The Rise of the Russian Empire: Russo-Armenian Relations

[KarotheGreat]

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

Russia's Lavrov says U.S. missile shield plans counterproductive

MOSCOW, July 7 (RIA Novosti) - Moscow hopes that Washington will realize the 'counter productivity' of its plan to deploy elements of U.S. missile shield in central Europe, the Russian foreign minister said on Tuesday.

"I hope that the revision [of the missile shield plans] in Washington... will result in an understanding that unilateral steps in this sphere are counterproductive," Sergei Lavrov said in an interview with Russia's Vesti channel.

U.S. President Barack Obama, currently in Moscow on a three-day visit, has shown less interest than President George Bush in opening a missile interceptor base in Poland and a radar station in the Czech Republic, which Moscow has fiercely opposed as a security threat.

Obama has not yet announced a final decision on whether to move ahead with the missile shield. The Bush administration said the missile defense shield elements were to counter possible strikes from "rogue" states, and not aimed against Russia.

"They [the U.S.] want to analyze this project, and they intend to complete their review in a two- or three-month period, as President Obama promised President Medvedev," Lavrov said.

Medvedev said on Monday after talks with the U.S. leader that the Obama administration, unlike its predecessor, had taken a pause and was examining the situation to formulate a final position on the missile defense plans.

Lavrov also said that talks on a new treaty to replace the START 1 deal due to expire in December would be completed by the end of the year.

"There are reasons to believe that we will complete the work by December," Lavrov said.

He added that Russia would want any new START treaty to stipulate large cuts in strategic delivery systems.

"We are for the maximum possible limits on delivery systems," he said.

The Russian and U.S. presidents signed a preliminary agreement on Monday to cut their countries' nuclear arsenals to 1,500-1,675 operational warheads and their strategic delivery systems to between 500-1,100 units.

source:http://en.rian.ru/world/20090707/155462457.html

[KarotheGreat]

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

Obama pledges to consider Russia's missile defense concerns

NOVO-OGARYOVO, July 7 (RIA Novosti) - U.S. President Barack Obama pledged on Tuesday to consider Russia's concerns on missile defense and to respect Moscow's interests in the post-Soviet space, a senior Russian government official said.

"Obama said Russia's concerns would be given more consideration when discussing [missile defense plans]," said Yury Ushakov, a deputy chief of staff at the Russian government.

Obama has shown less interest than President George Bush in opening a missile interceptor base in Poland and a radar station in the Czech Republic, which Moscow fiercely opposes as a security threat.

According to Ushakov, Obama and Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin discussed the former Soviet republics, including Georgia and Ukraine.

"President Obama pledged to consider the regional significance of these countries for us," Ushakov said.

On Ukraine, Putin told Obama about Russia's policy towards and its opinion of the developments in the neighboring country, which are important to Moscow, and also gave Russia's view on the August 2008 military conflict with Georgia over South Ossetia, Ushakov reported.

Citing Putin, Ushakov said the major problem had been that Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili had misinterpreted U.S. support for his plans.

During talks with his Russian counterpart, Dmitry Medvedev, Obama urged Russia to respect Georgia's sovereignty and territorial integrity.

"I reiterated my firm belief that Georgia's sovereignty and territorial integrity must be respected. If even as we work through our disagreements on Georgia's course, we do agree that no one has interest in renewed military conflict," Obama said at a joint news conference with Medvedev after their talks.

Speaking about Russia-U.S. cooperation on North Korea, Obama described it as very productive, Ushakov said.

According to the Russian government official, Obama also praised Russia's role in solving Iran's nuclear problem and said that "the United States was interested in Russia remaining in the same boat as the Americans and more close cooperation."

source: http://en.rian.ru/world/20090707/155458273.html

[meline]

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

So instead of selling it directly to Europe they will transfer it to Russia which will resell it to the EU at higher prices of course. Market monopoly. Of course they cannot sell it directly due to lack of infrastructure. Up a xxxx creek without a paddle. For the azeris I mean.

[KanadaHye]

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

Gazprom in Azerbaijan gas deal

Russian gas giant Gazprom has signed a deal to import natural gas from Azerbaijan and then pipe it to Europe.

Gazprom will import 500 million cubic metres of Azeri gas from 2010, and it expects import levels to rise.

The move is being seen by observers as an attempt by Moscow to extend its grip on potential European energy supplies.

Europe gets about 20% of its gas from Russia via pipelines in the Ukraine - though last winter rows between Kiev and Moscow saw supplies being cut.

Gazprom chief executive Alexei Miller said that his firm had also been promised priority in buying gas from the second phase of the Shakh Deniz Caspian Sea field.

This is seen as a potential key source of gas for the EU-backed Nabucco pipeline, which circumvents Russia.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/8124809.stm

[UrMistake]

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

Seems like a good tactical move to me, after all its Armenia's only trade link to the west.

The thing is that even i don't like it we must be friends with Georgia,giving awards in times of such no that is not good move,cause the same leader is the man against armenian in eny aspect in georgia.

If armenia had to answer at those politicans then we would demant stop selling guns to states that declare war as solution of eny problems.
They give jobs to big turkish companes to constuct buildings in russian bringing turkish workers wile the could do the same thing with other nation that are much more friendly and not just cheap.

[hipeter924]

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

Seems like a good tactical move to me, after all its Armenia's only trade link to the west.

[Federate]

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

Russian MPs Slam Yerevan For Honoring Georgia’s Saakashvili


Two senior members of the Russian parliament strongly criticized Armenia on Friday for bestowing its highest state award for foreign dignitaries upon Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili.
Saakashvili received the Medal of Honor from President Serzh Sarkisian at the start of his two-day official visit to Yerevan on Wednesday. Sarkisian’s office cited his contribution to “strengthening the centuries-old Georgian-Armenian friendship.”

The move did not go down well with Armenian nationalist activists who accuse the Saakashvili government of deliberately neglecting the socioeconomic woes of Georgia’s Javakheti region and violating the rights of its predominantly Armenian population. Several dozen of them tried to stage a protest on Thursday outside a Yerevan hotel where the Georgian leader stayed during the trip.

Police used to force to disperse the protesters, many of them young activists of the Armenian Revolutionary Federation (Dashnaktsutyun) that stands for granting Javakheti the status of an autonomous region. “Giving Saakashvili the Medal of Honor was incomprehensible,” said Giro Manoyan, a senior member of Dashnaktsutyun.

Some Russian politicians seem to have been even more irked by Yerevan’s warm reception of a man vilified by Moscow for his staunchly pro-Western foreign policy. Valeri Bogomolov, a member of the State Duma committee on foreign relations affiliated with the ruling United Russia Party, called it a “very controversial event.”

“Every country is free to award anything to anything,” the Regnum news agency quoted Bogomolov as saying. “However, it is important to understand that you can’t spit into a water well from which you will need to drink on more than occasion.”

“The demonstrative granting of a high Armenian state award to the Georgian president was an untactful and unfriendly step towards Russia,” agreed Viktor Ilyukhin, another senior Duma member representing the opposition Communist Party.

Both lawmakers were confident, however, that Sarkisian’s gesture will not inflict serous damage on close relations between Armenia and Russia. “Russia is a great country which thinks that it should prove its so-called tolerance everywhere and understands the sometimes inexplicable actions of our partners,” said Bogomolov.

Speaking at Yerevan State University on Thursday, Saakashvili slammed Russian policy on both Georgia and Armenia. He claimed in particular that Moscow showed an utter disregard of “the interests of the Armenian side” during its August 2008 war with Georgia.

http://www.armenialiberty.org/content/article/1763691.html

[Haykakan]

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

Simply amazing: A Russian story...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XvHX0...layer_embedded

Dude that was some cool art there i loved it.

[ZORAVAR]

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

Russia, the world’s critical ‘swing’ state

Brahma Chellaney

Russia, while remaining central to Indian foreign-policy interests, faces a tough challenge to engage a sceptical West more deeply.

Even if it is to prescheduled Brazil-Russia-India-China (BRIC) and Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) summit meetings, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh is making the symbolically significant first foreign visit of his second term in office to Russia, which he had once called a “tried and tested friend” of India. Russia, with its vantage location in Eurasia and matching strategic concerns, is a natural ally of India. A robust relationship with Moscow will help New Delhi to leverage its ties with both Washington and Beijing.
Which is the only power India can tap for critical military technologies? Which country today is willing to make a nuclear-powered submarine for India? Which state is ready to sell India a large aircraft carrier, even if an old one? Which power sells New Delhi major weapons without offering similar systems to India’s adversaries? The answer to all these questions is Russia. Little surprise Dr. Singh admitted in early 2007: “Although there has been a sea-change in the international situation during the last decade, Russia remains indispensable to the core of India’s foreign-policy interests.”

Three facts about Russia


Three important facts about Russia stand out. One, Russia has gradually become a more assertive power after stemming its precipitous decline and drift of the 1990s. Two, it now plays the Great Game on energy. Competition over control of hydrocarbon resources was a defining feature of the Cold War and remains an important driver of contemporary geopolitics, as manifest from the American occupation of Iraq and U.S. military bases or strategic tie-ups stretching across the Persian Gulf, the Caspian Sea basin and Central Asia.
Three, Russian democracy has moved toward greater centralised control to bring order and direction to the state. During Vladimir Putin’s presidency, government control was extended to large swaths of the economy and the political opposition was systematically emasculated.
Such centralisation, though, is no different than in, say, Singapore and Malaysia, including the domination of one political party, the absence of diversified media, limits on public demonstrations and the writ of security services. But in contrast to Russia, Singapore and Malaysia have insulated themselves from official U.S. criticism by willingly serving Western interests. When did you last hear American criticism of Singapore’s egregious political practices?
Yet Russia faces a rising tide of Western criticism for sliding toward autocracy. Indeed, ideological baggage, not dispassionate strategic deliberation, often colours U.S. and European discourse on Russia. Another reason is Russia’s geographical presence in Europe, the “mother” of both the Russian and U.S. civilisations. There is thus a greater propensity to hold Russia to European standards, unlike, say, China. Also, Russia was considered a more plausible candidate for democratic reform than China. Little surprise Russia’s greater centralisation evokes fervent Western reaction.
Today’s Russia, however, bears little resemblance to the Soviet Union. Life for the average Russian is freer and there is no Soviet-style shortage of consumer goods. There are also no online censors regulating Internet content. But what now looks like a resurgent power faces major demographic and economic challenges to build and sustain great-power capacity over the long run.
Demographically, Russia is even in danger of losing its Slavic identity and becoming a Muslim-majority state in the decades ahead, unless government incentives succeed in encouraging Russian women to have more children. The average age of death of a Russian male has fallen to 58.9 years — nearly two decades below an American. Economically, the oil-price crash has come as a warning against being a largely petro-state.
In fact, Moscow’s economic fortunes for long have been tied too heavily to oil — a commodity with volatile prices. In 1980, the Soviet Union overtook Saudi Arabia as the biggest oil producer. But oil prices began to decline, plummeting to $9 a barrel in mid-1986. U.S. intelligence, failing to read the significance of this, continued to claim Moscow was engaged in massive military modernisation. During the Putin presidency, rising oil prices played a key role in Russian economic revival. The higher the oil prices, the less the pressure there is on Russia to restructure and diversify its economy. The present low prices thus offer an opportunity to Moscow to reform.
Still, it should not be forgotten that Russia is the world’s wealthiest country in natural resources — from fertile farmlands and metals, to gold and timber. It sits on colossal hydrocarbon reserves. It also remains a nuclear and missile superpower. Indeed, to compensate for the erosion in its conventional-military capabilities, it has increasingly relied on its large nuclear arsenal, which it is ambitiously modernising.

Right international approach


Whatever its future, the big question is: What is the right international approach toward a resurgent Russia? Here two aspects need to be borne in mind.
First, Russia geopolitically is the most important “swing” state in the world today. Its geopolitical “swing” worth is greater than China’s or India’s. While China is inextricably tied to the U.S. economy, India’s geopolitical direction is clearly set — toward closer economic and political engagement with the West, even as New Delhi retains its strategic autonomy. But Russia is a wild card. A wrong policy course on Russia by the West would not only prove counterproductive to western interests, but also affect international peace and security. It would push Moscow inexorably in the wrong direction, creating a new East-West divide.
Second, there are some useful lessons applicable to Russia that the West can draw on how it has dealt with another rising power. China has come a long way since the Tiananmen Square episode. What it has achieved in the last generation in terms of economic modernisation and the opening of minds is extraordinary. That owes a lot to the West’s decision not to sustain trade sanctions after Tiananmen Square but instead to integrate China into global institutions.
That the choice made was wise can be seen from the baneful impact of the opposite decision that was taken on Burma after 1988 — to pursue a punitive approach relying on sanctions. Had the Burma-type approach been applied against China, the result would not only have been a less-prosperous and less-open China, but also a more-paranoid and possibly destabilising China. The lesson is that engagement and integration are better than sanctions and isolation.
Today, with a new chill setting in on relations between the West and Russia, that lesson is in danger of getting lost. Russia’s 16-year effort to join the World Trade Organisation has still to bear fruit, even as Moscow is said to be in the last phase of negotiations, and the U.S.-Russian nuclear deal remains on hold in Washington.
Little thought is being given to how the West lost Russia, which during its period of decline eagerly sought to cosy up to the U.S. and Europe, only to get the cold shoulder from Washington. Also, turning a blind eye to the way NATO is being expanded right up to Russia’s front-yard and the U.S.-led action in engineering Kosovo’s February 2008 self-proclamation of independence, attention has focused since last August on Moscow’s misguided but short-lived military intervention in Georgia and its recognition of the self-declaration of independence by South Ossetia and Abkhazia — actions that some portrayed as the 21st century’s first forcible changing of borders.
But having sponsored Kosovo’s self-proclamation of independence, the U.S. and some of its allies awkwardly opposed the same right of self-determination for the people of South Ossetia and Abkhazia. It is as if the legitimacy of a self-declaration of independence depends on which great power sponsors that action.
The world cannot afford a new Cold War, which is what constant bear-baiting will bring. Fortunately, there are some positive signs. Nuclear arms control is back on the U.S.-Russian agenda, and U.S. President Barack Obama is scheduled to be in Moscow for a July 6-7 summit meeting. The U.S. is going slow on missile-defence deployments in Eastern Europe and there is a de facto postponement of NATO expansion to Ukraine and Georgia. As part of what Mr. Obama has called a “reset” of the bilateral relationship, a U.S.-Russia joint commission headed by the two presidents is to be established, along with several sub-commissions. This is an improvement on the 1993 commission established at the level of No. 2s, Vice-President Al Gore and Prime Minister Viktor Chernomyrdin.
The key issue is whether the U.S. and Russia will be able to seize the new opportunity to redefine their relationship before it becomes too late. For Russia, the challenge is to engage the West more deeply. It also needs to increase its economic footprint in Asia. For the U.S., the challenge is to pursue new geopolitics of engagement with Moscow.
(Brahma Chellaney is professor of strategic studies at the Centre for Policy Research, New Delhi.)

http://www.hindu.com/2009/06/16/stories/2009061655360900.htm

[ZORAVAR]

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

Simply amazing: A Russian story...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XvHX0bgoouc&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Emilitaryphotos%2Enet%2Fforums%2Fshowthread%2Ephp%3Ft%3D99988%26page%3D1296&feature=player_embedded