Chechen separatism and yet been remarkably popular. But leaders who dismiss domestic critics crave international opinion, and are unaccustomed to brickbats. Hence Putin's outburst at the Munich security conference this month, when he announced he would "avoid extra politesse" and speak his mind.

Putin's apologists ask that he be viewed as victim of an epic miscalculation by the west. Here is a hard man avidly courted at first by Bush, Blair and other western leaders. After 9/11 he tolerated US intervention along his southern border with bases north of Afghanistan. Yet when he had similar trouble in Chechnya, he was roundly abused. When he induced Milosevic to leave Kosovo (which he and not "the bombing" did), he got no thanks. When Putin sought to join Nato in the 1990s he was rebuffed. Then Nato broke its post-cold-war promise and advanced its frontier through the Baltics and Poland to the Black Sea. It is now planning missile defences in Poland and the Czech Republic and is flirting with Ukraine and Georgia. Against whom is this directed, asks Putin.

The west grovels before Opec, but when Putin proposes a gas Opec it cries foul. America seizes Iraq's oil, but when Putin nationalises Russia's oil that, too, is a foul. Meanwhile, every crook, every murdered Russian, every army scandal is blazoned across the western press. True, Russia is still a klepto-oligarchy that steps back as often as forward, but what of America's pet Asian democracies, Afghanistan and Iraq? In his Munich speech Putin asked why America constantly goes on about its "unipolar world". Does Washington really seek a second cold war? Russia is withdrawing from Georgia and Moldova. Why is Nato advancing bases in Bulgaria and Romania? The west is handling Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan and Iran with the arrogance and ineptitude of 19th-century imperialists. Is it surprising Russia is seeking allies where it can, in China, India, Iran and the Gulf?

At an Anglo-Russian conference in Moscow last weekend I was bemused by the talk of a return to "east-west" confrontation. Diplomats have a habit of listing complaints like marriage counsellors inviting couples to catalogue what most irritates them about each other. The list seems endless, but it surely points to a proper talk rather than a divorce. Don't they really need each other after all? Having visited Russia three times since the demise of the Soviet Union, I remain impressed by its progress. Debate and comment are open. Russia is not squandering its energy wealth but setting $100bn aside in an infrastructure fund. The links between Russia and western business are worth $30bn in inward investment. Cultural and educational contacts are strengthening. Moscow and St Petersburg are booming world cities, their skylines thick with cranes.

The west views pluralist democracy as so superior that any state coming to it fresh must surely welcome it with open arms. When there is backsliding, as in former Yugoslavia, Ukraine, Russia and parts of Africa, let alone the Arab world, the west behaves like a peevish car salesman whose client has not obeyed the repair manual. If the west can do fair elections, market capitalism, press freedom and regional secession - after a mere two centuries of trial and error - why can newly free states not do them overnight? The tough response to Putin is easy. It is the one he has from Washington and Nato. We won the cold war. You lost. Shut up. If, as Russia's top general said last week, you want to withdraw from the intermediate-range nuclear forces treaty, then withdraw. If you think gas and oil enables you to play the superpower again, see what happens. Bush and Blair may be screwing up "Islamistan", but their successors will be more canny. Our defence budget is bigger than yours and we have you surrounded.

All this makes for good realpolitik. But what Putin actually said in Munich reflected not belligerence but puzzlement at the aggressive course of western diplomacy. In the old days, he said, "there was an equilibrium and a fear of mutual destruction. In those days one party was afraid to make an extra step without consulting the others. This was certainly a fragile peace and a frightening one, but seen from today it was reliable enough. Today it seems that peace is not so reliable."

Putin is hardly seeking a return to the certainties of the cold war. He has no more interest than the west in stirring the hornet's nest of Islamic nationalism, stretching as it does deep into Russian territory. His desire for "ever closer union" with Europe and Nato after 1997 was sincere and was surely welcome. While Putin appears to have been conducting his diplomacy over the past decade from weakness and the west from strength, the reverse has been nearer the truth. Britain and America have been led by essentially reactive politicians with no grasp of history. A terrorist outrage or a bombastic speech and they change policy on the hop. When Bush and Blair go, they will leave a world less secure and more divided in its leadership than when they arrived. Their dismissive treatment of Russia's recovery from cold war defeat has been the rhetoric of natural bullies.

Russia and the west have everything to gain from good relations. Putin has struggled to modernise his economy while holding together a traumatised and shrunken Russian federation. The west may feel he errs towards authoritarianism, but second-guessing Russian leaders is seldom a profitable exercise. This is a huge country, rich in natural and human resources. It is hard to think of somewhere the west would be better advised to "hug close". Instead, Putin will hand his successor an isolated and bruised nation. Under a less confident president, it could retreat into protectionism and alliances the west will hate. To have encouraged that retreat is truly stupid.

Source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/st...017668,00.html

[Armenian]

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

Russia ahead in Arctic 'gold rush'


State Duma Deputy Speaker and famous arctic explorer Artur Chilingarov

The Russians are leading a new "gold rush" in the high north, with a bold attempt to assert a claim to oil, gas and mineral rights over large parts of the Arctic Ocean up to the North Pole. Russia's most famous explorer, Artur Chilingarov, complete with nautical beard, is leading an expedition to plant the Russian flag in a capsule on the ocean seabed under the pole itself. "The Arctic is Russian," Chilingarov has said. "We must prove the North Pole is an extension of the Russian coastal shelf." Russia is claiming that an underwater mountain known as the Lomonosov Ridge is actually an extension of the Russian landmass. This, it argues, justifies its claim to a triangular area up to the pole, giving it rights under the United Nations Law of the Sea Convention.

Under Article 76 of the convention, a state can claim a 200 nautical mile exclusive zone and beyond that up to 150 nautical miles of rights on the seabed. The baseline from which these distances are measured depends on where the continental shelf ends. Russia lodged a formal claim in 2001 but the UN's Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf told it to resubmit the claim. The flag-planting can be seen as a symbolic gesture in support. At the same time, other states are acting to protect their interests in the Arctic. Canada is planning to build up to eight new patrol ships and the US Congress is considering a proposal to build two new heavy polar ships.

The rush for the Arctic has become more frenzied because of the melting of parts of the polar ice cap, which will allow easier exploration, and by the urgent need for new sources of oil and gas. A new sense of nationalism is also evident in Russia. The ice thaw is predicted by a team of international researchers whose Arctic Climate Impact Assessment suggested in 2004 that the summer ice cap could melt completely before the end of this century because of global warming. If the ice retreats, it could open up new shipping routes and new areas where natural resources could be exploited. The US Geological Survey estimates that a quarter of the world's undiscovered energy resources lies in Arctic areas.

At the moment, nobody's shelf extends up to the North Pole so there is an international area around the Pole administered by the International Seabed Authority from Kingston, Jamaica. But quite apart from the Russian claim there are multiple other disputes. The US and Canada argue over rights in the North-west Passage, Norway and Russia differ over the Barents Sea, Canada and Denmark are competing over a small island off Greenland, the Russian parliament is refusing to ratify an agreement with the US over the Bering Sea and Denmark is claiming the North Pole itself.

North Pole solutions

The five countries involved are considering two other potential ways of sharing the region, in which all the sea would be divided between them. The "median line method", supported by Canada and Denmark, would divide the Arctic waters between countries according to their length of nearest coastline. This would give Denmark the Pole itself but Canada would gain as well.

The "sector method" would take the North Pole as the centre and draw lines south along longitudes. This would penalise Canada but Norway and, to a lesser extent, Russia, would gain. One major problem is that the United States has not ratified the 1982 UN convention, largely because senators did not want to have international restrictions placed on American actions. However, in May 2007, Senator Richard Lugar, a senior Republican, pleaded for ratification in the light of the Russian moves, saying that an American voice was needed at the negotiating table.

Source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_depth/6925853.stm

Russia makes a bid for the North Pole (video): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AO63CTQc-4k

Who is Artur Chilingarov:

Artur Nikolayevich Chilingarov

Nationality:
Armenian

Career:
1957 - worked at a Baltic shipbuilding yard as a locksmith-fitter. Worked at Dikson. Chief of the first youth drifting polar research station North Pole-17. Headed department of hydrometeorological station in the city Amderm in Nenets Okrug. Elected deputy of the soviet in Nenets, member of NenetsÆ CPSU. Has been on all stations at the continent of the Southern pole. The first person ever to be on the Southern and Northern poles in one year. Participated at the first breaking up of the ice at an atomdriven icebreaker in the Arctic.
1990 - Became chairman of the Association of polar explorers when it was founded. Established a fund supporting polar explorers and inhabitants of the Northern territories. Established, together with Senkevich, the Russian fund for international humanitarian help and cooperation. Participated in the preparatory work of laws and decisions concerning the Northern territories. One of the authors of the program Arctic Children. Member of the (all-Russian) Party Renewal. Soviet hero.
1993 - elected deputy of the State Duma. Member of the Committee on Defence. Member of the fraction New Regional Policy. Represents Nenets autonomous Okrug, single-member constituency No.218, where he was (one among 7 candidats) nominated by the Civic Union. During election campain close connection with Yu.A. Senkevich.
1995 - elected deputy of the State Duma from the single mandate constituency no.218. Nominated candidate by Ivan Rybkin's Block.
1999 - joined Fatherland-All Russia, elected deputy of the State Duma from a single mandat constituency in Nenets AOk
2000 - joined Russia's Regions faction of the State Duma, elected deputy chairman of the State Duma

Source: http://www.nupi.no/cgi-win/Russland/personer.exe?69

[Armenian]

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

It is difficult to overemphasize this development within the Arctic. The political and economic significance of this bold operation is great indeed and will have longterm effects. What's more, this is a good example of how Russia's strategic interests and national pursuits put it on a direct collision course with the West. Incidentally, how much coverage has this news gotten in the mainstream controlled media? Minuscule.

Thus far, for the past several years that is, the Russian Federation has been on a fast forward momentum. From the Far East to the Baltic, from the Arctic to the Caucasus the Russian Federation has been consolidating its political and economic interests. Thus far, the West has not been able to effectively check Russia's ambitions. As a result, I believe that a direct collision of some sort between the two opposing interests is coming within the near future.

Armenian

Russia claims North Pole



Putin asserts his nation's ownership of 460,000 square miles of Arctic territory - and its huge reserves of oil and gas - after exploration feat of 'unimaginable difficulty'

Russia has taken a giant leap for the Kremlin by planting its flag on the ocean floor under the North Pole in a politically charged symbolic gesture to claim the rights to the sea bed which could be rich in oil and gas. In a dramatic technical feat testing international law, the Russians dispatched two mini-submarines 2.5 miles to the ocean floor in what is believed to be the first expedition of its kind. Both submersibles, with crews of three on board, completed their dangerous return to the surface yesterday after what was described as a "smooth landing".

But the expedition raised the hackles of Russia's neighbours, who also have their eye on the vast mineral deposits that could lie under the Arctic area, and who consider the Russian move as a brazen land grab. "This isn't the 15th century. You can't go around the world and just plant flags and say 'We're claiming this territory'," said Peter MacKay, Canada's Foreign Minister. Russia has fired the first diplomatic shot in a really cold war. The new oil rush has been galvanised by the accelerated shrinking of the polar ice cap because of global warming, which has allowed exploration that had been previously unthinkable because of the extreme conditions.

Russia claims that the Lomonosov Ridge, an underwater mountain range crossing the polar region, is an extension of its territory. The UN has rejected Moscow's 2001 claim to the ocean bed, which it says is part of its continental shelf under international law but the Russians are due to resubmit their case to the committee administering the Law of the Sea.

A brains trust of 135 Russian scientists, led by a 68-year-old personal envoy of President Vladimir Putin, the explorer Artur Chilingarov, plan to map out part of the 1,240-mile ridge.

But yesterday's scientific achievement of dropping a titanium capsule containing the Russian flag on to the seabed could not conceal the political advantage gained by Mr Putin. Once again, he has demonstrated to the West Russia's determination to expand its energy empire. The news of the mission's success dominated Russian television yesterday. Dmitry Peskov, Mr Putin's spokesman, said the President considered it "very important ... Being a unique scientific expedition, it is of course supported by the President."

The Foreign Minister, Sergei Lavrov, said: "I think this expedition will supply additional scientific evidence for our aspirations." But he added that the issue of territorial claim to the polar region "will be resolved in strict compliance with international law". If recognised, the claim would give Russia control of nearly half of the Arctic's near-half million square mile sea bed. But four other countries - the US, Canada, Norway and Denmark - also have claims on the ocean floor which could hold as much oil and gas as Saudi Arabia. According to the US Geological Survey, the Arctic seabed and subsoil account for 25 per cent of undiscovered oil and gas reserves.

The Russian convoy, consisting of a research vessel and a nuclear-powered ice-breaker, and the two submersibles which had been used in the filming of Titanic, set sail from the northern Russian city of Murmansk last week, catching the world by surprise. Initial concerns that the expedition could be thwarted by thick sea ice proved unfounded, although the research vessel, the Akademik Fyodorov suffered from engine trouble on the journey.

Mr Chilingarov was on board the Mir-1, the first submersible to go down, and spent eight hours and 40 minutes under water. The last 40 minutes were tense, as the crew tried to find an opening free of ice. "It was so good down there," he said on his triumphant return. "If someone else goes down there in 100 or 1,000 years, he will see our Russian flag." The Mir-2 had an international crew on board, including the Australian deep-sea specialist Mike McDowell who previously led tours to the Antarctic. The co-sponsor of the voyage, the Swedish pharmaceuticals millionaire Frederik Paulsen, was also on the submersible, according to the Russian news agency Itar-Tass.

In addition to the engineering challenge - which has been compared to the first moon landing - the dark depths of the Arctic waters are so mysterious that the Russian crew did not know what they would find. Vladimir Gruzdev, who accompanied Mr Chilingarov on Mir-1, mused before their dive: "What if we encounter Atlantis there? Nobody knows what is there. We must use the opportunity given to us 100 per cent." The operation was straight out of a Jules Verne story, with expectations that exotic underwater creatures would appear from the uncharted depths. But in a momentous anti-climax, the expedition's leader declared: "There is yellowish gravel down here. No creatures of the deep are visible."

While in the Arctic, until mid-September, the scientists will continue to study in detail the climate, geology and biology of the polar region. But the Russians had better watch their backs: the Danes hope to prove that the Lomonosov Ridge is an extension of Greenland, which is part of Denmark. Canadian and Danish scientists are currently on two icebreakers mapping the north polar sea.

And in a reminder of the Kremlin's aggressive use of its oil and gas wealth, the state-run Gazprom this week threatened to cut off gas to Belarus in a re-run of the economic bullying of Ukraine in 2006 that affected further supplies to Europe. Belarus owes Russia $460m for gas. Alexander Lukashenko, Belarus's President, yielded to the demand yesterday, after being promised a little help by the Venezuelan President, Hugo Chavez. If Russia had carried out its threat, gas supplies to Germany and Poland would definitely have been at risk.

Source: http://news.independent.co.uk/sci_te...cle2831111.ece

Gazprom says it hopes for major Arctic hydrocarbon discoveries



A Gazprom spokesman said Wednesday that the Russian energy giant expected "major new discoveries" of oil and gas reserves under the Arctic Ocean, and had large-scale prospecting plans for the region. Press secretary Sergei Kupriyanov discussed the company's plans in a radio interview, the day before a Russian exploration vessel is to send mini-submarines on the first-ever dive below the North Pole, a symbolic move as Russia attempts to claim a vast section of the Arctic.

The United States' geological survey data suggest the Arctic seabed contains up to 25% of the world's oil and natural gas reserves, and other mineral riches, made accessible by the retreating of the polar ice due to global warming.

Sergei Kupriyanov told Ekho Moskvy: "We have approved a program of work on the Arctic shelf, which includes a great deal of prospecting." The spokesman stressed the potential vastness of the Arctic shelf's reserves - the Shtokman field alone in the Barents Sea holds an estimated 3.8 trillion cubic meters of natural gas, he said. "This is more than we have supplied to Europe over the past 30 years. Less than 5% of the Arctic shelf has been explored, and we are sure that major new discoveries will follow," the official said.

Two Russian Mir mini-submarines are to dive 4,200 meters (14,000 feet) below the Pole in what is seen as a publicity stunt designed to prop up Russia's claim to 1.2 million sq kilometers (about 460,000 sq miles) of the territory - the underwater Lomonosov and Mendeleyev Ridges - which Russia says is the continuation of its continental shelf and which is believed to contain mineral resources. The claim has been challenged by other countries. The UN has yet to rule on the claim. The area around the Pole is currently an international territory administered by the International Seabed Authority. Researchers in the Mir 1 and Mir 2 mini-subs will take soil and fauna samples on the ocean bed, leave a Russian flag and a message to future generations in a capsule, and establish a video link with the International Space Station.

Source: http://en.rian.ru/russia/20070801/70124523.html

[Artsakh]

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

This is great news. Something tells me I'd better start learning russian, as I may need to move there once America goes to hell.

[Armenian]

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

Has anyone been following news coming out of Russia during the last several days? Simply stated, what's going on in the Russian Federation is astounding. And notice that they have decided to flex their military muscles over the Arctic by conducting strategic bomber flights over the North Pole (see following news report). Does anyone here think they are not serious about "privatizing" the natural resources said to be located there? Nevertheless, all these new military exercises and deployments are an unmistakable message to the West - stay away.

Armenian

Russia's strategic aviation to conduct 6 exercises in August



The Russian strategic aviation will fly over the North Pole and conduct test launches of cruise missiles during a series of exercises in August, the Defense Ministry said on its website Tuesday.

Units of the 37th Air Army of the Strategic Command will conduct a total of six tactical exercises in August as part of an annual training program, the ministry said in a statement. "During the exercises, strategic bombers will test launch cruise missiles, conduct simulated bombing raids, and fly over the North Pole, the Pacific and Atlantic oceans," the statement said. The exercises will involve Tu-160 Blackjack and Tu-95MS Bear-H strategic bombers, and Tu-22M3 Backfire-C theater bombers - the mainstay of the air component of Russia's strategic nuclear triad. According to various sources, the Russian Air Force currently deploys 141 Tu-22M3 bombers, 40 Tu-95MS bombers, and 14 Tu-160 planes. Lieutenant General Igor Khvorov, the newly appointed chief of the Air Force Main Staff, said in March that Russia's strategic aviation had sufficient potential to suppress elements of a U.S. missile defense shield should it be deployed in Central Europe.

Source: http://en.rian.ru/russia/20070731/70022257.html

Russia's Navy gets ambitious



The Russian Navy will become the world's second largest in 20 years' time, said its commander-in-chief, Admiral Vladimir Masorin, speaking ahead of Navy Day. He said the navy's core would consist of the newest strategic nuclear-powered submarines and six squadrons of aircraft carriers. For Russia's navy, this will be its third modernization program, said the admiral. The previous two, although giving it a boost, were never completed. Now, said the admiral, there is such a chance. Recently approved, a rearmament program until 2015 for the first time in Soviet and Russian history puts the development of the navy on an equal footing with strategic nuclear forces. Out of 4.9 trillion rubles ($192.16 billion) allocated for military rearmament, 25% will go into building new ships. "We are already building practically as many ships as we did in Soviet times," First Deputy Prime Minister Sergei Ivanov said during a visit to Severodvinsk. "The problem now is not lack of money, but how to optimize production so that the navy can get new ships three, not five, years after laying them down."

[...]

Of special note are plans to build six aircraft carriers, which would make the Russian Navy the world second in terms of combat capability. The government program, however, does not provide for their construction before 2015. Nor is there mention of them in plans for the period until 2030. But during his recent trip to Severodvinsk, Ivanov was shown plans for a new $500 million dock designed to build large-tonnage ships at the Zvyozdochka ship repair yard. Earlier such large ships could only be built in Nikolayev, Ukraine. The dock, the Russian shipbuilding agency said, is needed to build gas carriers - ships to transport Russian liquefied natural gas to Western partners.

The same dock could also build aircraft carriers. At any rate, the project is already on the drawing board. Masorin said the craft would be a nuclear-powered ship not less than 100 meters long and would carry an air wing of 30 combat fighter jets and helicopters. But this is not going to be soon. The outlook is best for submarines. Recently two Project 667BDRM boats have been modernized, and two more submarines are being repaired and upgraded at Severodvinsk. A new sonar system is being installed to enable them to "see" and "hear" better. Other equipment includes new fire fighting systems, nuclear reactor protection devices, and the RSM-54 Sineva strategic missile system. Unlike its predecessor, the Skif, the Sineva carries 10 independently targetable re-entry vehicles instead of four. The new missile has a longer range and a modern control system.

[...]

But modernization of existing vessels is only part of the rebuilding program. The Sevmash engineering plant at Severodvinsk is currently building a series of new fourth-generation submarines. These are Project 955 Borei boats. It is for them that the new Bulava sea-launched ballistic missile is being developed.

"Three nuclear submarines of the fourth generation are currently under construction," Masorin said. "They are the Yury Dolgoruky, Alexander Nevsky and Vladimir Monomakh. In comparison with previous boats, they will have much better armaments and equipment."

A Project 885 Yasen-class multi-purpose attack nuclear-powered submarine is preparing to hit the water at Severodvinsk. It is another new fourth-generation submarine able to replace several classes of submarines used in the Russian Navy. Professionals say this ship will cause a revolution in submarine building. Russia's third-generation Project 971 Akula submarines are already undetectable in ocean depths. The Yasen will outperform even the latest American Sea Wolf in the underwater noise level. In addition, it will be a multi-purpose boat. Thanks to its armaments (several types of cruise missiles and torpedoes), it will be able to carry out diverse missions. It will be able with equal ease to chase enemy aircraft carriers and deliver massive missile strikes on coastal targets.

Experts believe the new nuclear submarines and "floating airfields" will mean a quantum leap for the Russian Navy and its combat capabilities.

Source: http://en.rian.ru/analysis/20070731/70008268.html

Russia begins large-scale military exercises in North Caucasus



Russia begins large-scale military exercises in North Caucasus
Russia began Monday large-scale military exercises in five regions of the North Caucasus, involving at least 8,000 personnel, an aide to the commander of the North Caucasus military district said Tuesday.

The exercise involves units of the North Caucasus Military District, the 4th Air Force Army, Interior Ministry troops, border guards, and the Caspian Flotilla. "The total number of personnel involved in the command-and-staff exercise is over 8,000," Andrei Bobrun said. The main goal of the exercise is to practice interoperability between federal troops, interior ministry's troops, border guards, the Air Force and the Navy in special operations against militants and the defense of Russia's state borders.

The exercise, which involves at least 350 combat vehicles and aircraft, will be conducted until August 9 on the territory of North Ossetia, Ingushetia, Daghestan, the Chechen Republic, and the Stavropol Territory. Air Force spokesman Colonel Alexander Drobyshevsky earlier said aircraft and helicopters would practice reconnaissance, lock-on and destruction of air and ground targets. Although the active phase of the antiterrorism campaign in Russia's troubled North Caucasus region officially ended in 2001, periodic bombings and clashes between militants and federal troops still disrupt Chechnya and nearby regions, including Daghestan, Ingushetia, Kabardino-Balkaria, and Karachayevo-Circassia.

Source: http://en.rian.ru/russia/20070731/70012347.html

Strategic Missile Forces to conduct over 100 exercises in fall



The Strategic Missile Forces will conduct more than 100 exercises this summer and fall, the SMF press service said Friday. Part of the exercises will include rehearsing command and control operations involving the mobile Topol-M ICBM complex.

The SMF commander said last month Russia will commission three Topol-M ICBMs this year. "By the end of the year we will arm another missile battalion with advanced Topol-M ICBMs at the Teikovo missile base, Ivanovo Region," Col. Gen. Nikolai Solovtsov said. Gen. Solovtsov said earlier the deployment of silo-based Topol-M systems in the Saratov Region and road-mobile systems in the Ivanovo Region (central Russia) would be completed in 2010. As of December 2006, the Strategic Missile Forces operated 44 silo-based and three mobile missiles. The SMF press service said that, while 48 silo-based systems would be on duty by late 2007, the Teikovo base is shifting to cutting-edge road-mobile missiles.

Source: http://en.rian.ru/russia/20070727/69799517.html

Russia to equip two air regiments with Su-34 strike planes soon



Two regiments of the 16th Air Army will be equipped with new Su-34 Fullback fighter-bombers in the near future, the army commander said Thursday. Designed by the Sukhoi Design Bureau, the Su-34s will replace the Su-24 Fencer frontline bombers. Experts said the new bomber has the potential to become the best plane in its class for years to come. "The schedule for re-equipment of air regiments [in the Russian Air Force] with new and modernized aircraft has been determined," Major General Alexander Belevitch said. "Two of our air regiments will be re-armed soon."

The $36 million Su-34 fighter-bomber is a two-seat strike aircraft equipped with twin AL-31MF afterburning turbojet engines. It is designed to deliver high-precision strikes on heavily-defended targets under any weather conditions, day or night, and fields weaponry that includes a 30mm GSh-301 cannon, up to 12 Alamo or Archer AAMs, ASMs, and bombs. The first serial-production Su-34 has been procured by the Defense Ministry and will soon be deployed at the Lipetsk pilot training center for practical training of military pilots. General Belevitch said the 16th Air Army would also receive MiG-29SM Fulcrum fighters to replace outdated MiG-29s and modernized Su-25 Frogfoot close support aircraft, which showed outstanding performance during operations in Afghanistan, Chechnya and other "hot spots."

The 16th Air Army, headquartered at Kubinka, is essentially a tactical air force component of the Moscow Military District, with zone of responsibility of up to 1.3 million square kilometers, including the country's capital, Moscow.

Source: http://en.rian.ru/russia/20070802/70212524.html

Russia aims to increase number of submarines in Black Sea Fleet -1



Russia would like to increase the number of submarines in its Black Sea Fleet, but has so far been held back by Ukraine, Russian Navy Commander Admiral Vladimir Masorin said.

"In the future Russia's Black Sea Fleet [based in Ukraine's Crimea] should have a brigade consisting of 12-15 diesel submarines," Masorin said. The fleet currently has two diesel subs. "We have been asking Ukraine to transfer a sub from the Northern Fleet to the Black Sea Fleet, but we have yet to resolve the issue," he said. Masorin said in July that the construction of a new base for the Black Sea Fleet at the Russian port of Novorossiisk would be completed by 2012.

President Vladimir Putin signed a decree in 2003 setting up the alternative naval base for the Black Sea Fleet in Novorossiisk, after Ukraine demanded the base in Sevastopol, Crimea, be withdrawn by 2017. The commander said that in Soviet times, there were about 60 diesel subs in the Black Sea Fleet. "There is no longer any need for such a number," he said. Masorin said the construction of a third diesel sub named Sevastopol, from the Lada family, had recently been started. He also said the Black Sea Fleet would receive two new ships this year - The Admiral Zakharyin minesweeper and a Serna air-cavity landing craft.

Kiev has been pushing for the withdrawal of Russia's naval base in Sevastopol by 2017, in compliance with a previous bilateral agreement. Russia and Ukraine signed an agreement in 1997 stipulating that the Black Sea Fleet's main base in Sevastopol be leased to Russia for 20 years, with the possibility of extending the term. The annual rent of about $100 million is deducted from Ukraine's debt for Russian energy supplies. In addition to the main base, the Black Sea Fleet maintains two airfields and a ship re-supply facility on the Crimean Peninsula. Ukrainian President Viktor Yushchenko said in July the current rent could be increased in the future.

Source: http://en.rian.ru/russia/20070802/70232773.html

[TomServo]

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

This is great news. Something tells me I'd better start learning russian, as I may need to move there once America goes to hell.

How about moving to Artsakh instead?

[Armenian]

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

How about moving to Artsakh instead?

He wont because there are too many dashnaks there.