The Rise of the Russian Empire: Russo-Armenian Relations

[skhara]

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

The threat to the US economy will be when China decides that they are strong enough to be the super power and sell off their dollar reserves.

[Armenian]

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

Are Iran, Russia, China behind dollar's free-fall?



Some see 'Currency Cold War' meant to bring U.S. to its knees

October 2, 2007 WorldNetDaily.com

WASHINGTON – The hottest selling book in China right now is called "Currency Wars," which makes the case that the U.S. Federal Reserve is a puppet of the Rothschilds banking dynasty and it has persuaded some top officials Beijing should resist America's demands to appreciate its own undervalued currency, the yuan. This might not be news of concern to most Americans if the U.S. dollar were not in precipitous free-fall, having reached record lows against the euro yesterday. What would it mean if China ever threw its economic weight around by dumping dollars in a major way?

Suffice it to say it is referred to in some quarters as China's financial "nuclear option," because it would be the economic equivalent of detonating a thermonuclear weapon in the world's financial markets. But the American dollar's fate is hardly in the hands of the Chinese alone. Other foreign parties suspected of participating in a new "Currency Cold War" are Iran, Russia and Venezuela. Diane Francis, a financial reporter for the National Post in Canada, says it plainly and boldly: "There is a Currency Cold War being waged by Russia, Iran and various allies such as Venezuela."

The grand strategy being engineered by Vladimir Putin, she writes, is to force the use of euros as the international monetary standard as a transition to the Russian ruble.

"This is simply a monetary version of the old Cold War, minus the missiles," she writes.

Experts don't see any short-term reprieve for the falling value of the dollar. Kathy Lien, chief currency strategist with DailyFX.com in the US, told Bloomberg she expects the American dollar to slide even further, forcing more lending rates cuts in the U.S. to stave off recession.

"It seems like every single passing day we have a new record low in the dollar, and a new record high in the euro, and it's driven by the fact that U.S. data is continuing to deteriorate," she said. If other nations do not follow the U.S. in cutting rates, the slide in the value of the dollar would most likely continue. If the dollar trend continues spiraling downward, the risk is that nations like China – or Japan or Saudi Arabia – which have been buying U.S. Treasury bonds and thereby funding America's deficit, would stop that practice.

That would be the nuclear option. China, with $1.3 trillion in foreign exchange reserves as a result of the massive and growing $260 billion U.S. trade deficit, has taken huge losses with the falling dollar, given that some 80 percent of China's $1.3 trillion in foreign reserves is held in U.S. dollar assets, largely in U.S. treasury securities. Meanwhile, Song Hongbing, the author of China's runaway bestseller, "The Currency Wars," says he's pleasantly surprised at the 200,000 copies his book has sold. He is probably not eager to see the dollar punished as he lives in Washington, D.C.

"I never imagined it could be so hot and that top leaders would be reading it," he says during a book tour in Shanghai. "People in China are nervous about what's going on in financial markets, but they don't know how to handle the real dangers. This book gives them some ideas."

Among the research findings that shocked him most was that the Fed is a privately owned and run bank.

"I just never imagined a central bank could be a private body."

Some, meanwhile, are standing on the sidelines cheering the currency wars – seeing them as a way of reducing the power and influence of the "imperialistic" U.S. Rohini Hensman, who describes himself as "independent scholar, writer and activist based in India and Sri Lanka," says it's about time the U.S. got its comeuppance.

"As the bombs started falling on Iraq in 2003, I wrote and circulated an appeal entitled 'Boycott the Dollar to Stop the War!,' arguing that although the military strength of the U.S. was enormous, its economy was in a mess; with a massive gross national debt, the only reason it could finance its foreign wars and occupations was because of the inflow of over a billion dollars a day from countries accumulating foreign exchange reserves in dollars because it was the world's sole reserve currency. The denomination of the oil trade in dollars made it additionally desirable.

With the advent of the euro, however, there was the possibility of an alternative world currency; therefore individuals, institutions and countries opposed to the war on Iraq should refuse to accumulate dollars or use them outside the U.S., because these were activities that helped to finance U.S.-Israeli aggression against Palestinians, Iraqis and Afghanis. After the World Social Forum meeting in 2004, the Boycott Bush Campaign adopted the dollar boycott as part of its strategy."

In early trading today, the dollar advanced slightly, prompting gold prices back from 28-year highs set yesterday. The dollar's value against a basket of six major currencies rose slightly to 77.950 from a lifetime low of 77.657 a day earlier. The dollar traded at $1.4223 per euro, stronger than a record low on Monday of $1.4283. WND has reported the Federal Reserve is in a dilemma.

The stock market has demanded rate cuts, wanting to return to the free credit policies of the Federal Reserve that fueled the liquidity bubble that has boosted home prices and pumped the Dow Jones Industrial Average since 9/11. Yet, the Fed giving in to stock market demands and lowering rates threatens an international dollar sell-off that could lead to a dollar collapse. Former Fed Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan also sparked controversy by suggesting in his recently published book, "The Age of Turbulence," the euro is rivaling the dollar as the international foreign exchange reserve currency of choice.

The Wall Street Journal recently quoted a rule of thumb advanced by Harvard University economist Kenneth Rogoff, a former chief economist for the International Monetary Fund. According to Rogoff’s "back-of-the-envelope" calculation, a 20 percent drop in the dollar's exchange value reduces Americans' income by 3 percent, adjusted by inflation.

Source: http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=57936

[Armenian]

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

An English love letter to Russia written in Ankara...

Armenian

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

Vladimir Putin rescued Russia from disaster: so let’s just leave him be



Our correspondent defends the Russian President and his legacy

Yet again President Putin’s fingers are being rapped: he has apparently been trying to hang on to power. Russia’s Constitution was written more or less to Western order, back in the days when free markets and democracy were supposed to reign. Models were consulted. The French one has a president with powers such that the prime minister is a glorified office-boy; but, in Russia, as in the American model, presidents are not supposed to run for office more than twice in case it goes to their heads.

Vladimir Putin may retire to run Gazprom but instead, quite astutely, he is finding a way to hang on to power. He can put himself forward as deputy for the reigning party, then become prime minister, and push forward, as nominal president, a man in his mid-sixties whom he can control. Such devices are not at all without precedent in Russia. Moving an older or even an aged man, without ambition, into a high office so that he can be controlled from behind has long origins, beyond even communist times. If Vladimir Putin is finding a way to hang on to power, then he is doing so within the tradition. And the very first thing to be said is that he has been a very successful leader of the country.

Not so long ago, Russia was being written off. Wise persons shook their heads. Moscow was like Berlin in the latter days of the Weimar Republic – Cabaret, complete with rampaging inflation, old women selling their husbands’ medals in the underpasses of the ring roads, prostitutes all over the place (every businessman had his story), a collapsing birthrate, gangster-capitalism raking it in and making whoopee in hotels in Monte Carlo. There was even a school of thought to the effect that the whole of Eurasia was turning into a Latin America: a Slavonic culture disintegrating as the overall Spanish culture of Latin America had done, into oil-rich turbulent Venezuelas on the one side, and weird, atmosphere-poor Bolivias on the other, while wars went ahead between assorted Hondurases and Nicaraguas.

Under Putin, Russia has not turned into Latin America. Quite the contrary. Reality on the ground in Russia nowadays is different, and this is not just to do with the recent rise in oil prices. If you go to the provincial towns east and south east of Moscow – Vladimir, say, or Saratov – you can see a successful change going ahead, as people set up businesses such as furniture factories to make up for that lack of consumer goods that marked the old Soviet Union. The university in Saratov has state-of-the-art computers; even agriculture is said to be improving. The horrors of Chechnya are receding into the past and the International Herald Tribune, not a lover of Putin, recently carried an article about the return of order there: the planes fly back and forth and Grozny is being restored after two decades of vicious nonsense including that horrible massacre of schoolchildren three years ago.

Of all things, tourism is being encouraged, and the Chechen insurgency seems to be a horror story of the past. There are other encouraging signs. In old Russia, the Tatars were a very important element, not backward Muslims as was sometimes casually supposed: they were good traders, and their habit of sobriety made them stand out. Now, Tatars have been adding their creative element (two instances that will have British resonance: both Nureyev and Barishnikov are Tatar names, Nur from “light” and Barish from “peace”). The Russians are even marketing an aircraft that will challenge Boeing and Airbus. So if Putin thinks that he has done well by his country he is not wrong, and masses of ordinary Russians agree. Now, Russia is recovering, and is back on the world’s stage. Why should a successful president be held back by some constitutional formality?

There is no real reason for constitutions to be set in tablets of stone. Referendums were staged elsewhere in the old Soviet continent for successful and popular presidents to stay in office, and it is maybe a measure of Putin’s lack of self-confidence that he shrinks from that. Does he really have to fear the criticism of Europeans, let alone Americans, who now seem to be settling into their own pattern of dynastic politics? Of course his regime is not pure, in the approved Scandinavian manner. It has had to deal with horrible problems of terrorism, and no government can ever be entirely without sin in conditions of that sort.

But Putin has highlighted an aspect of Russia that anyone in London should recognise. Russia, like Britain, is a country with a capacity for tissue regeneration. In the Seventies, you would have written Britain off. And then, lo and behold, in the Eighties she struck back – many, many things wrong, of course, but back just the same. It is an odd fact that English literature translates best into Russian, and vice versa. Two countries on the European edge, with the same diagonal approach, and very interested in each other. We should not be criticising Putin: rather, encouraging him to stage that referendum.

Norman Stone, former Professor of Modern History at Oxford, is now head of the international relations department at Bilkent University in Ankara

Source: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/com...cle2582598.ece

[TomServo]

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

Armenian, you know that Norman Stone, the guy who wrote that article, denies the AG?

[Armenian]

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

Armenian, you know that Norman Stone, the guy who wrote that article, denies the AG?

Why am I not surprised? After all the person in question does work in Turkey.

Besides, politically and economically it makes perfect sense for Western nations to side with the Turkish state regarding the Armenian issue. As a tiny impoverish landlocked nation with no viable natural resources - what do we Armenians expect to bring to the geopolitical table? Only headaches. As a nation that does not want to forget the historic crime perpetrated against it by a major geopolitical player one that also happens to be a crucial ally for the Zionist State and a NATO member - what does Armenia expect to bring to the geopolitical table? Only headaches. As a nation that is forced to side with Russia and Iran on political matters - what does Armenia expect to bring to the geopolitical table? Only headaches.

The aforementioned is the view regarding Armenia from a Western perspective. The Armenian Genocide, as well as all other issues that we have, is a matter that only concerns us. Why do we always expect others to take up our cause. You think we Armenians can emulate what the Jooish elite have been able to establish in the Western world? That is an impossibility. If a Western entity decides to support us in our cause it will do so only for its interests and nothing else. The only time Westerners will seem to side with Armenia is when they get seriously worried about Turkey entering the EU. And even then their support for the Armenian Republic will be superficial.

In short, I really don't give a rat's ass about who supports the Armenian Genocide and who does not. I care about the role the Armenian Republic plays geopolitically in the Caucasus. When one day the Turkish state falls apart due to its numerous internal and external problems and the Armenian Republic finds itself in a position to take advantage of the geopolitical situation - watch then all the Western powers kissing Armenian ass.

In politics there is no such thing as justice, morals, religion, rights, freedom, democracy, etc.

Political policy is in essence rooted in the interests of the elite that run the global economy.

[Armenian]

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

I recently happened to come by a new book that is definitely worth reading. The seemly counterproductive and destructive policies of the Western world, specifically that of the United States, will only make better sense once those policies are placed within a proper political perspective. Many around the world today are utterly perplexed that the US government is pursing policies that are in essence detrimental to the wellbeing of the United States without taking into serious consideration the absolute clout that certain special interest groups have within the halls of power. Books such as the following will help the reader see American politics under a clearer light for it will help the reader see the driving mechanisms behind the foreign policy making apparatus' of Washington DC.

Armenian

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

The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy



The two authors are prominent political scientists with impeccable credentials, hailing from Harvard's John F. Kennedy School of Government and the University of Chicago. Among other issues they try to prove that a small group of mostly xxxish intellectuals and government members succeeded, to push the U.S. into a disastrous war because they cared more about the security of Israel than the security of their homeland. Since their conclusions about Israel and its negative influence on American foreign policy are in some areas too academic and will awaken much anxiety, resentment and fury in certain quarters, Walt and Mearsheimer have a point.

The book is based on their article, "The Israel Lobby," and was originally published in the London Review of Books in March 2006, it was one of the most controversial articles in recent memory and provoked both howls of outrage and cheers of gratitude for challenging what had been a taboo issue in America: the impact of the Israel lobby on U.S. foreign policy. Their argument is not exactly new. It is well known in Washington that a "kosher nostra," consisting of the usual suspects like Paul Wolfowitz, Donald Rumsfeld, Douglas Feith, defense expert Richard Perle (who just loves his nickname `Prince of Darkness'), and perhaps two dozens of other neocons, have been twisting facts to overthrow Saddam Hussein since years, reaching back to the Reagan administration.

The basic argument is that the extraordinarily high degree of economic, military and diplomatic support given to Israel by the United States cannot be explained or justified by the notion that Israel functions as a strategic asset to the U.S., or that Israel as the "only democracy" amidst a sea of authoritarian neighbors is deserving the special favors, particularly of gigantic military aid, for its "shared interests and values". In fact, the authors claim, Israel is more a liability than an asset.

There is no question that during the Cold War, there was logic behind the strategic-value argument. In a clever scheme, the Soviets had significantly increased their sea power in the Mediterranean during the Arab-Israeli conflict - the Six Day War in June 1967 - to show their support for the Arab states. During that crisis the Soviet Mediterranean "Eskadra" numbered up to about seventy units, some of which were in Port Said and Alexandria to prevent Israeli attacks. In my opinion (shared by a number of security professionals at the time), the entire war had been provoked by the Soviets in the first place to gain a strategic advantage over the West and to demonstrate on a grand scale their willingness and capability to influence major events in the area. After that war the "Eskadra" had rapidly expanded and in the late 1970s comprised of more than ninety ships, including over a dozen destroyers and nearly two dozen subs - outnumbering NATO's backbone, the American 6th fleet.

However, the Soviet menace has disappeared and the enemy which the U.S. supposedly needs Israel's help to combat, is Islamic terrorism. But the U.S. favor shown to Israel at the expense of the Palestinians only makes us more not less vulnerable to terrorism. So if neither "shared values" nor "strategic assets" can explain the overwhelming U.S. support of Israel, what else is there? The power of the Israel lobby has brought about a situation in which it is impossible for elected officials to question support for Israel. This has led the U.S. to make critical mistakes. The authors argue that the U.S. would not have attacked Iraq, were it not for the influence of the Israel lobby.

What is perhaps most significant and remarkable about this book is that it got published. Could it be that there is still hope for reasonable, open debate about the right courses of action in the Middle East? The authors have been and will continue to be vilified as anti-Semitic or worse. They are owed a debt of gratitude for having the courage to stand up and to refuse to be silenced.

"Now that the cold war is over, Israel has become a strategic liability for the United States. Yet no aspiring politician is going to say so in public or even raise the possibility, because the pro-Israel lobby is so powerful." write Mearsheimer and Walt. Then they go on to credit the lobby with preventing talks with Syria and with moderates in Iran, and inhibiting the United States from denouncing Israel's 2006 war in Lebanon.

"The Israel Lobby" is a brand new welcome addition to the ever increasing controversies of biased U.S. foreign policies. My only disappointment with this book is that the authors haven't interviewed the people who are being lobbied or those doing the lobbying. Although I wouldn't question the meticulous research that has been presented, the fact that there is a missing piece suggests that you should read this book with a "grano salis".

Source: http://www.amazon.de/Israel-Lobby-U-...ews/0374177724

[skhara]

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

Armenian,

Do you remember approximately when you posted that article about a meeting of Israeli and Russian jet in Eastern Med?

[Armenian]

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

Armenian,

Do you remember approximately when you posted that article about a meeting of Israeli and Russian jet in Eastern Med?

Do you mean this one?

Analysis: Russia uses Syrian port to demonstrate its power in the Med


(SU-33 Landing on the Deck of Admiral Kuznetsov)

THE JERUSALEM POST Aug. 31, 2007

Russia is expanding its military presence in Syria, developing an advanced naval port at Tartus and providing Syria with sophisticated missile technology. The story of Russia's return to Tartus, Syria's second most important port after Latakia, broke a year ago. It is Moscow's only foreign naval outpost situated outside the former Soviet Union. In June 2006 Russian media reported that Moscow had begun dredging at Tartus with a possible eye to turning what was largely a logistical base into a full-fledged station for its Black Sea Fleet, soon to be redeployed from the Ukrainian port of Sevastopol. But Tartus is much more than just a new home for the fleet; it allows projection of Russian power into the entire eastern Mediterranean, and, by extension, a flexing of military might before Israel and the West.

Russian sources said the country's military planned to form a squadron to operate in the Mediterranean within three years, built around the Moskva missile cruiser. In addition, several respected Russian newspapers have reported that Moscow planned to deploy an S-300PMU-2 Favorit air-defense system to protect the base, with the system being operated by Russian servicemen rather than by Syrian forces. According to these reports, the system would provide air defense protection for a large part of Syria. Moscow and Damascus have also reached an agreement to modernize Syria's anti-aircraft network by upgrading medium-range S-125 missile complexes that were sold to Syria in the 1980s. Another instance of secret activity at the port came on March 9, 2005, when yet another Russian Black Sea Fleet vessel, the Azov, supposedly carrying machinery for rebuilding the moorage at the Tartus technical base and replacements for obsolete items in the base's storage, left for Syria. When it arrived at the port, several suspicious meetings between local authorities and Russian Navy officers took place, Russian media reported.

Less than two months later, Syria test fired new Scud missiles. The Syrians launched one Scud B missile with a range of 300 kilometers, and two Scud D missiles with a range of 700 kilometers. It is tempting to suggest that technologies for these projectiles were among the "equipment" brought on board the Azov. The Russians have not stopped at moving missiles in their attempt to make an impression in the region. On one occasion they sent fighter planes into Israeli airspace.

In January 1996, the Russian Navy aircraft carrier Admiral Kuznetsov came very close to Israeli territorial waters. On January 27, it launched several advanced Su-33 fighters, the naval version of the Su-27. The jets ventured into Israeli air space near Haifa. IAF planes were scrambled to intercept, but a skirmish was avoided. The incident was kept secret for six years and was only revealed in 2002 in an article in the Israel Air Force magazine. According to the report, Russian planes entered Israel's airspace at least twice and several F-16 scrambled for an intercept mission after an intrusion alert was received.

Source: http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satelli...cle%2FShowFull

[skhara]

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

Yes, that's the one.

Thanks

[Armenian]

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

China’s regional relationships



In addition to China's good-neighbor policy, Beijing has carried out a policy of befriending regional powers for the last 20 years. There are four regional powers in particular that directly affect China--Russia, India, Japan, and Australia. Both for safeguarding Asia-Pacific stability and expanding common economic prosperity, it's imperative that all of these powers work together and of the utmost importance that China develops a mutually respectful and beneficial relationship with each.

Recently, some of these states have forged coalitions, usually with a regional outsider such as the United States. For example, under Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, Japan championed alliances with countries that shared its democratic values, establishing a quasi-military alliance with Australia in hopes of safeguarding regional peace. As for India, it struck a nuclear agreement with Washington and joined Japan and Australia (along with the United States) in staging a joint naval exercise in the Indian Ocean, leaving some international observers to wonder whether these actions had something to do with China's emergence.

Such exercises could make China feel uncomfortable, but as long as Beijing aspires to a peaceful rise, there's no reason for it to worry. There are good reasons for China to defend its sovereignty and integrity, and these are sound explanations for building its defense capabilities. But short of defending its own territory, China has no territorial ambitions. Its next primary objective is to develop its economy in a sustainable way.

Overall, China's relationship with each of these regional powers is improving. With Yasuo Fukuda assuming power in Japan, it seems as though Toyko will implement a more respectful foreign policy that will help improve relations with its East Asian neighbors. At the very least, Japan can be expected to employ a more stable and constructive external policy on issues that are sensitive to China and the two Koreas. Obviously, China and Japan share a rich, but exceedingly complex, relationship. To truly move forward in a constructive manner, both need to be courageous in dealing with the past and more importantly, the future. Both countries share blame for their cool relationship, so they each must look at themselves self-critically during future interactions.

Under John Howard's decade-long tenure as Australian prime minister, Beijing and Australia have established a robust economic and trade bond, and China appreciates Australian Foreign Minister Alexander Downer's view that the United States should not assume that Canberra must side with it on the Taiwan issue automatically. Currently, polls indicate that Kevin Rudd will win the national election in two months and become Australia's next prime minister. If he does win, it's expected that China and Australia's relationship will continue to grow, given Rudd's good command of Chinese affairs.

In the post-Cold War era, Russia no longer reaches out globally--neither militarily nor economically. Largely, Moscow has been restrained in Eurasia and pressed on NATO expansion, missile defense, and regional energy issues by the United States. But as Russia's global standing has decreased, Russian-Chinese ties have grown stronger. Beijing has settled its border dispute with Moscow, and China has secured some access to Russia's military technology and energy resources. Generally, Beijing and Moscow are rapidly lessening their mutual suspicion.

And finally, there has been steady improvement in Sino-Indian relations. Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh will visit China this fall, and he has promised that "the India-U.S. tie shall not affect India-China relations." He's right, of course. New Dehli only benefits from China's rise, as it garners India more and more attention. So if China continues to prosper, in this particular strategic angle, India will also prosper. No matter what happens in the future, however, Beijing's policy to befriend major regional powers will remain unchanged. The ongoing changes in regional political dynamism simply offers China an improved opportunity to do so.

Source: http://www.thebulletin.org/columns/d.../20071005.html