The Rise of the Russian Empire: Russo-Armenian Relations

[zeytuntsi]

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

Zeytuntsi, your article actually comes from: www.marketoracle.co.uk, not http://www.topix.com/forum/world/rus...8GDM7BL8CPJUEF, though I did enjoy the lsilly Ukrainians posting there.

The topix link that you have posted is invalid, the one that I posted is valid. Just click on it.

Wherever you go on the net, or in the news, it seems that there is a rigid divide between the pro-Russian sources and the Pro-West (Nato/Britain/US) ones. For those of you who haven't noticed, this rigid divide has also reached our forums with The Rise of the Russian Empire and the Is Russia a Banana Republic thread. Both threads, in and of themselves, serve is good archives for information piled together by advocates of either side.

There are many sides to any story. Is this an archive site or a discussion forum? When an article or post deals with the collapse of the Russian economy then doesn't it make sense to post it in a thread that "discusses" the rise of the Russian "empire"?
By the way I first started to post in this thread, but when "Armenian" got intolerant and started to behave like a childish drama queen then I started the other thread.

The side your article is taking is very typical of BBC's coverage of Russia's domestic conditions, always portrayed in a negative light, whilst RT's coverage is precisely the opposite. In any case, they are to be understood as two extremes and as propaganda made by opposing camps.

Your article addressed concerns about Russia's oil trade, it's government's stabilization fund and its expenditure, and its foreign auto-industry companies operating inside the country. The light these issues are portrayed in are not only pessimistic, but hostile as they go on to negate the possibility that Russia could surmount her situation, as if western nations are able to surmount all their problems just fine by comparison, and that this could lead to social problems that would break up the country.

The goal is to present a side that is not simply a blind, one sided propaganda and a bit of exaggeration will not hurt because this entire thread is just an exaggerated and blind pro-Russian establishment propaganda and is not necessarily pro-Russian people.
I'm not taking any side and simply presenting another side. I'm not anti-Russian and there are probably more Russians in my life than in those who are spreading this one sided propaganda.

This view is very much hostile towards the member culture that contributes to this thread regularly and could illicit an outbreak. I don't think it's good to just state the generic anti-Russian propaganda and walk out without backing up the claims with actual evidence.

I don't see how it's hostile? Are you saying that anything that is not blind propaganda is hostile?
This is a discussion forum and people should learn to tolerate divergent opinions and inconvenient reality, covering up reality does not help.

For example, the price of oil is not 32$ (jesus, where did this figure come from).

http://uk.reuters.com/article/oilRpt/idUKL021972920090115

MOSCOW, Jan 15 (Reuters) - Russia's budget deficit could top 4 trillion roubles, or over 10 pct of GDP, this year if oil prices average $32 a barrel, Interfax news agency reported on Thursday quoting sources close to the government.

The scenario projects gross domestic product (GDP) of 38 trillion roubles ($1,204 billion) and the dollar being worth 34 roubles from around 32.2 currently <RUB=>, it said.

Earlier in the week Interfax reported that the Finance Ministry was considering restating this year's budget based on an oil price forecast of $32 a barrel, compared to a current price of around $40 URL-E. Originally the budget was based on $95 oil which would have resulted in a sizeable surplus.

Likewise, you do not address at all any of the measures Russia is trying to take to create economic stability despite the fall of oil prices. Instead, your article postulates that such measures simply cannot be made and that everything depends on the price of oil. This raises the question then... What is Russia thinking? Why are they pursuing the expansion and domination of oil and natural gas markets if the commodity they're using is not going to bail them out of the economic crisis? How is Russia performing in other sectors of its economy, is it developing any infrastructure using its surplus funds? Where exactly are all the surplus funds being spent?

Have you ever been to Russia recently? How frequently? Russia cannot even provide food despite all the land. How about other consumer products? Do you know how hard it is for Russians? You should go and see.

Can you offer an non-hostile explanation to any of the above? If you can, I'll encourage you to continue to post here.

Why do you insist on the word "hostile"? I think that you should encourage tolerance of different opinions instead.

[jgk3]

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

Zeytuntsi, your article actually comes from: www.marketoracle.co.uk, not http://www.topix.com/forum/world/rus...8GDM7BL8CPJUEF, though I did enjoy the lsilly Ukrainians posting there.

Wherever you go on the net, or in the news, it seems that there is a rigid divide between the pro-Russian sources and the Pro-West (Nato/Britain/US) ones. For those of you who haven't noticed, this rigid divide has also reached our forums with The Rise of the Russian Empire and the Is Russia a Banana Republic thread. Both threads, in and of themselves, serve is good archives for information piled together by advocates of either side.

The side your article is taking is very typical of BBC's coverage of Russia's domestic conditions, always portrayed in a negative light, whilst RT's coverage is precisely the opposite. In any case, they are to be understood as two extremes and as propaganda made by opposing camps.

Your article addressed concerns about Russia's oil trade, it's government's stabilization fund and its expenditure, and its foreign auto-industry companies operating inside the country. The light these issues are portrayed in are not only pessimistic, but hostile as they go on to negate the possibility that Russia could surmount her situation, as if western nations are able to surmount all their problems just fine by comparison, and that this could lead to social problems that would break up the country.

This view is very much hostile towards the member culture that contributes to this thread regularly and could illicit an outbreak. I don't think it's good to just state the generic anti-Russian propaganda and walk out without backing up the claims with actual evidence. For example, the price of oil is not 32$ (jesus, where did this figure come from). Likewise, you do not address at all any of the measures Russia is trying to take to create economic stability despite the fall of oil prices. Instead, your article postulates that such measures simply cannot be made and that everything depends on the price of oil. This raises the question then... What is Russia thinking? Why are they pursuing the expansion and domination of oil and natural gas markets if the commodity they're using is not going to bail them out of the economic crisis? How is Russia performing in other sectors of its economy, is it developing any infrastructure using its surplus funds? Where exactly are all the surplus funds being spent?

Can you offer an non-hostile explanation to any of the above? If you can, I'll encourage you to continue to post here.

[zeytuntsi]

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

After the rise i.e. the bubble comes the collapse....

http://www.topix.com/forum/world/russia/T3R8GDM7BL8CPJUEF

Never in modern history has the success or failure of a major emerging economy been so dependent on one single commodity! And never before has that commodity fallen so far and so fast as Russian crude oil!

Russia does have other resource and revenue sources. But in just the past six months, Urals crude, Russia's primary export blend, has plunged from a high of nearly $141 per barrel to a low of a meager $32.34 — a 77% crash that's pounded Russian stocks like a sledgehammer and sliced through the Russian economy like a serrated sickle.

The big dilemma: To balance its federal budget, Russia must get a minimum of $70 per barrel for its crude oil. But at $32 and change, it's getting less than HALF that amount. The entire country is losing money hand over fist.

No wonder Russia's stock market
has plunged 72%, forcing 25 separate stock exchange shutdowns!

Transneft, the Russian oil transporter, is down from $2,025 in January 2008 to a recent low of $270. Gazprom, the natural gas monopoly, has lost more than two-thirds of its market capitalization since May. Meanwhile, Lukoil fell from a May peak of $113 to a recent low of $32.

Russia's oil-driven real estate bubble is also collapsing. That's why Russian construction and real estate giant Sistema-Hals lost more than 94% of its value last year alone … why PIK Group, another major construction giant, collapsed by 96%… and why the entire RCP Shares Index of Russian developers has sunk 92% since its record high in June 2007.

Ford, Renault and Volkswagen are halting production at Russian assembly lines. Unemployment is likely to surge to 10% and beyond. Massive amounts of foreign capital are fleeing the country.

In a desperate attempt to stem the tide, the Russian government has devalued the ruble 11 times since November, and thrown a quarter of its foreign currency reserves at the raging debt crisis. But it's still not enough. Russia's primary source of revenues — energy exports — is in shambles; and unless crude oil prices could somehow DOUBLE in a big hurry, Russia's economic and financial decline cannot end.

Standard & Poor's has cut Russia's long-term debt rating for the first time in nine years, citing dangerous outflows and a “rapid depletion” of currency reserves. And more downgrades are in the offing. Even a major debt default is not unthinkable.

The biggest danger: Political upheaval and social unrest.

Even before this crisis, Russia's middle class earned less than $500 per month. Now, with the devastating plunge in oil revenues already in place, those numbers are falling to even lower levels. For a nation with a cost of living that rivals that of the U.S., Western Europe and Japan, the last thing the Russian people needed was a depression. Yet that's exactly what they're getting.

I visited Russia last year before the collapse in oil prices. I spoke to a variety of professionals and people on the street. And I stayed with friends who work in government jobs.

From everything I had read, I had anticipated signs of greater prosperity. Instead, I was surprised to see how little average citizens had benefited from the recent years of rapid economic growth.

Yes, they have more access to a wider variety of goods that were scarce during the Soviet era. But most professionals — such as teachers, doctors, nurses and government employees — are still living on the edge of poverty.

Equally surprising is the popular disgust and disdain for the government. Public opinion surveys and press reports may indicate broad support for the Kremlin's foreign policy, and they seem to be accurate. But support for domestic policies is another matter entirely.

My view: Any major disappointment with respect to pocketbook issues could lead to major political changes, the outcome of which is largely unpredictable.

[Federate]

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

Iran replacing Russia as Armenia's energy supplier

Tue, 24 Mar 2009 22:57:21 GMT

Armenia has started the construction of a 240-million-dollar pipeline to import oil products from Tabriz oil refinery in north eastern Iran.

Minister of Energy and Natural Resources Armen Movsisyan told journalists that the 300-km pipeline will pump Iranian oil products including gasoline and diesel fuel into Armenia.

In December 2008 Iran and Armenia reached an agreement in a number of fields including energy, oil, petrochemistry and tourism.

"The pipeline would be a safe route for importing oil products to Armenia that will increase security of energy supply and decrease the cost of fuel import," Movsisyan said on Tuesday.

Iran and Armenia have also inaugurated a 140-km gas pipeline intended to reduce Yerevan's reliance on Russian gas. The 220-million-dollar project was launched in March 2007.

Russia's recent row with Ukraine, which disrupted gas flow to Europe during Christmas holidays, triggered many countries to consider alternative sources of energy in a bid to cut their dependency on Russia.

Based on agreements signed by Iran and Armenia, for each cubic meter of Iranian gas, Armenia will return 3 kilowatt of electricity to Iran.

http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=89550&sectionid=351020103

[SweetAngessa]

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

Is Armenian going to come back and restart this thread again?

[Alina]

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

Great comparaison... Europe is already overwhelmed with its own problems and is thinking that new members or willing to join countries need to suffer... so having Russia as an ally might be good after all. There is also an issue with Americans, they give money only once... Ukraine and Georgia are nice recent examples.

[Federate]

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

Russian Railway ‘Not Honoring’ Armenia Investment Pledges

By Hovannes Shoghikian

The Armenian government expressed its discontent with the Russian management of Armenia’s rail network on Tuesday, with Transport and Communications Minister Gurgen Sargsian again accusing it of failing to honor its investment commitments.

Russia’s state- run rail company, RZD, took over the network in January 2008 after signing a long-term management contract with the government. The agreement committed it to investing $230 million in Armenia during the first five years of operations and another $240 million in the following years.

Sargsian said that the Russians invested only 3.5 billion drams ($11.5 million) in the cash-strapped network, recently renamed the South Caucasus Railway (SCR), last year. “Only 30 percent of the 2008 investment program envisaged by the management contract was carried out,” he told a news conference.

That program envisaged, among other things, repairs and replacement of SCR rail tracks and the purchase of several new locomotives. According to Sargsian, the railway management failed to do that.

The minister said the SCR operator has assured his government that it will eliminate the investment shortfall this year in addition to making 12 billion drams worth of capital investments originally planned for 2009. The SCR’s new chief executive, Shevket Shaydulin, said earlier this month that RZD investments in Armenia will total about $80 million this year.

Shaydulin’s predecessor, Aleksandr Kuznetsov, was replaced late last year after Armenian state regulators launched an investigation into the legality of a sharp increase in the cost of cargo shipments and other services provided by the SCR. The rail company also faced embarrassing media allegations of profligacy after it emerged that it spent large sums on expensive apartments and cars for its personnel.

Shaydulin accepted some of the criticism, announcing that the SCR will auction off ten of those vehicles and a house in Yerevan. But he defended other apartment purchases, saying that they are intended for accommodating Armenian railway specialists living outside the capital, rather than RZD executives from Russia.

Meanwhile, a cargo train laden with gold ore was derailed in an accident in central Armenia on Monday night. No casualties were reported. An SCR spokeswoman said the company is investigating possible causes of the accident.

http://www.armenialiberty.org/armeniareport/report/en/2009/03/D5EA9950-D1F8-4EE8-AC75-FC38F14C279C.ASP

[TheGreat]

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

Despite economic crisis, Medvedev pledges military buildup

17 March, 2009 - It seems that the long-awaited thaw that many observers had expected from an Obama-Medvedev partnership just got doused with a cold glass of reality.

Citing US and NATO military expansion up to its borders, President Dmitry Medvedev announced at a meeting with defense ministry officials on Tuesday that Russia must quickly enact a “large-scale rearmament.”

“Attempts to expand the military infrastructure of NATO near the borders of our country are continuing,” Medvedev told an annual meeting with the Defense Ministry’s top commanders.

“A modern military well trained and well equipped with modern weapons… is a guarantee of our protection from any potential threat or attempts to pressure our country. The transition of all military units to a level of combat readiness is number one on the agenda.”

The Russian president’s tough words show that the Kremlin is taking no chances with its security, despite Washington’s recent declarations of friendship and renewed trust.

Before US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton ceremoniously pressed the “reset” button together with her Russian counterpart, Sergey Lavrov, Clinton told a meeting of NATO foreign ministers that Washington wanted “a fresh start” in relations with Moscow.

Read more

“We… must find ways to manage our differences with Russia where they persist, and stand firm where our principles or our vital interests are at stake,” Clinton remarked.

It was probably the “vital interests” part of Clinton’s speech that rang some alarm bells in Moscow. Indeed, ‘standing firm on vital interests’ may be loosely interpreted to mean just about anything, including the spread of democracy, acquiring new pools of non-renewable resources and seizing new slabs of geopolitical real estate in Central Asia. Other equally important issues, for example, the possible inclusion of Georgia and Ukraine into the Cold War military organization, continues to rankle the Kremlin.

The Russian president hinted at precisely such a possible future scenario when he said that the US and NATO are beefing up their forces not simply over ideological considerations, as was the case during the Cold War, but in a strategic maneuvering for diminishing natural resources, namely oil and gas, which Russia has in tremendous amounts.

Tiberio Graziano, editor of Eurasia magazine on geopolitical studies, echoed these sentiments in a recent interview with RT.

Asked about the recent gas crisis between Kiev and Moscow, Graziano put the blame on NATO and EU expansion.

“The origin of the gas dispute… is actually a reflection of NATO enlargement in Eastern Europe as well as EU expansion into Eastern European countries,” Graziano said. “This kind of enlargement began in 1989 after the fall of the Berlin Wall. From that moment the United States had decided to manage the whole planet. They chose Western Europe as a starting point to move in the direction of Russia and Central Asia, as it’s known that Central Asia has huge resources of gas and oil.”

Presently, Moscow continues to watch developments in Eastern Europe, specifically in Poland and the Czech Republic where Washington, on the pretense of an Iranian missile threat, plans to install components of its missile defense system. Although US President Barack Obama has sent signals to Moscow that he is prepared to abandon the missile brainchild of the Bush administration, any sort of a deal will probably require that Moscow exert some influence on Tehran, which is suspected of pursuing a nuclear weapons program.

But it is not simply western expansion that prompts Russia to begin a military rearmament, which is to start in 2011.

In an apparent reference to Russia’s last year’s five-day war with Georgia, which was sparked after Tbilisi launched a morning assault that killed hundreds of South Ossetian residents and 12 Russian peacekeepers, Medvedev made reference to “local crises” that also threaten Russia’s peace and prosperity.

“An analysis of the military-political situation… has shown that a serious conflict potential remains in a number of regions; threats are persisting that cause both local conflicts and international terrorism,” the president said.

Defense Minister Anatoly Serdyukov told RIA Novosti that “70 percent of its weaponry would be modern by 2020.”

Next month, the dialogue will continue as Dmitry Medvedev and Barack Obama meet for the first time in London for the G20 summit.

http://www.russiatoday.com/Politics/...y_buildup.html

[jgk3]

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

very nice find Illuminator, thank you.

[Illuminator]

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

Moscow Top News

http://www.moscowtopnews.com/

Now has a sister site, Russian Sentry. People can also make comments on articles on both sites now.

http://www.russiansentry.com

They are still looking for input on Javakhk.