The Rise of the Russian Empire: Russo-Armenian Relations

[Siamanto]

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

A discussion on another thread that involved network54 reminded me that on USC i.e. "Underground Serbian Cafe" chornyvolk - a Russian and a friend of Armenians - have posted articles that are similar to the ones posted here and "related" threads, for ages.

P.S. I just checked the forum and saw posts by MACHOSLAV, an anti-Russian, anti-Armenian, pro-jurkish Polish American - he was and maybe still is??? a Mod on CWE, a forum owned by a jurk.
LOL Probably, one of the "trailer thrash" "buddies" of Armenian from stormfront.org!!!!

[Armenian]

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

Russia is Back



The Conservative Voice August 24, 2007

Back in May 2001, Jeffery Tayler, of the Atlantic, wrote an Article titled "Russia is Finished." In which he chronicled the downfall of Russia since the collapse of communism. Its political corruption, its weak economy, its demographic problems, the problems in Chechnya. It seemed, back then, that Russia might be shoved into geopolitical obscurity.

How things can change in just six years. Russia is once again flexing its muscles. Under the leadership of the uncrowned tsar, Vladimir Putin, Russia has emerged as a powerful nation that wants to be treated as a powerful nation. The country is awash in oil money, and President Putin has announced a 200 billion dollar military buildup. The question is, who is that military going to be aimed at? As far as Russia is concerned Iran and the other Muslim nations are no threat to them. After all, Russia supplies them with weapons and, in the case of Iran, nuclear material. It's highly unlikely that the European Union is planning a Napoleonic style offensive on Russia, and Putin has turned China into his best friend. So once again, who is this military build up targeting? There is only one answer. He's targeting the U.S.

The truth is this is probably music to the ears of most Russians. Russia wants to be taken seriously and if they have to threaten a new cold war that is just fine with them. Most like President Putin, who wants to create a non communist(Putin is no ideologue) Soviet Union. The Russians, for possessing so much territory, have always had claustrophobia. They need to push their borders outward or, at the very least, reduce the nations on their borders to vassalage, if they can.

If there is a second cold war it could be called the second war of miscommunication. Russia can't be convinced that a missile shield designed to thwart Iranian designs isn't secretly aimed at them. Are they planning to use nuclear weapons as a threat? That's the only reason I can think of for them being so angry at a missile shield, they consider missiles pointed at Europe and the States a major part of their military(who's restarting the cold war again?) So being the old paranoid Russia that we've come to know and love, they react to the United States defending itself from a rogue terrorist state(a rogue terrorist state that Russia is helping to become a nuclear threat. Maybe Putin ought to think of that when he shrieks that we're putting a missile shield so close to home.)

Russia has it's problems however. Its economy is reliant on raw materials, mostly crude oil. If the price of crude oil were to fall, or if the United States were to import less and start drilling for oil in America the Russian coffers wouldn't be so full. The next problem is demographic, there simply aren't enough Russians. It's gotten to the point that the Russian government has taken to paying women to have children. If Russias population continues to shrink they won't have anyone to fly those bombers and buzz American airspace. There's also the political problem. Putin is constitutionally barred from serving a third term and has insisted time and again that he won't try to do so. However it's no secret that he likes power and likes exercising it. Since he has been President he has increased to powers of his office, made Russia even less democratic than it was, and basically made himself Tsar Vlad.

He has only two options, the first is to change to constitution to give himself another term(think Hugo Chavez) or to step down and hand pick a successor, and try to run things from behind the scene. If he tries the latter he will most likely be disappointed. Leaders who try that find that their successors insist on being their own man. Regardless of the problems that Russia has today, and no matter what problems it faces in the future for the time being Russia is once again a strategic problem for the United States and that isn't going to change any time soon.

Source: http://www.theconservativevoice.com/article/27507.html

[Armenian]

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

Russia Builds Up Its Military



Russia's recent resumption of strategic bomber flights is viewed by many analysts as more evidence of President Vladimir Putin's determination to build up his country's military might. The Russian leader has cited security concerns for strengthening the military, but the move also is reviving memories of the Cold War, when Moscow used its military capability to project its power. For producer Ivana Kuhar, VOA's Bill Rodgers narrates. Grand entrances are perhaps symbolic of President Putin's growing stature in the world -- a stature he is trying to enhance by strengthening Russia's military might. Mr. Putin earlier this year signed a $200 billion spending plan to rebuild the Russian military -- and has taken steps to modernize his country's long-range missile arsenal.

Earlier this month, he announced the resumption of strategic bomber flights around the world -- reviving a Cold War practice by the former Soviet Union. Mr. Putin says security threats are forcing Russia to strengthen its military. But these moves puzzle analysts, such as Russian expert Stephen Sestanovich. "Take the restoration of strategic bomber patrols at long distances from Russian territory. I think the Russians would find it rather hard to tell you what the purpose of that was. Why are they circling around Guam -- an American island in the middle of the Pacific Ocean? What's the connection between that and the Russian national interest?"

Yet many Russians support Mr. Putin's projection of strength -- and power. They believe Russia's international stature has grown, according to Russian TV news anchor Alexei Pushkov. "Putin created an impression that Russia can get even with the world leaders after a long period of weakness. Russians do like a strong leader." While few expect a revival of Cold War-type military interventions, it is unclear what foreign policy goals Moscow is trying to achieve with its tough posturing. "They want very much to show a kind of assertive independence, but I don't think they've clearly identified for themselves the goals of that assertive independence," said Sestanovich.

Russia's military muscle was on display at the recent airshow outside Moscow -- a showcase for military modernization. Rebuilding an aging military would seem to be a logical step now given Russia's oil wealth, according to foreign policy analyst Richard Weitz. "Some of this is to be expected. The Russians have always had a series of nuclear forces to deter the United States and for other purposes. Their naval component was a weaker component and so it makes sense for them to try and build it up."

The White House has downplayed the buildup, saying through a spokesman it is not surprising that militaries around the world engage in a variety of activities. But others believe the Kremlin's buildup needs to be watched very carefully. Sestanovich adds, "Sometimes, countries give themselves a new foreign policy rhetoric and they give themselves new foreign policy instruments, and then they take it from there. Sometimes, this can be an unfortunate and dangerous process."

But for now, Russia's military buildup is likely to continue.

Source: http://www.voanews.com/english/2007-08-27-voa29.cfm

[Armenian]

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

Abkhazia confirms plane crash



AFP Aug 27, 2007, Page 6

UNKNOWN ORIGIN: The chief of the region's general staff Anatoly Zaitsev said that radars had spotted an unidentified aircraft over the Black Sea on Wednesday night

Georgia's rebel province of Abkhazia on Saturday confirmed reports that a plane went down in the region this week, but claimed it was a US spy plane or Georgian aircraft, Russian news agencies reported, while a Russian defense analyst warned that Georgia's accusations against Russia could stretch Moscow's patience too far and provoke a conflict. Abkhaz officials were at odds over the origins of the plane that went down, with its top military official saying it may have been a US spy plane while the foreign minister said the plane was probably Georgian.

Georgia said it believed a plane had crashed in a Georgian-controlled part of Abkhazia, the Kodori Gorge, after its forces opened fire on an aircraft that had violated its airspace on Wednesday. Georgia said it believed the plane was Russian. Speaking in the Abkhaz capital Sukhumi on Saturday, the chief of the region's general staff Anatoly Zaitsev told reporters that radars had spotted an unidentified aircraft over the Black Sea in the vicinity of Abkhazia on Wednesday night. The plane went down trailing smoke, he said. "There are no aircraft of this type in the Georgian air force," he said. "Chances are it was an American reconnaissance plane."

Abkhaz Foreign Minister Sergei Shamba, however, told Russia's RIA Novosti news agency that the plane was probably Georgian. "Georgia has repeatedly violated Abkhaz airspace," he said. "Since Russia vigorously denies that Russian planes were flying in this area ... we can only realistically conclude that it was a Georgian plane." Meanwhile, Georgia's attempts to score points in a tense diplomatic stand-off with Russia are aimed at accelerating its bid to join NATO but could exhaust Moscow's patience, observers said.

"There is a threat" that rising tensions between the two former Soviet republics could provoke a confrontation, said Pavel Felgenhauer, an independent Russian defense analyst. "No one wants a Georgian-Russian confrontation.... The world doesn't want to provoke Russia," Felgenhauer said. NATO's reaction to the finding of the alleged Russian missile near Tbilisi on Aug. 6 was measured. A NATO spokesman said a few days after the incident that the alliance would be in close contact with Georgia over the incident.

"Georgia risks ... not benefiting from complete credibility at a time when it will need Western partners," Salome Zurabishvili, a Georgian opposition leader and the country's former foreign minister, said earlier. Russia for its part has been making life hard for Georgia in a bid to rein in pro-Western Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili, who has been actively supported by Washington since coming to power in 2004. During a bout of extremely cold winter weather last year, Russian gas supplies to Georgia were cut off for prolonged repairs on a pipeline. A few months later, Russia banned the import of wine and mineral water from Georgia.

Then, last September, Georgia arrested four Russian officers on charges of spying. This prompted Russia to suspend all direct transport and postal links, as well as to deport hundreds of Georgian immigrants from Russia. Russia has also given political and economic backing to Abkhazia, a separatist region on the shores of the Black Sea in northwest Georgia that broke off in a fierce conflict in the early 1990s. South Ossetia, another breakaway region, also enjoys Moscow's backing. Perhaps most sensitive of all, Russia still has soldiers and military hardware stationed in Georgia from Soviet times, even though it has vowed to withdraw them by next year.

Source: http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/worl.../27/2003376026

[Armenian]

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

Russia vs Georgia: A war of perceptions



An intimate past and bitter present make it hard for Russians and Georgians to live as neighbours but impossible to separate completely, says Donald Rayfield. From openDemocracy.

The second alleged incursion of a Russian aircraft into Georgian territory during August 2007 has further heightened tension between the two states. An already difficult relationship is mired in accusation, denial, rumour and suspicion over the sorties (the Georgian deputy defense minister Batu Kutelia claims there have been nine in the last three months). The fact that such incidents, minor in themselves, can provoke such heated reactions confirms that something has gone badly wrong in a once almost familial bond. What is it, and can it be repaired? It is hard to disentangle reality from myth regarding the airspace violations amid the deluge of propaganda on either side. But most international experts now agree that on 6 August 2007, Russian aircraft did venture three times into Georgian airspace from the direction of Vladikavkaz - and that on the third sortie an aircraft deliberately fired a missile, which fortunately failed to explode when it landed near the village of Tsitelubani.

This was followed on the night of 21 August by the entry of a Russian military jet which seems to have discharged a missile which fell on a cornfield (and also did not ignite) in the vicinity of Georgia's border with the disputed territory of South Ossetia. Both incidents have been given the full diplomatic treatment - official statements, condemnations, appeals to scientific evidence, calls for solidarity from allies and the international community (including the United Nations). The west's anxiety about becoming embroiled in further confrontation with Russia mean that Georgia's attempts to bring its grievance over Russian behavior to the attention of the Security Council will probably be as ineffective as the missile itself. There is a recent precedent: the Russia-originated cyber-attack on Estonia in April-May 2007 which targeted the government's computer system - in apparent revenge for Estonia's moving of a city-centre statue commemorating the country's "liberation" by the Red Army in 1944 - has not met with any effective protest or sanctions.

But if Georgia will find it difficult to persuade the world to take the incidents seriously enough, the violation of its territory is part of a pattern that reveals much about the mindset currently animating Russian policy. A key aspect of this is the deep xenophobia that pervades Russian politics and public opinion directed at Americans, western Europeans, and Chinese but, above all, at the people of nations which have secured their independence since the fall of the Soviet Union. In this sense the Georgians are only one target of a wider "blame culture" in Moscow (as the Estonia example confirms). But it is also the case that the bitterness directed against them (and reciprocated in full) reflects the illusions of a Russia that thinks it "knows" and understands Georgia - and has not yet understood that, in fact, it no longer does.
Russia's telescope

The first Russian illusion is indicated by a recent feature on the Moscow radio station Ekho Moskvy, where listeners were asked to estimate the population of Georgia. The mean response was 30 million (the true figure in 2007 is approximately 4.6 million). Moreover, the signifier "Georgian" (like Azeri, Armenian, Avar, Circassian or Abkhaz) has now been replaced by the overall term "person of Caucasian ethnicity," thus losing a series of imaginary distinctions drawn in imperial and Soviet Russia: between civilised, Christian Caucasians (Georgians, Armenians and in part Ossetians) and wild, pagan and Muslim Caucasians (all the rest); and between settled Caucasians who meekly accepted the imperial yoke (Georgians, Armenians, Azeris, Ossetians) and noble savages (Chechens, Avars, Circassians) who resisted it. A second Russian illusion is that Georgia is ungrateful, having enjoyed a privileged position under Soviet rule (mainly thanks to its being the homeland of Joseph Stalin). True, in Georgia's lush climate the sun shone and fruit grew on trees even in the 1930s; and in the 1930s-1940s only 1 percent of the Soviet prison-camp system was Georgian, though Georgians made up 2.5 percent of the Soviet population - a disproportion corrected in 1951 under Stalin himself, when a new persecution doubled the number of Georgians in the gulag.

But a closer look at the statistics reveals that the "great terror" affected Georgia at least as badly as Leningrad or Moscow. The ruthless prosecutor Nikolai Yezhov's targets for repression in August 1937 set the proportion for "Category 1" (to be shot after arrest and interrogation) at 50 percent of those arrested in Georgia (compared to 16 percent for Moscow). But these limits were everywhere exceeded by a factor of nine, meaning that the secret-police chief Lavrenti Beria (himself a Mingrelian, from a region in western Georgia) had some 50,000 Georgians shot in 1937-38, the same proportion as in Russia's two main cities. During the "great patriotic war" of 1941-45, the Georgian male population had perhaps the highest casualty rate of any Soviet republic: some 300,000 young men died (mostly in the Kerch landings of 1943), about a third of those of military age in the country. The third Russian illusion about Georgia is one of patronage, that Moscow can effectively direct Tbilisi's choice of political leader. The extraordinary antagonism displayed by Vladimir Putin's officials and army officers towards Georgia can be perhaps explained by their initial support for the "rose revolution" of 2003-04 that brought Mikheil Saakashvili to power: so great was their hatred for Eduard Shevardnadze (Saakashvili's predecessor as Georgia's president and the former Soviet foreign minister, whom they blamed for the Soviet system's demise) that anyone who overthrew him was bound to find some sympathy in Moscow.

Moreover, Saakashvili followed his political triumph by ejecting Adzharia's warlord Aslan Abashidze from his fiefdom in southwest Georgia; as a business associate of Moscow's mayor, Abashidze was particularly obnoxious to Putin. The Russians no doubt thought that Saakashvili would prove another deluded, manipulable nationalistic intellectual (like the unlamented first president of independent Georgia, Zviad Gamsakhurdia) who would reduce his country to helpless destitution and dependence on Russia's tutelage. Instead, and to Moscow's chagrin, Saakashvili has proved astute at home and popular abroad with relationship. The single overriding Georgian illusion is that Russia is the great Christian kingdom of the north which will come to the rescue of a small Christian nation threatened by Turkic and Persian, Islamic, rule. This view of the northern protector is one that has persisted since the crusades: that a fellow-Christian kingdom will come to the aid of a beleaguered Christian nation threatened by barbarians.

Georgian history teaches otherwise. The crusaders did the very opposite, and ravaged the eastern Christians more thoroughly than they did the Muslims; in the 18th century, several western rulers (Louis XIV, Louis XV, Pope Clement XI) told Prince Sulkhan-Saba Orbeliani (uncle of the Georgian king, Vakhtang VI) that their trading links with Persia superseded their concern for a Christian nation threatened by that Islamic state; the British withdrew all their support staff the moment that the Red Army threatened Tbilisi in 1921. In 2008, nobody should doubt that if Russia were to invade Georgia the west would confine its support to a few unenforceable resolutions in the United Nations - and would go on buying Russian oil and gas. This is where illusion meets reality - with a crunch. For a combination of choice and circumstance is redirecting Georgia's economy towards the west. Georgian railways are about to be managed by a British firm for the next 89 years; Turkey has become Georgia's chief trading partner, and Georgia's exports to Russia have declined by more than half in 2007, thanks to Russia's ban on Georgian wine and mineral water. Even the land border- crossing to Russia has become an obstacle-course, as Georgia prepares to open a third crossing to Turkey (and very soon a direct rail link, which Armenians too will be able to use).

The underlying logic is that Soviet-era industry died in Georgia in 1990 and cannot be resurrected. The agricultural sector is still operating largely as subsistence farming, producing less than a third of what it did in the mid-1980s, when Georgia supplied Russia with citrus fruit, wine, lamb, tea and cheese. Western markets, flooded with cheap produce, are not going to import Georgian agricultural products, except for the recently revived wine industry which is producing wines of high enough quality to find a niche market (Tbilisi will soon again be producing brandy to rival French cognac.) Yet the break with Russia has its costs. The approximately 500,000 Georgian workers in Russia are subject to increasing pressure from authorities to prevent them trading, being educated, or remitting money home. Even Russian citizens of Georgian origin - such as the writer Boris Akunin (born Grigori Chkhartishvili) and the sculptor Zurab Tsereteli - have been targeted by Russia's notorious tax authorities.

The problem of the lost lands, Abkhazia and South Ossetia, is even more painful for Georgia. The dispute over the "frozen territories," which wrested themselves from Tbilisi's control in the small wars of 1992-93, is further from a solution than ever before. In South Ossetia, the idea of unity with North Ossetia (part of Russia) has been encouraged by the Russian foreign minister and by the authorities in the north; while Tbilisi uses a mixture of charm and bluster in the effort to replace the breakaway Eduard Kokoity government with the pro-Tbilisi puppet, Dmitry Sanakoyev. In Abkhazia, hotels, villas and building land have been bought by Russian businessmen and officials who have a vested interest in seeing that Abkhazia will become a puppet - if not yet an actual integral part - of the Russian Federation. The award of the 2014 winter Olympics to Russia's Black Sea resort of Sochi has allowed Abkhazian territory to be proposed for use in accommodating the athletes and even hosting events. No Georgian politician can seriously foster any hope of recovering Abkhazia by diplomatic or military means - although any Georgian politician who admitted this publicly would cease to be a politician, or even to be alive, the very next day.
An intimate acrimony

In this difficult environment, all Mikheil Saakashvili can do - while cultivating his gift for memorable, provocative remarks - is to try to make Georgia a safer, freer and more prosperous country to live in, and thus encourage western investment and sympathy while. Here he has had partial success: everyday bribery has been vastly reduced (you can drive across the the country and never be stopped by an acquisitive traffic policeman, though the number of expensive restaurants with very large black Mercedes outside and very fat politicians and officials inside suggests that at higher levels corruption has only become a little more discreet). Tbilisi's opera house and theatres now open for performances; readers can afford to buy books again and therefore publishing houses are printing them; and best of all, the Georgian cinema, once the pride of the USSR, is coming back to life. The president's wife, Sandra Roelofs (Dutch by origin, and a fluent speaker of Georgian), has opened a classical-music radio station. The education system has been purged, to the annoyance of parents and university teachers who both preferred the payment of bribes as the most convenient selection process for students. In his own way, Putin has helped the Georgian economy by frightening several Russia-based Georgian oligarchs into taking their wealth and their need for efficient infrastructure home to Georgia, where their impact almost matches that of the 1,000 American military and intelligence agents and the dozens of international NGOs in providing employment.

There is a long way to go. The pro-western government of Saakashvili speaks the benign international language of peace and transparency, but investigations into the mysterious death in February 2005 of prime minister Zurab Zhvania, the brains behind the rose revolution, have been obstructed. Saakashvili's refusal to pursue these, indeed his persecution of any journalists that continue to probe the affair, cast doubt on his commitment to democracy and the rule of law. Other moves, such as the decision to expel the Georgian union of writers from their building in order to privatize the property, show an ill-considered contempt for Georgia's intelligentsia. The frequent crises and the intemperate tone of the current Russia-Georgia relationship are, then, part of long-term shifts on both sides. The relationship is both full of bitterness and extremely close, reminiscent of that between an acrimoniously and recently divorced couple. Even today, no serious Georgian politician will ever undertake a significant decision without taking into consideration what the Russian reaction would be. Russian-Georgian ties, however near rupture and however twisted, remain impossible to disentangle or to disavow.

Source: http://www.isn.ethz.ch/news/sw/details.cfm?id=18033

[Armenian]

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

Iran-Russia trade hits $2.2b


Russian president Putin showing his Iranian counterpart the way

Value of Iran's export to Russia was $237 million in 2006. Iran's trade with Russia reached $2.2 billion in 2006, marking an increase of 6.2% from the previous year, Iran's envoy to Russia says. Speaking on the sidelines of a visit by Iran's ambassadors abroad to a Mashhad Exhibition, Gholamreza Ansari noted that out of the total volume of exchanges between the two countries, Iran's share amounted to $237 million, showing a growth of 6.2 percent over its previous year, Mehr News Agency reported. "The Russians are satisfied with the quality of Iranian products, which means further qualitative improvement is sure to take the volume of Iran's exports to higher levels," the official added. He pointed to domestic and international exhibitions as very effective means for boosting the country's foreign trade.

Source: http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=20311

[Armenian]

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

Jerusalem worried by Iranian owned anti-ship missile


(Yakhont Anti-Ship Missile on Ground Next to SU-33)

THE JERUSALEM POST Aug. 28, 2007

The recent delivery of an advanced Russian-made anti-ship missile to Iran has defense officials concerned it will be transferred to Syria and Hizbullah and used against the Israel Navy in a future conflict. Called the SSN-X-26 Yakhont, the supersonic cruise missile can be launched from the coast and hit sea-borne targets up to 300 kilometers away. The missile carries a 200-kilogram warhead and flies a meter-and-a-half above sea level, making it extremely difficult to intercept. Its closest Western counterpart is the US-made Tomahawk and Harpoon.

The missile homes in on its target using an advanced radar guidance system that is said to make it resistant to electronic jamming. The Yakhont is an operational and tactical missile and can be used against both a medium-sized destroyer and an aircraft carrier. It would pose a serious threat to the Israel Navy, according to defense officials. "This is certainly a threat to the Navy," one defense official said. "There is a real fear that if this missile is in Iran it will also be in Syria and Lebanon."

During the Second Lebanon War, the IDF was surprised when the INS Hanit was struck by a Chinese-made ground-to-sea missile, which was not known to have been in Hizbullah hands. At the time, the IDF suspected Iran had assisted Hizbullah in the attack, which killed four sailors. While officials could not confirm that the missile had reached Syria or Hizbullah, the growing assumption is that any weapons system or missile that can be taken apart and fit into a shipping container can easily be transferred.

Source: http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satelli...icle%2FPrinter

Officials worried Iran will give their Russian anti-ship missile to terrorists

By Israel Insider staff August 28, 2007

Defense officials have expressed concern about the recent delivery of an advanced Russian-made anti-ship missile to Iran, saying they will likely be transferred to Syria and Hezbollah, the Jerusalem Post reported. If they fall into the hands of Syria and Hezbollah, they will be used against the Israeli navy in a future conflict.

"This is certainly a threat to the Navy," one defense official said. "There is a real fear that if this missile is in Iran it will also be in Syria and Lebanon."

The defense establishment's fears are in part due to the IDF's surprise during the Second Lebanon War last summer at the content of Hezbollah's arsenal. The INS Hanit was struck by a Chinese-made ground-to-sea missile, which was not known to have been in Hizbullah hands. At the time, the IDF suspected Iran had assisted Hezbollah in the attack, in which four sailors died. Although officials could not confirm that the missile had reached Syria or Hizbullah, the general assumption now is that any weapons system or missile that can be taken apart and fit into a shipping container can easily be smuggled to Hezbollah or Syria. Meanwhile, Minister of Strategic Affairs Avigdor Lieberman said Monday "the Iranian leadership with Ahmadinejad at its helm is temporary."

Lieberman called the Iranian administration "a band of crooks jeopardizing the security of Iran and the entire world," he said. "Instead of investing in the economy, [they] are investing in terror and Hizbullah, and I hope the Iranian people will remember this the next time they line up to vote." Regarding Iran's nuclear program, Liberman advocated economic sanctions over military action, saying that sanctions have been successful in frustrating such programs in Libya and North Korea.

Source: http://web.israelinsider.com/Article...rity/11948.htm

[Armenian]

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

Sarkozy warns Russia against 'brutality' in exercising its energy strength



The Associated Press August 27, 2007

French President Nicolas Sarkozy warned Russia on Monday against exercising its energy resources with "brutality" on the world stage, amid mounting concerns in Europe over future supplies of oil and gas. Sarkozy, in a sweeping speech to French ambassadors outlining French foreign policy, noted that "Russia is imposing its return on the world scene by playing its assets, notably oil and gas, with a certain brutality." Sarkozy said Russia's resurgent global activity comes "while the world, particularly Europe, is hoping for an important and positive contribution from (Russia) toward settling the problems of our age." He added, in unscripted remarks, "When you are a great power, you should not use brutality." Since his election in May, the conservative Sarkozy has taken a somewhat harder line on Russia under President Vladimir Putin than Jacques Chirac had. In their first meeting, Sarkozy asked Putin about human rights violations in Chechnya and the slaying last October of Anna Politkovskaya, a journalist who wrote scathingly of the Russian president. Russia's chief prosecutor on Monday announced 10 arrests in the case.

Source: http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/...nce-Russia.php

[Armenian]

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

Indian team in Moscow to talk military shopping


(Russian Aircraft Carrier Admiral Gorshkov)

Daily Times, August 29, 2007

A high-level Indian delegation led by National Security Advisor MK Narayanan is in Moscow to thrash out contentious issues such as the delay in the acquisition of the aircraft carrier Admiral Gorshkov and Russia’s demand for more money for military hardware. Several high-level meetings are lined up between the two countries to resolve niggling issues ahead of the talks between Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and Russian President Vladimir Putin in November. Another high-level army delegation led by Army Chief Gen JJ Singh is expected in Moscow next month to carry negotiations forward. Antony told parliament here last week that some “unforeseen” problems have caused delays in the acquisition of the aircraft carrier. He said construction or repair of an aircraft carrier was a complex exercise and various problems can arise, which have to be resolved through interactions between concerned agencies.

Sources here, however, said Russia is demanding more money for the Gorshkov and Sukhoi Su-30MKI projects. Citing the weakening dollar and strengthening rouble, Russia is reported to have asked for an additional $113 million for refurbishing the Gorshkov. Russia gifted the aircraft carrier to India and an amount of $1.5 billion had been agreed for refurbishing it with armaments and fighter planes. Indian officials say the contract does not contain a price escalation clause. The aircraft was to be delivered to India in 2008. However, reports say Russia has stopped work on the carrier at their Sevmash shipyard and this has pushed the delivery schedule to somewhere around 2012. Apparently, Moscow has diverted a major portion of the workforce at the yard to the construction of a nuclear submarine. Similarly, the Russians have asked for an additional five payment for an additional 40 Su-30 combat jets as well as the 138 jets that are to be manufactured in India under license.

Though General Singh’s scheduled visit next month is timed to coincide with the first ever major joint Indo-Russian anti-terrorism exercise, sources said the price escalation issue will figure prominently in the talks. India’s crack paratroopers are also set to take part in “search and destroy” exercises code named Indra-2007 in the headquarters of Russia’s elite airborne division in the Pskov region deep in the northwestern part of Russia from September 16 to 18. The area is situated only a few dozen kilometres from the NATO borders of Estonia and Lithuania.

Source: http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default...-8-2007_pg7_60

In related news:

India’s Sukhois turn it on in UK skies, turn off radars


(Indian Air Force SU-30 in flight)

August 27, 2007

IAF pilots participating in the UK-Indian exercise Indra Dhanush last month switched off the radars on their Sukhois to prevent secret radio frequencies from being picked up by Western military intelligence. The IAF was so concerned about protecting the new-age Sukhois’ highly classified NO11M Bars radars — designed by the Russian Phazotron company — that pilots were ordered not to use them at all during the exercise, top Indian sources here confirmed to The Indian Express.

Asked if the radars were blocked at the request of Sukhois’ Russian designers, the source explained, “It was for a mixture of reasons. The Russians have their IPRs (intellectual property rights) and we have our concerns.” The source added, “India opened up four or five years ago, but we’re still building up confidence in each other. It’s a step-by-step process, we’ve always moved step by step.” The frequency of the Su-30 MKI fighter’s radar is jealously guarded because once disclosed it neutralises both the aircraft and its missiles. And obviously, if India is to maintain its air superiority over Pakistan — and the SU-30 is the world’s most advanced fighter bomber — it needs to make sure that Islamabad does not gain access to its radar frequencies via friendly Western governments. In fact, during Indra Dhanush, the IAF pilots’ refusal to use their radars created problems that the RAF overcame by flying its Tornado F3s alongside each of the six Su-30s.

Later, RAF commanding officer for the exercise, Wing Commander John Prescott, admitted: “It isn’t the way we normally do business. When we are working with another fighter, we would expect the pilot to use his radar for long-range targeting and to take the beyond visual range (BVR) shots as well.” But stressing that the exercise was a success, Wg Cdr Prescott told UK’s Defence News: “Working with a nation we were not familiar with proved to be extremely good value. It is good for both sides to be able to adapt and work with each other and gain a level of understanding with officers and airmen — not just in the air but in a social situation as well.”

Source: http://www.indianexpress.com/story/212874.html

[Armenian]

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

US naval power wanes

ISN Security Watch (27/08/07)

With more countries acquiring or building aircraft carriers, the US's power in the world's waters is rapidly waning, forcing the its military to re-examine its maritime strategy. The most important maritime lesson that the US learned during World War II was the primacy of aircraft carriers. For the last 60 years the country has had a near virtual monopoly on this class of warship and today operates the largest and most expensive carriers afloat, the nuclear-powered Nimitz-class CVNs, 1,092 feet long and capable of carrying 85 aircraft, costing approximately US$4.5 billion a piece. Despite the tremendous investment in expertise and expense, the US' near virtual monopoly of naval air power may be drawing to a close, as several countries have recently announced building programs that, if fully implemented, will force a major re-evaluation of the Pentagon's maritime strategic thinking. The only comfort over the next decade or two for US Navy planners is that it currently maintains a global advantage in this unique class of warship.

Of the world's 21 carriers currently operational, the US has 11 aircraft carriers in commission, of which nine are Nimitz class, with another one under construction and one on order. The Nimitz class nuclear-powered propulsion units are unique; the only other nuclear-powered carrier is France's Charles De Gaulle. Eight other nations operate carriers, including the UK with two: HMS Illustrious and HMS Ark Royal. Other countries operate a single vessel: Russia fields the Kuznetsov; Italy - MM Giuseppe Garibaldi; India - INAS Viraat; Spain - SPS Principe de Asturias; Brazil - NAel Sao Paulo; and Thailand - HTMS Chakri Nareubet. The countries that have announced carrier construction programs include the UK, France, India, Italy, Russia, Spain and China. For US strategic planners, only the UK, France and Spain can be considered reliable allies with India as a potential ally; the US' relations with Russia are on a downturn and the Pentagon regards the rise of China's military power as a potential threat.

Russian naval revamp raises the stakes


(Russia's Kuznetsov Class Aircraft Carrier)

Of the projected building programs, Russia's is by far the most ambitious. Flush with revenues from world record-high energy prices, the Kremlin has announced a zealous military rearmament program, which includes upgrading the navy. While Russia currently has only one operational aircraft carrier, the Kuznetsov, the commander of the Russian Navy Admiral Vladimir Masorin announced earlier this month that over the next two decades the Russian navy will acquire six new nuclear-powered aircraft carriers. Three carriers and their escorts are to be deployed to Russia's Pacific Fleet, while the other three are to be based with Russia's Northern Fleet. As if to underscore Masorin's ambitions, the 65,000-ton Kuznetsov is back in service after two years of refurbishment. The Kuznetsov entered service in 1995; its sister ship, the Varyag, was two-thirds complete in the Nikolayev shipyard in the Ukraine when the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991.

The Kuznetsov's problems epitomized the navy's difficulties during the Yeltsin post-Soviet period, when funding shortages meant that the carrier was rarely put to sea and pilots were forced to train from a land-based mockup of the flight deck in order to maintain their skills. Pilots are again flying from the Kuznetsov's flight deck, according to a recent broadcast on the Russian station Channel One from on board the vessel. Masorin's comments reflect the Kremlin's desire to divert part of its enormous energy revenues to rebuilding Russia's military establishment: In 2005 Russian defense spending rose 22 percent, 27 percent in 2006 and analysts estimate that in 2007 it could increase by an additional 30 percent. The Kuznetsov class is not as complex as the Nimitz class, being smaller and lacking nuclear power and steam catapults, but it is still a formidable design, capable of carrying up to 36 Sukhoi-33 fighters and sixteen helicopters.

What is interesting about the Russian navy's proposed deployment of its new carrier fleets is the fact that it has essentially concluded that carrier deployment would be useless in the enclosed Baltic or Black Seas, especially as they are now bordered by NATO's formidable naval forces, preferring instead to place them in regions with direct access to the open ocean. Russia is currently the carrier builder of choice for India. Russia already has a US$1.5 billion contract from India for modernizing the USSR's former aircraft carrier Admiral Gorshkov, re-christened INS Vikramaditya, sold to India in 2004. Russia's Sevmash shipyard in the Arctic port of Severomorsk however is "at least three years behind schedule" on upgrading the vessel. The upgrades include modifications to carry a squadron of Russian MiG-29 fighters, producing a hybrid vessel combining the capabilities of a missile cruiser and an aircraft carrier.

India project ambitious, but behind schedule


(Indian Navy Ship Viraat)

India already operates the INS Viraat as its flagship, originally commissioned in the UK's Royal Navy in 1959 as HMS Hermes, seeing duty in Britain's 1982 Falklands campaign as the task force's flagship. Russia's Interfax news agency quoted an unnamed "high-ranking Sevmash source" as saying that the shipyard's Director General Vladimir Pastukhov had been fired after failing to meet deadlines and noted that as the contract was delayed, "The realistic date [for delivery] is now 2011." Ironically, India will receive the carrier's air wing before the ship itself: In June MiG deputy director general General Sergei Tsivilev said that the first delivery of the carrier's MiG-29K fighters would be later this year.

India is experiencing similar problems with its attempt to build its first indigenous carrier, a 37,000-ton Vikrant-class platform being built at India's southern Cochin shipyard, costing more than US$300 million and originally scheduled for delivery in 2011-2012. The ambitious project represents a quantum leap forward in Asian shipbuilding capabilities as currently only the US, Britain, Russia, Italy and France have built carriers. The project is not running smoothly, however. Owing to cost overruns and shortages of building material, the ship is not likely to be completed and handed over to the navy before 2015. The projected carrier would be powered by four LM2500 gas turbines capable of achieving a top speed of 28 knots and would carry a mixed air wing of 12 MiG-29Ks, eight Tejas Light Combat Aircraft and 10 helicopters. For India, carrier deployment in the Arabian Sea would allow it to stalemate its traditional enemy Pakistan, while deployment in the Bay of Bengal would allow it to project maritime power further east toward the Straits of Malacca, in both cases protecting India's coastline.

China studies the competition


(The Chinese towing their newly purchased Soviet built Varyag through the Dardanelles Straits in late 2001)

China is also seeking to avail itself of Russia's carrier expertise, but has taken a different approach to other nations interested in carriers, acquiring Western ships for research. While China has yet to deploy a single carrier, its interest in naval aviation is longstanding, dating back to 1985, when it bought the Australian carrier HMAS Melbourne, originally launched in 1945 as the Royal Navy's HMS Majestic, entering Australian naval service a decade later and decommissioned in 1982. The carrier's fate is unclear: While some reports state that she was scrapped in 1985, other reports list her as still in existence in 1994 in Guangzhou, being studied by Chinese naval architects. China also acquired three former Soviet carriers, once again, for study. China's first acquisition was the USSR's Kiev, classed by the Soviet Union as a "heavy aircraft-carrying cruiser." Launched in 1975, the Kiev carried a complement of 12-13 Yak-38 STOL aircraft and 14-17 Kamov Ka-25 helicopters and was designed to locate and destroy US ballistic missile-carrying submarines. Following the 1991 collapse of the USSR the Kiev was decommissioned in 1993 and the newly independent Ukrainian government sold the ship to China, where she has ostensibly been part of a military theme park in Tianjin.

Two years later China acquired the Kiev-class sister ship Minsk from Ukraine. Launched in 1978, the Minsk was originally assigned to the Soviet Pacific Fleet, where the ship sustained severe maintenance problems. The Minsk was bought in 1995 by a South Korean businessman, who subsequently sold her to China's Shzenzen Minsk Aircraft Carrier Industry Company, with the business displaying her at Shenzhen's Shatoujiao "Minsk World" military theme park until she was auctioned off in 2006. China's third acquisition of Ukrainian carrier assets occurred in 1998, when a Chinese company submitted the winning US$20 million bid for the hulk of the USSR's 65,700-ton Varyag, which had been laid down at the Nikolayev shipyard in 1985. Due to conflicts with Turkey over the issue of the Montreaux Convention governing the passage of carriers through the Turkish Straits, the Varyag, stripped of its electronics and engines, did not depart the Black Sea for China until 2001, once again, supposedly to serve as an entertainment complex. The Varyag is currently moored in Dalian, where it is being refurbished.

During the 10th National People's Congress in Beijing this year, a Chinese admiral speaking off the record stated that Beijing was already involved in researching and developing an indigenously built aircraft carrier with construction of the first hull to be completed within three years, according to Chinese media reports. While China has yet to approach Russia to build carrier hulls, last year it acquired Sukhoi-33 arrestor tail-hooks and other landing and takeoff equipment designed by Moscow's TsNII Sudovogo Mashinostroenia and manufactured in its Proletarskii Zavod.. Additional naval aviation equipment has been purchased from Ukraine as well, including a T10K, a variant of the Sukhoi-27SK fighter. Analysts predict that future Chinese carriers will field domestically made J11B fighters, an upgraded version of the Sukhoi-27SK, which is currently manufactured in China under license.

Last October, Russia's "Kommersant" newspaper carried a report that China was considering buying from Rosobornexsport up to 48 Sukhoi-33 fighters, the naval variant of the Sukhoi-27SK in a deal worth up to US$2.5 billion. Analysts debate China's ultimate intentions in developing a carrier fleet, speculating that China is not only interested in protecting its energy supplies arriving by sea from the Middle East, but that such a force would allow it significant influence in its relations with Taiwan as well as providing a deterrent to the US Navy deploying in the Western Pacific. The most likely answer is a combination of all three scenarios.

[...]

Source: http://www.isn.ethz.ch/news/sw/details.cfm?id=18038