The Rise of the Russian Empire: Russo-Armenian Relations

[Armenian]

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

The downward spiraling of Russo-Georgian relations continue unabated. I am sure that the news about Vladimir Putin staying in power after the next year's elections in Russia is not being taken lightly in Tbilisi...

Armenian

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

RUSSIAN TV REPORT ATTACKS GEORGIAN PRESIDENT



Excerpt from report by Russian Channel One Europe TV on 30 September

[Presenter Petr Tolstoy] The most shocking news of the week came from Georgia. It provided further proof that even the Rose Revolution will only be worth something, if it is able to defend itself. The Georgian authorities have gone rather far in putting up this defence, much further than declarations about democracy and independence. First, there was the carbon monoxide poisoning of [late Georgian Prime Minister Zurab] Zhvania, and now another comrade, former Defence Minister [Irakli] Okruashvili has been put in the cells. This was after he promised to tell the truth about murders and corruption scandals in the government.

But this is not the main thing. In the final analysis, all these murders and arrests of the opposition are the internal affair of Georgia. Another thing was striking: the cruelty with which two Russian citizens, former soldiers, were killed having been taken prisoner. The two men were conducting training with new recruits near the Abkhaz-Georgian border.

Murders of Russian officers of this kind last took place at the beginning of the 1990s in Chechnya.

Here with the details is Yevgeniy Baranov.

[Correspondent] The Georgian president's speech to the UN has been long expected. It was expected and feared. Not the speech itself, but what would be chosen as its reference point. It was thought that some sort of controversy would be provoked for yet another attack on Russia. But no-one thought that bloodshed would be used as a pretext for posturing on a platform. [Passage omitted: excerpt of Saakashvili's speech at UN asking why Russian officers were on Georgian territory]

[Correspondent over shots of grave] The mother and widow of retired lieutenant-colonel, Igor Muzovatkin, stand by his grave. It was of him that the Georgian president was speaking at the UN. The horrible death of the retired officer, who once served as a peacekeeper in Abkhazia, gave Saakashvili his longed-for pretext to raise the question of the withdrawal of Russian peacekeepers from Abkhazia. [Passage omitted: grieving mother speaks of her last memory of her son]

[Correspondent] Lieutenant-Colonel Muzovatkin had his throat cut on 20 September. It happened here at this training camp for Abkhaz border guards high in the mountains of the republic's Tqvarcheli District. New recruits have been coming here to train for three years now. This time the group of 20 young men had two instructors: two former Russian officers, who had signed a contract with the Abkhaz Defence Ministry.

The second was Artur Dvorkin. He was shot at point-blank range when already wounded. [Passage omitted: Abkhaz forensic expert says it was a brutal killing]

[Correspondent] It is now known that around 30 Georgians took part in the attack, and that it was carefully planned. [Passage omitted: details of the attack, including Abkhaz soldier saying it was an unprovoked attack, and that it was a long way from Georgian territory]

[Correspondent] Seven men were captured and taken away to Georgia. Those who decided to put up a fight were dealt with without ceremony.

[Sergey Bagapsh, president of the Republic of Abkhazia] As a man and as their friend, I had a desire to take some serious hardware up there and avenge them like a man. I had this feeling as a person and a man. But as a politician, I understand what could follow from this. There are things that are done right away, and others that we will do in any case. We will conduct negotiations and talk for as long as this is possible. Seven of our men are imprisoned there, and our number-one priority is to secure their release.

[Correspondent] If it had not been for the speech of Russia's UN envoy, Vitaliy Churkin, at the Security Council, the UN would not have known about these details. [Passage omitted: details of UN proceedings, including criticism of Georgia by Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov]

[Correspondent] The main impression from Saakashvili's speech [at the UN] was meant to be that Russian peacekeepers are not just training guerrillas, but are leading sabotage raids against Georgia. What is more, this main motive concealed another one, which might be even more important. Expressing his indignation in New York, Saakashvili succeeded in gradually legitimizing the activity of his security forces on Abkhaz territory. From now on, any similar action will be portrayed as a logical continuation of what they have already got away with once, even if it happens on the edge of Sukhumi. [Passage omitted: Saakashvili saying that he will unify Georgia during his presidency. The correspondent adds that this is to be understood as up until 2008. The report goes on to cover the allegations made against Saakashvili by his former Defence Minister Irakli Okruashvili]

[Correspondent] On Tuesday evening [25 September], when Saakashvili was savouring his imminent triumph in New York, a crushing blow was dealt to his government. On the only TV channel not under the control of the authorities, Imedi, his former closest comrade Irakli Okruashvili accused the president of corruption, conspiracy to organize murder and anti-state activities. [Passage omitted: more details of the accusations, including excerpts of Okruashvili on Georgian TV]

[Correspondent] Sitting in the studio, the former minister recounted in detail how, for example, Saakashvili ordered him to liquidate the owner of the [Imedi] TV channel, the influential businessman, Badri Patarkatsishvili, by blowing up his car. [Passage omitted: more on the political controversy in Georgia, suggesting that Saakashvili has dodged answering the charges directly, and containing the suggestion that the controversy has boosted the opposition, and that opposition leaders may now be fearing for their own lives]

[Correspondent] In the absence of Okruashvili [who has been arrested], we managed to get oblique confirmation of his accusations from an unexpected source. It turns out that the now world-famous businessman, Andrey Lugovoy, has spent the last few years helping Badri Patarkatsishvili with his personal security in Georgia.

[Lugovoy, interviewed in a park] I would just like to say, first, that it is more than likely that what Okruashvili says is true. This is because, second, the motives would be his [Patarkatsishvili's] political rivalry and independent position, which found an outlet, among others, through the media. The third thing is that we observed this. We observed that there was a more serious attitude to security, with different people saying different things. There were requests to step up security, to lay on an extra car, a lead group. In the car carrying the security guards there was a dog capable of detecting explosives. All this took place.

[Correspondent] According to Lugovoy, it is not just him who does not doubt that Okruashvili is telling the truth, but all those he worked with in Tbilisi. What is more, he knows himself how the murder would have been portrayed had it taken place.

[Lugovoy] The hand of Moscow. The hand of Moscow. That is the only way. This is Saakashvili's style. They would have thought up anything, taking into account the fact that Patarkatsishvili has not been in Russia for some time for various reasons. The hand of Moscow, what else could these young hot-blooded types like Saakashvili do?

[Correspondent] The reaction of the West to the arrest of Okruashvili was predictable, but disappointed many in Georgia. [Passage omitted: quotation from statement by State Department official Matthew Bryza saying it was probably linked to crime, not politics, and that the courts must decide the matter]

[Correspondent] The statements from Washington made it clear to everyone that the only thing that concerns the Americans now is the security of Saakashvili's position. The problems with Georgian democracy, which were recently of such concern to them, were declared to be an internal matter for Georgia.

[Andrey Kokoshin, chairman of the State Duma committee for CIS affairs] The reaction of the State Department is pure political hypocrisy. There are enough politicians there who know who they are dealing with. I mean the current leadership in Georgia. But they have invested in it and backed it. People like this are not abandoned straight away in a situation like this. Maybe they have not found a replacement yet. [Passage omitted: Putin says what is going on in Georgia is an internal matter, but that it is hardly a good example for other states to follow]

[Correspondent] The authorities in the unrecognized republics of Abkhazia and South Ossetia are preparing for the worst. Saakashvili's tone leaves no doubt that having put his hawk [Okruashvili] behind bars, he will soon have to show his claws himself.

Source: http://www.eurasianet.org/posts/100107rus_pr.shtml

[Lernakan]

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

Voghjuyn enker Lernakan, the video presentation you posted was very well produced - as well as an American production could be.

ողջույն Ընկեր, it's been a few days since I watch Russia Today and I've got to say that I like the programmes and documentary's a lot. When I saw this documentary I thought I have to share this with you and luckily they had updated it on youtube.

A couple of weeks ago an Armenian-American idiot in Yerevan told me that due to "the overwhelming Russian troop presence in Armenia" official Yerevan does not have real national independence...

[skhara]

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

. When I saw this documentary I thought I have to share this with you and luckily they had updated it on youtube.

Thank you for sharing that. I like the lighthearted manner of the production.

[Armenian]

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

Excellent new report from Hayots Ashkhar. It outlines a lot of the points I have been making about Russo-Armenian relations and how beneficial it has been for us. Can we Armenians even dare to imagine the Caucasus region without a strong Russian presence?

ARMENIA-RUSSIA
Armen Tsatouryan

Hayots Ashkharh, Armenia
Sept 28 2007



Mutual Cooperation Continues

Serge Sargsyan's official visit to Moscow evidenced the irrevocability
and the succession of the process of strengthening the strategic
partnership and extending the trade-economic relations between the
Republic of Armenia and the Russian Federation.

The main peculiarity of the visit was that the Governments in both
countries have changed, such change having taken place in Armenia a few
months ago and in Russia - quite recently. And in half a years' time,
i.e. at the beginning of 2008, there will be presidential elections
in both Armenia and Russia. In the meantime, the governments of
both countries are viewed as the legal successors of the authorities
in power.

The qualitative changes in the mutual cooperation have predetermined
the necessity of continuing and extending the alliance between Armenia
and Russia.

Being the only military and political ally of Russia in our region,
Armenia has also become a serious economic partner. As evidenced by
the last 6 months' 70 per cent growth of bilateral good circulation
and the significantly increased volume of the investment of the
Russian capital in Armenia as well as the economic component of the
Armenian-Russian cooperation is steadily approaching the high level
characteristic of political cooperation.

And the maintenance and further acceleration of such high paces
naturally demand ensuring relevant political guarantees in terms of
maintaining the positive potential of bilateral cooperation.

As shown by Prime Minister Serge Sargysan's official visit to the
Russian Federation and the meeting with his counterpart as well as with
other officials of that country, the Governments of Armenia and Russia
are determined in maintaining the achievements of their predecessors.

The Armenian Prime Minister arrived in Moscow not only with the
purpose of summing up the accomplishments with his counterpart,
but also submitting a package aimed at deepening the bilateral
cooperation and advancing bold proposals. They concerned the complex
and comprehensive problems of nuclear energy and, in that connection
- the issues of exploiting the uranium mines of Armenia, building an
oil refinery in the neighborhood of the border with Iran, operating
the production capacities acquired in Armenia by the Russian side
and increasing the communication potentials of export.

Russian Prime Minister Victor Zubkov had a particularly enthusiastic
attitude to the proposal of involving Armenia's construction potentials
in the preparation for the 2012 Olympic Games. This will enable our
country to operate new capacities for the production of construction
materials.

The parties are convinced that the implementation of all the programs
may, in the near future, increase Russia's direct investment, which
has already assumed large volumes and contribute to the progress of the
main industries in Armenia. Through operating large capacities in the
sphere of nuclear energy and oil industry, Armenia will supplement
the fuel-energy complex necessary for the further development of
its economy and get chances to export energy in large volumes to
the neighboring countries. In conditions of the existence of such a
complex, no economic blockade can impede our country's development,
because Armenia will not only have gas in sufficient quantities,
but also electric energy and oil.

We believe Prime Minister Serge Sargsyan's first official visit
to Russia was unprecedented both in terms of the number of the
meetings held and their contents as well as the abundance of the
issues discussed and the agreements achieved. It showed that the new
Government of Armenia and Russia and their leaders, who shoulder the
responsibility of extending mutual cooperation, will not only maintain
but also extend the rich traditions of the cooperation between the
Armenian and Russian peoples.

[Armenian]

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

A very interesting geopolitical evaluation concerning Russia and its surrounding regions including the Caucasus and Armenia.

Armenian

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

Russia and the Kosovo Card

TBILISI _ Look before you leap is as sound a principle in foreign policy as it is in life. Yet, once again, the Bush administration is preparing to leap into the unknown. Even though lack of foresight is universally viewed as a leading cause of its Iraq debacle, the United States (with British backing probable) is now preparing to recognize Kosovo's independence unilaterally _ irrespective of the consequences for Europe and the world. Kosovo has been administered since 1999 by a United Nations mission guarded by NATO troops, although it remains formally a part of Serbia.

But, with Kosovo's ethnic Albanian majority demanding its own state, and with Russia refusing to recognize U.N. mediator Martti Ahtisaari's plan for conditional independence, the U.S. is preparing to go it alone. Instead of thinking what Ahtisaari deemed unthinkable, a partition of Kosovo with a small part of the north going to Serbia and the rest linked to the Kosovars ethnic brethren in Albania or a separate state, the U.S. plans to act without the U.N.'s blessing, arguing that only an independent Kosovo will bring stability to the Western Balkans. That argument is debatable _ and the record of the Kosovar government suggests that it is wrong. But the U.S. position is unambiguously misguided in not foreseeing that the ``Kosovo precedent" will incite instability and potentially even violence elsewhere.

Why the rush to give Kosovo independence? Many serious disputes have gone unresolved for decades. The Kashmir question has lingered since 1947, the Turkish occupation of Northern Cyprus since 1974, and Israel's occupation of the West Bank from 1967. Yet no one is suggesting that unilateral solutions be imposed in these potential flashpoints. Nevertheless, the U.S. _ and most European Union members _ argue that Kosovo's situation is sui generis and will set no legally binding international precedent. But Russia sees things very differently. Indeed, it may seek to use this precedent to re-establish its authority over the nations and territories that were once part of the Soviet Union.

Spain and Cyprus with their worries over secessionist-minded regions, are worried by any possible precedent. Romania fears the fallout from Kosovo's unilaterally gaining independence on neighboring Moldova. The worry is that Russia will unilaterally recognize the breakaway Moldovan territory of Transdnistria, which Russian troops and criminal gangs have been propping up for 16 years. Ukraine _ the great prize in Russia's bid to recapture its former sphere of influence _ is also deeply anxious. It fears that Russia will encourage separatist tendencies in Crimea, where the ethnic Russian population forms a majority. (Crimea was ceded to Ukraine by Nikita Khrushchev only in 1954).

Russia may decide to abuse the Kosovo precedent further to divide Ukraine's population between Russian speakers and Ukrainian speakers. But the biggest risks posed by unilateral recognition of Kosovo's independence are in the South Caucasus, a region that abuts the tinderbox of today's Middle East. Here, there is a real danger that Russia may recognize breakaway regions in the South Caucasus, _ and back them more strongly than it does now. Even before Vladimir Putin became Russia's president, the Kremlin was making mischief in Georgia, issuing Russian passports to citizens of Abkhazia (the largest breakaway region) and pouring money into its economy.

Russia's supposed ``peacekeeping troops" in Abkhazia and South Ossetia, Georgia's other secession-minded region, have in fact protected their rebel governments. Russia has also been enforcing a complete trade embargo on Georgia in the hope of weakening the resolve of its pro-Western president, Mikhail Saakashvili. Should Russia recognize Abkhazia's independence, Saakashvili might be tempted to respond militarily to prevent his country from unraveling. Renewed conflict in Abkhazia would not only bring the risk of open warfare with Russia, but strain relations with Armenia, as there are near to 50,000 Armenians in Abkhazia who support the breakaway government.

Another risk in the South Caucasus is that Russia (with Armenian support) will recognize Nagorno-Karabakh's self-proclaimed independence from Azerbaijan. Nagorno-Karabakh, historically Armenian, endured a bloody secessionist war between1988 and 1994, with 30,000 killed and 14 percent of Azerbaijan's territory occupied by Russian-backed Armenian forces. Since then, oil has fuelled an Azeri military buildup. So the government in Baku is far more prepared to respond to renewed warfare than it was in the 1990's. Moreover, it has neighboring Turkey on its side. Turkey is already enforcing a punitive economic embargo on Armenia, including closure of its border.

Military projections by the US have repeatedly suggested that Azerbaijan would lose such a battle, even with newly purchased equipment and Turkish military support. Armenian forces are well dug in and have received a significant boost from Russia's diversion of heavy weaponry to Armenia from some recently closed Georgian military bases. Iran also must be factored into this equation, as it is becoming a strategic investor by building an oil refinery just across its border in Armenia, partly as a security measure in case of a U.S. attack and partly to relieve its petrol shortages. Moreover, Iran remains eager to contain Azerbaijani revanchist claims over the large Azeri minority in northern Iran.

The conflicts in Transdnistria and the South Caucasus are usually called "frozen conflicts," because not much has happened since they began in the early 1990's. Any unilateral move to give Kosovo its independence is likely to unfreeze them _ fast and bloodily. And such potential bloodshed on Russia's border may give Vladimir Putin the pretext he may desire to extend his rule beyond its constitutionally mandated end next March.

Source: http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news...137_11176.html

[Lernakan]

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

Thank you for sharing that. I like the lighthearted manner of the production.

Khntrem Enker

[Lernakan]

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

Russian patriarch says Kosovo 'sacred' for Serbs, decries destruction of churches in province



STRASBOURG, France: The head of the Russian Orthodox Church said Tuesday that Serbs must be able to live peacefully in Kosovo after its final status is determined, and decried the destruction of Orthodox churches in the province, which he said was carried out with tacit consent of the ethnic Albanian majority.

Russian Orthodox Patriarch Alexy II said Kosovo was "sacred" for Serbs, and offered his help in mediating the crisis in the region.

"The Russian Orthodox Church has considerable experience in peace-building and peacemaking, and we stand ready to help," he told the Council of Europe's parliamentary assembly.

In a speech and a question-and-answer session with parliamentarians from the council's 47 member states, Alexy also lamented widespread poverty and a massive gap between the rich and the poor in Russia, and — in comments going directly against the spirit of the human rights watchdog — lashed out against homosexuality, calling it an illness.

Alexy also was to meet with President Nicolas Sarkozy and the Catholic Bishops' Conference during his visit to France.

He told the council Kosovo was a subject of political bargaining by people who did not appreciate the province's history and its importance for Serbs.

"Those people have never been to Kosovo and have never seen with their own eyes what Kosovo means for the Serbian people," he said.

Orthodox Serbs consider Kosovo, although today predominantly ethnic Albanian and Muslim, the heart of their ancient homeland. Since the end of a 1998-1999 war between ethnic Albanian rebels and Serb forces, Kosovo's minority Serbs have lived in guarded enclaves under fear of attack at the hands of Albanians, and many Orthodox churches and monuments have been destroyed or vandalized.

"There are many monuments that are sacred to the people of Serbia, and we cannot silently stand by when those monuments are being destroyed, despite the fact that they are under the protection of UNESCO and were built in the 12th, 13th or 14th century," Alexy II said.

Kosovo, a province of 2 million people, has been under U.N. administration since 1999. Its final status, which is under discussion by international negotiators, is an emotional issue in the region.

Alexy repeated his calls for a wide-ranging dialogue between cultures and religions, saying no world view, including secularism, should claim a monopoly in Europe or elsewhere.

But on homosexuality he stood his ground, saying he could not depart from his church's teachings.

"No one should be discriminated on the basis of conviction, but no one should try to keep us quiet when we call something a sin," he said.

"There is a lot of homosexual propaganda that has a lot of influence on young people who otherwise have nothing to do with homosexuality ... it's an illness, distortion of a human being."

Alexy's calls for an interreligious dialogue are seen as an overture to the Roman Catholics. The Vatican sees the Orthodox Church as a logical partner in its efforts to push its conservative agenda on bioethical, social and moral issues, including opposition to embryonic stem cell research, abortion, euthanasia and same-sex marriage.

http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/10/02/europe/EU-GEN-EU-Russia-Orthodox-Church.php

On a related note:

Russian Patriarch, in France, rues culture of death

Paris, Oct. 1, 2007 (CWNews.com) - Russian Orthodox Patriarch Alexei II highlights concerns about protecting the dignity of human life in an interview with the French magazine La Vie.

Patriarch Alexei, who is visiting France this week, used the language of the late Pope John Paul II in lamenting the rise of a culture of death in contemporary Europe. The Russian prelate has frequently emphasized the need for Catholic and Orthodox believers to work together to restore respect for fundamental moral principles in Europe.

http://www.cwnews.com/news/viewstory.cfm?recnum=53867

Russian Orthodox see four-fold growth since collapse of Communism



Moscow, Sep. 17, 2007 (CWNews.com) - The Patriarchate of Moscow is reporting a four-fold increase in the number of Orthodox parishes and monasteries in Russia during the past 20 years.

In 1987, before the final collapse of the Soviet Union, there were 6,800 Orthodox parish churches and 19 monasteries in Russia, Patriarch Alexei II told an audience in Moscow last week, as reported by the Interfax news service. By the beginning of 2007 there were 27,300 parishes and 716 monasteries.

"Those who were in the Soviet Union 20 years ago and come here again [today] can hardly recognize the country," Patriarch Alexei said, proclaiming a resurgence of belief in the country since the Communist empire fell.

"When we traveled abroad in 1960s or 1970s we could often hear, 'Who comes to your churches but old ladies?’" the Russian Patriarch reported. Today he said there is a keen interest in the faith among young Russians. "Yet we gratefully remember those old ladies who brought up their grandchildren as believers in Christ," he said.

http://www.cwnews.com/news/viewstory.cfm?recnum=53557

[Armenian]

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

Putin Turns His Face to Tehran, His Back to Bush and Sarkozy



Iran’s suspect nuclear program is further polarizing the big powers. As American and European officials discussed a third round of UN Security Council sanctions, Iran’s president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, more pugnacious than ever, addressed a military parade Sat. Sept. 22 marking the 27th anniversary of the onset of the Iraq-Iran war of the eighties. “Those (countries) who assume that decaying methods such as psychological war, political propaganda and the so-called economic sanctions would work and prevent Iran’s fast drive towards progress are mistaken.”

"The Iranian nation is ready to bring any oppressive power to its knees," read a slogan from supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, inscribed on a massive board on a truck as a new, improved long-range, 1,800-km range surface missile trundled by. Other slogans called for "Death to America" and "Death to Israel." Western military attaches, apparently warned in advance, boycotted the rally for the second year running. But there is no escape: These are the messages Ahmadinejad takes with him this week to the UN General Assembly and Columbia University in New York. The French president Nicolas Sarkozy meanwhile stands shoulder to shoulder with President George W. Bush. Friday, Sept. 21, he said: “Iran is trying to obtain an atomic bomb. That is unacceptable and I tell the French people it is unacceptable.”

A week ago, French foreign minister Bernard Kouchner warned that the world faced war if diplomacy and sanctions failed to curb Iran’s nuclear activities. But Vladimir Putin pulled in the opposite direction from his two fellows in the UN Security Council when he decided to be the first Russian president to visit Tehran on Oct. 16. The visit, in the framework of the Caspian Asian Summit, is planned to encompass much more than state ceremonial and ritual photo-ops, although there will be plenty of that too. The head of Iran's Atomic Energy Organization (IAEO), Reza Aghazadeh, said a document would be signed setting the timeline for Russia to complete the long-delayed Bushehr nuclear plant and deliver the fuel to activate it.

Last week, at the general conference of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Iranian and Russian teams began formulating the document to be signed by their heads of state. Reporting this, Aghazadeh also described a most useful conversation he had with the head of Russian’s Federal Atomic Energy Agency, Sergei Kiriyenko. In its long dispute with Moscow, Tehran claims Russia had contracted to commission the Bushehr plant in 2000. This was later amended and under the fifth agreement negotiated between Tehran and Moscow, Russia undertook to deliver 90 tons of fuel by March 2007 and commission Bushehr nuclear plant by September 2007. According to DEBKAfile’s sources in Moscow and Washington, the Russian president had four goals in sight when he decided to settle his dispute with the Islamic Republic and join the rulers of Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan, Azerbaijan at the Caspian Sea Summit in Tehran:

1. He will be on hand to underscore Moscow’s concern and conviction that the last two or three months of 2007 will take the controversy over the Iranian nuclear program to crisis point and could determine whether or not America resorts to the military option. The Russians have marked this period as crunch time for the international community. The UN and its Security Council will have to decide then between two options: endorse the IAEA chief Mohammed ElBaradei’s deal with Tehran, under which Iran promises to open up secret compartments of its program to international inspection, or else support the tougher economic sanctions advocated by the United States. Our Washington sources report that administration heads accuse ElBaradei of practicing deceit and underhand machinations for the sake of giving Iran more time for large-scale uranium enrichment up to weapons grade, safe from the threat of a third round of sanctions until after President Bush departs the White House in Jan. 2009. US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice made no bones about the low esteem in which the chief nuclear inspector is held by the administration when she said Sept 19: “Diplomacy is best left to diplomats, not a technical body such as the International Atomic Energy Agency.” This view is fully endorsed by Israel.

2. The Russian and Iranian presidents will publicly sign a new nuclear accord, attended by international television and media hype. This is a ploy to reposition Russia in Arab and Muslim eyes. Putin wants to demonstrate that Moscow has no objection to supplying a Muslim nation with a nuclear reactor, technology and fuel, in contrast to Washington, which is willing to go as far as military action to thwart such acquisitions.

3. The Russians are uneasy about the new Washington-Paris alliance. They were alarmed by the outspoken rhetoric coming from Sarkozy and Kouchner slamming Iran and aligning with the US - up to and including military conflict. Putin sees the French president moving into position as Bush’s leading foreign partner in place of Britain’s Tony Blair as a portent of a potential American-European fence to block off Moscow’s influence in Europe. He links this potential with Washington’s plan to set up missile bases in Poland and the Czech Republic and perceives a strong line forming on the map of Europe that threatens to reverse his diplomatic gains on the continent and circumscribe his drive for the control of its supplies of energy. These issues were undoubtedly thrashed out when the French foreign minister met his Russian opposite number Sergey Lavrov in Moscow last week.

4. Sitting together at the head of the table at the Caspian Sea Summit next month, Putin and Ahmadinejad will be broadcasting a message to Washington and the nations of Central Asia that the future and security of Caspian and Central Asian natural resources and oil do not depend entirely on their relations Washington, or even the US military bases going up on their soil. Russia will be posing a stiff challenge to America in Central Asia by holding out the offer of joint-strategic sponsorship with Iran.

Source: http://www.debka.com/article_print.php?aid=1304

[Armenian]

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

Russia flexes new muscle in Europe



Its resurgence means confronting the US and the EU on key issues, including Kosovo's independence.

By Robert Marquand|Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor

Belgrade, Serbia

From the Baltics to the Balkans, Russia's resurgence is beginning to tie Europe in knots; creating tensions among nations and fears of ethnic instability and border disputes, and divisions between the US and its continental partners. In nearly every key relationship Russia has with Europe, the Kremlin under Vladimir Putin – who this week hinted he may stay in power – has pushed its way back to a central place at the decisionmaking table on Kosovo, Iran, energy, military alliances, and nuclear proliferation. And as a key supplier of natural gas to Europe, it's managed to do so at very little economic risk to itself, say diplomats and experts in Europe. Take the highly emotional question of the territory of Kosovo here in Serbia.

A mere year ago it seemed Kosovo would soon be independent. After seven years of a UN mission and billions of dollars from Europe to stabilize the region, the script went like this: Belgrade would deliver the Kosovar Albanians. Moscow wouldn't interfere with Kosovo independence, allowing the Balkan crisis to be brought to a close. Finnish diplomat Martti Ahtisaari might even win the Nobel Prize for a grand plan to grant sovereignty to Kosovo's majority Albanian population with a guarantee of minority rights for Serbs. But Russia has departed from the script, strongly backing Belgrade's efforts to keep Kosovo ahead of a crucial Dec. 10 deadline for independence. It's a move Serbs welcome.

"We thought Kosovo was lost," says Ljubica Gojgic, a foreign-affairs specialist at B92 TV in Belgrade. "But now we feel very differently. We feel we have a protector or an advocate in Moscow that will help represent our views in a just manner."

US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice last week emphasized that the current negotiations were not open-ended, and underscored Kosovo's independence as the only workable option in US eyes. But no Belgrade leaders will approve that by the Dec. 10 deadline, setting up a troubling course of events, experts say: Should the US and leading European nations recognize Kosovo outside the UN, Russia may back independence for three renegade enclaves in Georgia and Moldova, which could embolden Serbs in Bosnia to join with Serbia. The scenario is a "nightmare," says a European diplomat in Belgrade. "The new Russian track of assertiveness, arm-twisting, and influence-grabbing has changed the story," says Jacques Rupnik, a European expert at Sciences Po in Paris. "The EU was counting on Russia to compromise on Kosovo since Moscow had no reason to object. But they have objected, and for very little cost. Europe is divided on Russia and it will be on Kosovo."

How Russian resurgence affects EU

Russian maneuvering on Kosovo is just part of a new geopolitical game that Putin has opened in the past six to eight months in the European neighborhood – one seeking to restore Russia's traditional sense of being a great nation, taking a tougher line on Russia's sphere of influence, and ending what many Russians felt was national humiliation during the 1990s, as Moscow struggled to adjust to post-Soviet realities.

Many experts in Europe have been slow to acknowledge Russia's resurgence – and its divisive effects on Europe's attempts to achieve a common foreign policy. But that is changing, largely due to recent Russian political, economic, and security moves, including opposition to the proposed US missile shield, Russia's cyber attack on Estonia, Gazprom's control of gas to Europe, spy scandal disputes with Britain, Russian bomber violations of Norwegian airspace, Moscow's reticence to sanction Iran on uranium enrichment, and Russia's exploding of the largest-ever nonnuclear bomb last month.

"Europe's strategic partnership with Russia isn't working properly," says Thomas Gomart, an expert with the Paris-based IFRI. "It is clear more and more that Russia is the biggest issue for Europe in the next decade. Moscow is the new player in setting up a multipolar world weighing against the US. What we haven't answered is whether Russia is a partner or a threat." American diplomats assert categorically that Moscow knows the proposed missile shield, which would be hosted in part by Poland and the Czech Republic, is actually designed for Iranian missile capability. But they say Putin continues to treat it as a threat to Russian security.

European nations and the NATO alliance have not yet set limits on what enlargement of the European Union means – but Russia has been stiffly fighting EU and NATO enlargement in Ukraine, Belarus, and the Caucasus. Moscow created jitters last winter with warnings about withholding crucial gas deliveries that make up 26 percent of Europe's total supply. But Monday, as Putin acknowledged he could stay in power – Russia also issued a statement through Gazprom that Europe will not have to worry about gas shipments since it will develop the Shtokman fields 600 miles offshore in the Barents Sea.

To be sure, experts say, Russia has been struggling itself over the past decade – after a half-century of being at the center of the cold war. Putin took over a Russia with a weak government, and has been steadily recentralizing authority in the Kremlin. But holding the world's largest natural gas reserves and substantial oil reserves in a hot energy market, Russia is quickly developing cash assets. Putin's aim is to end Russia's humiliation and restore its sense of greatness, experts say. A key part of that is countering US dominance.

"Putin took over as very pro-West, but soured over all the criticisms of his policies," says Pierre Lorrain, a French writer in Paris and longtime Russian expert. "For him, Russia is a great power, and it will be back as one of the biggest powers. Putin wants to be the man that makes that turnaround. He knows the Russian people think the rest of the world wanted Russia weak. So it is important for him not to give up any more ... of Russia's power."

Until 2005, the Kremlin made clear distinctions between NATO, which it disfavored, and EU enlargement, which it saw as a natural economic progression. But in recent years, as the EU swelled to 27 countries, Putin and Moscow have been less accommodating.

"It is difficult for Russia to cope with new developments of the former satellites," says Laure Delcour of IRIS in Paris. "EU and NATO enlargement created tremendous changes in 10 to 15 years. Russia can't cope with these changes yet. It takes a lot of time to digest enlargement. For Russia, NATO is a problem of interference in the near abroad."

A strategy of deepening divisions

Inside the EU itself, divisions over Russia are especially stark. Former Soviet satellite states like Poland are far more concerned than EU members like Germany and France – though that may be changing somewhat as well. French president Nicolas Sarkozy, who meets Putin Oct. 9, recently termed his handling of Kosovo a form of "brutality." The Germans in particular have been divided over the meaning of a resurgent Russia – with figures like former foreign minister Gerhard Schröder actively pursuing a pro-Russia policy that would center Berlin between Moscow and Washington. German Chancellor Angela Merkel, on the other hand, has taken a tough line with Russia's newly assertive behavior.

Last February in Munich, Putin disparaged the 1988 Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces treaty and the use of NATO forces outside UN mandates, as well as "unilateral illegal actions" – a reference to the Iraq war. It was a clear call for a multipolar world, which US Defense Secretary Robert Gates later parried by saying, "As an old cold warrior, one of yesterday's speeches almost filled me with nostalgia for a less complex time. Almost." Yet one senior German official told the Monitor, "We publicly came out with Gates, but about half my colleagues in the building agreed with Putin." Some diplomats say that Russia is reviving an old strategy of sowing division to boost its influence.

"I have to hand it to Russia, they have the greatest diplomats in the world," says a senior US diplomat. "I think they enjoy stirring the pot, sitting back, and watching everyone struggle over these European questions." A senior European diplomat intimately involved with Kosovo admits that "Russia's hardened position on Kosovo is a wonderful way for Putin to split the EU and to create difficulties for the US."

Mr. Lorrain says he believes that despite the remonstrations, Putin is committed in the long run to democracy, Russian style. "People like Putin know NATO is not a threat. There's no causus belli, nothing between the EU and Russia that could lead to war. But governments need to think of worst-case scenarios."

Source: http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/1004/p01s01-woeu.htm

[Armenian]

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

With the weakening of the US Dollar worldwide the following news reports from Iran today are very significant indeed. If Tehran starts a concerted effort of moving away from using US currency (a strategic concept that has been talked about by various major powers looking to undermine US power) it is conceivable that Russia, China and various other nations may follow suit eventually. Needless to say such a move can potentially have a devastating impact on an already vulnerable US economy. As a result, I believe that US policy makers will attempt everything in their power to foil such an attempt before it fully takes shape. Consequently, this may result in drastic reverses in Washington DC's foreign policy formulations or may simply result in major military confrontation that will seek to destroy the regime that first attempts to undermine the All Mighty Dollar.

Armenian

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

Iran: Almost Dollar-Free



Summary

Iran is trumpeting its success at shifting away from the use of dollars in its oil trade. Such a shift is not easy, and generates little but costs.

Analysis

Mohammad-Ali Khatibi, an executive in Iran's National Iranian Oil Co., said Oct. 2 that after two years of effort, Iran uses the U.S. dollar in only 15 percent of its oil transactions, with 20 percent being carried out in Japanese yen and 65 percent in euros. Insisting upon non-dollar payment really only creates rhetorical ammunition. So long as the global system -- and the energy industry in particular -- is dollar-denominated, any non-dollar payments for oil subtract the exchange rate costs from the payments. Put simply, Iran's insistence on anything but dollars translates into a small transaction fee loss on every oil sale.

So while Iran can stand proud and bite its thumb at Washington, proud that it has played a small role in reducing demand for the dollar and thus making the currency slightly weaker, the process racks up a hardly inconsequential cost. In the first quarter of 2007, a 1 percent transaction cost would have cost Iran $500 million, a significant sum for a country wracked by inflation and dropping living standards. Once the payments are done, keeping the proceeds in non-dollar currencies could make more sense. For the past few years the U.S. dollar has been weakening, so the relative value of non-dollar holdings has gradually increased. Such logic is more obvious for euros, where gains have been impressive, than for the yen, whose real appreciation has been only marginal.

But the dollar's weakness does not work against U.S. economic strength, and going dollar-free is hardly risk-free. First, a weak dollar is allowing U.S. firms to surge exports, generating strong growth at a time when a more traditional element of economic growth -- the housing market -- seems to be stumbling. Iran's diversification does push the dollar down a touch, thus doing the United States a small favor -- which could be why the Bush administration is ignoring Iran's currency rhetoric. Moreover, other and larger forces are at work in weakening the U.S. dollar. Foreign governments, including the United Arab Emirates and Russia, continue to shift increasing proportions of their currency reserves away from the dollar. When advisers to the Chinese government suggested in August that Beijing could threaten to sell off chunks of its U.S. assets as a "bargaining chip," analysts and economists jumped on it as a possible explanation for the dollar's subsequent decline.

Currencies rise and fall on a mix of factors, and one of the biggest factors leading to the dollar's fall is likely petering out. When the Europeans launched the euro in 1998, central banks the world over were not sure that it would last, so they took nearly all of their francs, lira and deutschemarks and traded them in for greenbacks. The result was a surge in the U.S. dollar that peaked in 2000-2001. Since then, central banks -- now confident that the euro is here to stay -- started switching back. Six years later a new balance is being achieved, and that is likely to put a floor under the dollar sometime in 2008.

Source: http://www.stratfor.com/products/pre...ected=Analyses

Europe's Beef With The Dollar

When it was first put into circulation, the Euro exchange value was 1.1 against the US dollar. Today, one Euro is equivalent to $1.41 while some American financial sources speculate that it may reach as high as $1.45 or even $1.50. Ultimately, a depreciating dollar has put European exports at in a very uncompetitive position as they are too expensive vis-à-vis American products. Among the first to reap the benefits is Boeing which has for long been at a nose to nose battle with Europe's Airbus in international markets. Apparently, a weak dollar is helping finance the US deficit and offering American industries and exports a major boost.

The weak dollar and the subprime mortgage crisis in the US have painfully hurt American exports and left their marks on major European banks such as UBS and Credit Suisse as a result of their investments in the American mortgage market. The weak dollar makes American industries and exports more attractive in international markets whereas Europe may face a significant economic slowdown if the weak dollar impacts its exports. While this scenario is highly probable, it is not necessarily destined. Let us not forget that when the German Mark peaked, German exports were barely influenced. Another encouraging factor for the EU is that as Europe's oil purchases are denominated in dollars, the cost is lower in Euro, even as oil reaches currently peaks at around $80 per barrel or even more. Oil producing nations, on the other hand, have a different story. While oil has surged to $80 or more per barrel, enormously inflating their incomes, not all their purchases are in US dollars. Some of these purchases are paid for in Euros, pounds sterling as well as in yens.

And while their oil revenues are at an all time-high, the real purchasing power of oil-producing countries is not based on the market price of oil, currently at around $80 per barrel, but rather, it is set at 10% to 12% lower as a result of the dollar's depreciation in front of the Euro and Yen. This does not mean that oil price is low. To the contrary, OPEC members are satisfied with this price and may be expecting even higher prices as a result of political turbulence in the Middle East and other oil-producing regions. It is worth mentioning that oil-producing countries such as Iran will find out that they are subject to punishment as a result of their political attitudes since their moneys and most of their trade was with Europe and Japan. Consequently, a depreciating dollar will drain their foreign reserves and their revenues, not to mention the impact of the restrictions imposed on international banks to prevent them from doing business with Iran.

A depreciating dollar is sometimes a tool of economic competition between the US on the one hand, and Europe and Japan on the other. Even if it does not affect European exports, a depreciating dollar will harm European tourism, a significant source of revenues for some European countries such as France. Last summer, for example, witnessed a remarkable drop in the number of visiting American tourists at the southern coasts of France and other tourism spots in Italy. Luckily for Europe, however, tourists arriving from Russia and surrounding oil-producing countries replaced American tourists and covered what would have been huge losses for Europe's expensive and well-known hotels and resorts.

Cap D'Antibes, south of France, for example, witnessed flocks of Russians wishing to own property, purchasing the most beautiful villas in this town. As long as there are nouveau riches, Europe's tourism will not suffer even with the absence of American visitors. However, a rising cost of living in Europe and a depreciating dollar in the long term could make industries and tourism locations less attractive, threatening the European economy with the possibility of rising unemployment.

Source: http://english.daralhayat.com/opinio...f2b/story.html