The Rise of the Russian Empire: Russo-Armenian Relations

[Lernakan]

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

Ara Abramyan: Putin’s premiership is in interests of Russia, and Robert Kocharyan will decide on his own what to do next



Russian President Vladimir Putin is very friendly towards Armenians and Armenia in general, Chair of the World Armenian Congress, Chair of the Russian Union of Armenians Ara Abramyan said at a news conference today. A REGNUM correspondent quotes him as saying that Armenian President Robert Kocharyan is the only president with whom Putin meets so often. Speaking on a possibility of appointing Vladimir Putin as Russia’s prime minister and repeating the scenario in Armenia, the chair of the Russian Union of Armenians noted that Putin’s premiership is in the interests of Russia. “As for Robert Kocharyan, he must make up his own mind where to be,” Ara Abramyan noted adding that the union and the congress have not made up their minds whom to support at the 2008 presidential election in Armenia, because election processes have not started in Armenia and no candidates are announced.

Speaking on relations towards Armenians in Russia in general, Ara Abramyan said that this year the number of ethnic crimes in Russia comparing to last year reduced by 2.5 times. The Russian Union of Armenians having 600 its offices throughout Russia has played its role in it as well. Heads of the offices are in permanent contact with regional, municipal authorities and law enforcement bodies.

http://regnum.ru/english/armenia/899402.html

[Armenian]

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

Energy Relations To Dominate Ahmadinejad's Armenia Visit



October 22, 2007 (RFE/RL) -- Iranian President Mahmud Ahmadinejad arrives in Armenia today for a two-day visit. On the agenda is a natural-gas pipeline between the two countries and other energy issues. Federico Bordonaro, a senior analyst with the Rome-based Power and Interest News Report, spoke to RFE/RL about the geopolitical implications of the growing ties between Armenia and Iran.

RFE/RL: Given the problems between Armenia and Azerbaijan, which is predominantly Shi'ite like Iran, why is Iran so eager to forge good ties with Armenia?

Bordanaro: Contrary to the expectations of those who follow the theories of Samuel Huntington [the author of "The Clash of Civilizations"] we can see in this case that it is not really civilizations that drive alliances or strategic partnerships, but sheer geopolitical arrangements. Iran does not want a very strong Azerbaijan -- first of all, because Azerbaijan is pro-United States, and second, because the Azeri minority in Iran must be checked by the Tehran central government.

RFE/RL: Ahmadinejad's visit comes shortly after Russian President Vladimir Putin's trip to Tehran. Moscow also has its own interests in Armenia. Is a three-way partnership developing here?

Bordanaro: Russia finds in Armenia and Iran a kind of axis that projects Russian influence in the [Persian] Gulf. And of course, Russia has the same problem with Azerbaijan. The problem is that Azerbaijan is becoming too pro-NATO and pro-Western for Moscow.

RFE/RL: So this is part of the larger geopolitical struggle between Russia and the West for influence in the region?

Bordanaro: A Russian-Armenian-Iranian strategic partnership in terms of energy security, energy projects, and intelligence sharing is very profitable for Russia if Russia is to check the U.S. and NATO penetration in the South Caucasus. I think that the alignment that we are seeing today is dictated mainly by energy routes and by the fact that Russia and Iran find it interesting to put yet another irritant in the geo-strategy of the West. But I think it is more tactical and could be reversed.

RFE/RL: Why would it be reversed?

Bordanaro: Russia for the moment sees Iran as more of a cooperator than a competitor in Armenia. But I would say in the medium to long term, Iran is a competitor to Russia in the Caspian region. So I would not be surprised to see a reversal. I would not be surprised [if] Russia drops Iran once Russia, for example, has succeeded in negotiating something with the United States in Eastern Europe or the South Caucasus.

RFE/RL: Armenia's position here is also quite interesting since they have good relations with the United States and the West. Can you comment on that?

Bordanaro: Armenia is very interesting because it does not reason in terms of bloc against bloc. Armenia is also pro-Western, we should not forget this. There are many reasons. There are cultural reasons. There are successful Armenian diasporas in the United States and France, for example. Armenia is sympathetic to the European Union. But at the same time, Armenia is not scared by Russia and Iran in the same way that the West is. So it is a very complex and interesting situation.

RFE/RL: How does Armenia's geographic situation explain Yerevan's readiness to work so closely with Moscow and Tehran?

Bordanaro: It is a landlocked country. When you are landlocked, you need access to the sea via [another country]. This is a powerful drive in the foreign policies of landlocked countries. And Armenia has no strategic resources. It is very dependent upon Russia and Iran. This is why Armenia cannot afford to make as dramatic a pro-Western turn as Georgia or Azerbaijan.

Source: http://www.rferl.org/featuresarticle...EC13965CA.html

In related news:

Iranian president visits Armenia as economic and political ties grow

October 22, 2007 YEREVAN, Armenia: Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad arrived Monday on his first official visit to the Armenian capital as the two neighboring countries steadily strengthen economic and political ties. During the two-day visit, Ahmadinejad was to meet with Armenian President Robert Kocharian, address parliament and speak with professors and students at Armenian State University.

The Iranian leader also was to step into the controversy over the World War I-era killing of Armenians by Ottoman Turks by laying a wreath Tuesday at the memorial complex commemorating the victims. Scholars view the killing of 1.5 million Armenians, who are Christians, as the first genocide of the 20th century. But an attempt in the United States to recognize the killings as genocide has angered Turkey, which says the toll has been inflated and that those killed were victims of civil war and unrest.

Ahmadinejad has caused outrage by suggesting that the Holocaust is a "myth" invented by xxxs. An estimated 6 million xxxs were killed in what most consider to be the worst genocide of the 20th century. Kocharian was Ahmadinejad's guest last year in Tehran, and in March the two presidents formally opened the first Armenian section of a natural gas pipeline between the two countries. The ceremony was held near the Armenian town of Meghri, just over the border from Iran. During Ahmadinejad's visit to Yerevan, he and Kocharian were expected to discuss plans to expand energy and transportation cooperation further.

The two sides may sign an agreement for the construction of an oil pipeline from Iran to Armenia, an Armenian official said on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak publicly. Russian companies have expressed interest in building an oil refinery in Armenia. Iran and Armenia also intend to build two hydro-electric plants on the Araks River, which forms the border between the two countries. Earlier this month, Iran opened its borders to Armenian trucks transporting goods to Iranian ports on the Caspian Sea, a more direct route for goods destined to Central Asia or southern Russia than the alternative route through Georgia.

Iran and Armenia also plan to build a railroad linking the two countries, and the details should be hammered out by the end of the year, Deputy Transportation Minister Grant Beglarian said. The railroad link would give landlocked Armenia an outlet to the Persian Gulf. Armenia has looked to Iran as it struggles to overcome the economic difficulties posed by the closing of its borders with Turkey and Azerbaijan. The borders were closed in the wake of the conflict over Nagorno-Karabakh, a region of Azerbaijan occupied by Armenian and ethnic Armenian Karabakhi forces.

Source: http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/...menia-Iran.php

Ahmadinejad on Genocide: any nation should remember its history it and face the future

“Iran’s stand on the events of early 20th century in the Ottoman Empire bases on two principles,” Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said at a meeting with students and teaching staff of Yerevan State University. “The first principle is that each nation should remember its history but face the future and this must not lead to repetition of the past. Second, Iran will always be by Armenia’s side,” he said. Mr Ahmadinejad added that every year the Armenian community in Iran commemorates the events. He said Iran condemns infringement of human rights but did not use the term ‘genocide’.

Source: http://www.panarmenian.net/news/eng/?nid=23802

[Armenian]

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

Caspian Summit: Putin Puts Forward A War-Avoidance Plan



Putin has grasped the fact that what the Cheney Crowd is threatening is World War

The visit to Tehran on Oct. 16, by Russian President Vladimir Putin was officially billed as his participation in the second summit of the Caspian Sea littoral nations, convoked to deal with legal and other aspects of resource-sharing in the oil-rich waters. Although that summit did take place as scheduled, and important decisions were reached by the leaders of Turkmenistan, Kazakhstan, Russia, and Iran, the main thrust of Putin's visit was another: The Russian President's trip--the first of a Russian head of state since the 1943 Tehran conference of war-time powers--was geared to register his government's commitment to prevent a new war in the region, at all costs. That new war is the one on the strategic agenda of U.S. Vice President xxxx Cheney, against Iran.

Putin's participation in the summit, especially, his extensive personal meetings with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, constituted a spectacular gesture manifesting Russian support for war-avoidance factions in the Iranian government, in their showdown with Cheney's neocon war party. As one Iranian political source put it, Putin's visit was tantamount to saying to Washington: If you want to start a war against Iran, then you have to reckon with me, and that means, with Russia, a nuclear superpower. Perhaps not coincidentally, Putin right after his return to Moscow, stated in a worldwide webcast press interview, that his nation was developing new nuclear capabilities. His Iran visit was, as one Arab diplomat told me, a message to the warmongers in Washington, that Russia is still (or again) a superpower, and is treating the Iran dossier as a test for its status as a great power.

The Caspian Sea summit was, in and of itself, productive. Although the legal status governing the sharing of the sea's resources, was not solved, the points agreed upon in the final document of the summit constitute a great step forward in cooperation among the participating countries. Most important, the summit explicitly rejected the possibility that any one of its countries could be used for mounting aggressive acts against Iran, or any other country. It also explicitly endorsed the right of all countries to the peaceful use of nuclear energy. There was no mention of ``concerns in the international community'' about possible military applications of Tehran's program, or the like.

Putin's main point, which he reiterated at every possible opportunity, was: Conflicts can and must be solved through diplomatic, peaceful means. In his address to the summit on Oct. 16, Putin praised the Caspian Sea countries' problem-solving formulae, ``respecting each other's interests and sovereignty, and refraining not only from any use of force whatsoever, but even from mentioning the use of force.'' Putin went on to explain: ``This is very important, as it is also important that we talk about the impossibility of allowing our own territory to be used by other countries in the event of aggression or any military actions against any one of the Caspian littoral states.'' In short: The U.S. cannot count on Azerbaijan, as a launching pad for operations against Iran.

The final document also announced the decision to form a Caspian Sea Cooperation organization. But, even more important than the summit itself, were the bilateral meetings that Putin held with Iran's President and Supreme Leader, who is the ultimate authority in the country. Ayatollah Khamanei does not routinely receive foreign visitors to Iran, thus his meeting with the Russian President took on a special significance. During their meeting, Putin reportedly presented Khamenei with a proposal for reaching a solution to the conflict over Iran's nuclear program. According to the Iranian state news agency IRNA, Khamenei told Putin: "We will ponder your words and proposal.''

Although details of the proposal have not been made public, some news outlets reported that Iranian ``hardliners'' had said the proposal called for a "time-out'' on UN sanctions if Iran were to suspend uranium enrichment. "The main reason for Putin's visit to Iran was to convey this message personally to the ultimate power in Iran,'' one Iranian official was quoted as saying. Khamenei reportedly told Putin that Iran was serious about continuing its nuclear energy program, including enrichment, but was not interested in "adventurism.'' If Putin did propose a "time-out,'' that would be coherent with what International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) director Mohammad ElBaradei has been campaigning for. It may be that Moscow's offer went beyond that of the IAEA chief. The {Tehran Times} reported that Ali Larijani, head of the Supreme National Security Council and chief negotiator on the nuclear issue, told reporters that Putin had made a ``special proposal,'' and that Khamenei said it was "ponderable.''

According to a well-informed Iranian source I spoke to, Tehran would be willing to suspend its enrichment program, on condition that it received something tangible in return. This, would be a significant shift, since Iran has, to date, refused any such idea. Iran would {not}, however, be willing to give up its nuclear program as North Korea has done. Suspension of enrichment activities would be temporary, in order to facilitate negotiations, which should be oriented towards tangible results, said this source.

Whether or not this was Putin’s message is unclear. Larijani’s surprise announcement on October 20, that he was resigning, cast shadows over the situation. After Larijani had reported on the Russian president’s proposal, Ahmadinejad denied any such had been made. This led to a series of wild speculations in the press, that the “hardliners,” on orders from Ahmadinejad, were ousting Larijani and rejecting the proposal from Moscow. It must be remembered, however, that the ultimate decisions are made by Ayatollah Khamenei, and that Larijani, according to Iranian wires, will continue to attend meetings of the Supreme National Security Council, in the capacity of representative of the Supreme Leader.

[...]

Strategic Understanding Between Tehran and Moscow

Whatever was agreed upon behind the scenes between Putin and his high ranking Iranian counterparts, the official, rather extraordinary bilateral statement which was released after their talks, speaks volumes about Russia's commitment to a peaceful solution to the Iran crisis.

The joint statement, in the version translated by Itar-Tass on Oct. 17, was not just a list of points of agreement, but, taken as a whole, constitutes a far-reaching commitment by both sides, to strengthen what has become a strategic understanding between Moscow and Tehran, clearly oriented towards a war-avoidance policy. The statement begins with the assertion that, "The sides confirmed that mutually beneficial cooperation in the political, economic, cultural and other areas, as well as cooperation on the international stage, meet the national interests of the two sides and play an important role in supporting peace and stability in the region and beyond.'' Economic cooperation is central in this regard, especially as concerns the energy sector:

"The sides spoke in favor of increasing efforts to further expand economic ties between the two countries, especially in areas like the oil and gas, nuclear power, electricity, processing and aircraft-building industries, banking and transport.''

As for nuclear energy--the issue being manipulated as a pretext for war--the statement says: ``The sides noted bilateral cooperation in the area of peaceful nuclear energy and confirmed that it will continue in full compliance with the requirements of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. In this regard they also noted that the construction and launch of the Bushehr nuclear power plant will be carried out in accordance with the agreed timetable.''

In addition, the joint statement noted a contract for five Tu-204-100 aircraft to be supplied to Iran, as well as the need to create the conditions for advancing joint investment in Russia and Iran. Regarding regional infrastructure projects, the statement asserted the agreement ``to continue work on the development of the north-south international transport corridor, including its automobile, rail and maritime components, in the interest of further strengthening trade and economic ties between Russia and Iran, as well as other countries of the region. The two sides also reached agreement on ``pressing regional problems,'' and stressed cooperation to achieve stability and security in Central Asia. Here the role of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, of which Iran is an observer, was highlighted. As for the Caspian Sea region, the statement asserts that "the relevant norms of the agreements of 1921 and 1940 between Iran and the former Soviet Union remain in force until there is a convention on the legal status of the Caspian Sea.'' Furthermore, the two sides ``advocate the exclusion from the Caspian of military presence of non-Caspian littoral states,'' a clear rejection of any U.S. intentions to establish a presence in the region.

The joint statement also declared an identity of views between Tehran and Moscow on crucial foreign policy issues. They called for ``building a fairer and more democratic world order which would ensure global and regional security and create favorable conditions for stable development ... based on collective principles and the supremacy of international law with the United Nations Organization playing a central coordinating role....'' They explicitly ruled out Cheney-style saber-rattling: ``The sides confirmed their refusal to use force or threat of force to resolve contentious issues, and their respect for sovereignty and territorial integrity of the states.''

In the context of statements of their commitment to fight terrorism, the two sides also addressed the deteriorating situation in Afghanistan, and "confirmed Russia's and Iran's intention to continue to take part in the post-war reconstruction of Afghanistan, and are interested in strengthening its statehood and the process of that country becoming a peaceful, democratic, independent and flourishing state.''

Iraq was also an important feature of the agreement. The two sides "expressed vigorous support for Iraq's territorial integrity and sovereignty and for an end to foreign military presence in that country on the basis of the relevant schedule.'' It should be noted that Putin, in his international webcast on his to Moscow, made this a central point of his polemic against Washington. Also, the joint statement called for a “just settlement” to the Middle East conflict, which may indicate renewed flexibity on Iran’s part, to accept agreements which thePalestinians (united) might make. Finally, in a short but clear paragraph, the two ``noted the need to settle the issue of Iran's nuclear program as soon as possible by political and diplomatic means through talks and dialogue and expressed hope that a long-term comprehensive solution will be found.''

In sum, the joint statement goes far beyond any earlier definition of relations between Russia and Iran, and sends a clear message to the war party in Washington and London, that they can no longer consider Iran in isolation, but must recognize that the country has become a strategic partner of Russia, whose leadership is determined to prevent war.

Europeans Should Know Better

What Putin achieved in Tehran must have sent shivers up and down the spines of Cheney and his de facto sympathizers at home and in Europe. President Bush indulged in one of his typical ranting sessions Oct. 18, in remarks to the press, in which he threatened that were Iran to achieve the knowledge required to build a bomb, then that would mean World War III were just around the corner. In Europe, members of the coalition of the spineless, had already weighed in against Putin, even attempting to dissuade the Russian leader from going to Iran. U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice have pressured Putin, during their Moscow visit, to join them in threatening Iran with new sanctions, if it did not meet their expectations on the nuclear issue. French President Nicolas Sarkozy had delivered a similar message. During his visit to Wiesbaden, Germany, for the Petersburg Dialogue, on Oct. 14-15, Putin was again besieged by German Chancellor Angela Merkel and others, with demands he get tough with Tehran.

And, in case the message had not registered, a wild story was circulated internationally, that a team of suicide bombers was primed to blow themselves and Putin up, as soon as he set foot on Iranian soil. While Iranian officials denounced the obvious psywar attributed to ``foreign'' intelligence services, Putin tossed the story off with a laugh, saying, were he to heed such warnings, he would never leave his home.

The point to be made is that Putin--unlike his European interlocutors--has grasped the fact that what the Cheney crowd is threatening is world war, not some political power play, and has therefore stuck to his guns. That Russia has been aware of the dangers inherent in Cheney's planned Iran war, is nothing new. In his speech to the Munich Wehrkunde meeting early in 2007, Putin had lashed out in most undiplomatic terms, against the pretensions of the would-be leader of a presumed unipolar world, to dictate world affairs through military fiat. And, regarding the Iranian nuclear issue, Russia has been consistent in stating its position that if, 1) Iran abides by international commitments to the NPT and IAEA regime, then 2) Iran's right to the peaceful use of nuclear technology must be guaranteed, and 3) that program must not be misconstrued as a weapons program, and thus used as a pretext for military aggression.

Source: http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.p...xt=va&aid=7151

[Armenian]

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

India, Russia, China to hold meet in Harbin



New Delhi (PTI): Foreign Ministers of India, China and Russia will hold a two-day meeting from Wednesday in northeastern Chinese city of Harbin to explore ways to enhance trilateral cooperation. The ministers are expected to exchange views on major international and regional issues and discuss expansion of cooperation among the three countries. This is the third stand-alone meeting between the foreign ministers of the three countries, who had earlier met in Delhi in February and in Vladivostok in Russia in June 2005. External Affairs Minister Pranab Mukherjee, Chinese Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi and their Russian counterpart Sergei Lavrov are expected to explore cooperation in various fields. Foreign ministers of the three countries have been meeting on the sidelines of the United Nations General Assembly in New York since September 2002. The first Summit Meeting among the leaders of India, Russia and China took place on July 17, 2006 in St Petersburg on the sidelines of the meetings among G-8 and outreach countries. Mukherjee's three-day visit to China beginning Tuesday will be his first as External Affairs Minister. He had visited China in May last year as Defence Minister. He is likely to meet with Yang to discuss bilateral ties after their meeting on the sidelines of the UNGA in New York last month.

Source: http://www.hindu.com/thehindu/holnus...0710230302.htm

[Armenian]

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

The March to War: NATO Preparing for War with Serbia?



by Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya

Today in the globalized realm of international relations everything is interlinked. Eurasia is all but a giant jigsaw in name. Two opposite forces are creating a synthesis. This state is a result of the dynamic and static pushes to infiltrate the Eurasian Heartland and those opposed to the American-led drive of infiltration, the Eurasian reactionary outward counter-drive.

A Second Kosovo War Scenario against Serbia: NATO’s Noble Midas 2007

NATO has performed military exercises based on the scenario of a military conflict in an unnamed breakaway province in the Balkans. [1] The breakaway province is clearly the predominately Albanian inhabited Serbian province of Kosovo. The exercises took place from September 27 till October 12, 2007 in the Adriatic Sea and Croatia according to the NATO Public Information Office in Naples, Italy. [2] The exercise was inaugurated as a “peace enforcement exercise” in the Adriatic Sea. [3]

The problems that have arisen between Kosovar Albanians and Serbia have been problems that have been mostly fueled by NATO powers. In fact the issue of full independence was not a problem between Serbia and the Kosovar Albanians before 1999. Kosovo’s Albanians also enjoyed autonomy from Belgrade for many years. It has only been under the influence of NATO that animosity has been raised between the two sides.

Croatia and Albania have also participating in the NATO exercise and both are projected to have roles in any future war against Serbia and its regional allies and supporters inside Bosnia-Herzegovina and Montenegro over the fate of Kosovo. Many Croats are also unhappy about their government’s decision to coordinate or cooperate with NATO, which they view with suspicion and as a destabilizing force in the Balkans.

According to a NATO press release, “Approximately 2,000 military and 50 civilian personnel, over 30 ships and submarines and 20 fixed-wing aircraft from NATO and the Croatian Armed Forces will train together in a Crisis Response Operation scenario, where NATO is appointed by the U.N. to build up an immediate reaction in a fictitious country on the brink of civil war.” [4]

It is clear that NATO intends to settle the issue of Kosovo through military means. Rear-Admiral Alain Hinden, the French commandant of the NATO exercise has made a statement that is a dead giveaway about the underlying intentions of NATO in regards to the exercise: “This exercise has been designed for years. The U.N. and NATO are training for this type of real intervention, of humanitarian assistance be it in this region [the Balkans] or anywhere else in the world.” [5]

NATO Military Integration: Preparing the World for a Broader War?

According to the British Broadcasting Service (BBC), “With the military forces of Western [meaning NATO] nations stretched, particularly those of the U.S. and U.K. [in Iraq and Afghanistan], flexibility and adaptability are becoming increasingly important.” [6]

Commander Cunningham, a British naval officer, aboard the H.M.S. Illustrious in the Adriatic Sea, off the coastline of the former Yugoslavia and Albania, has told the BBC’s Nick Hawton that “integrating [NATO] forces at this level has simply not happened before.” [7]

Commander Cunningham also clarified how NATO forces are being merged: “Military equipment is hugely expensive and it’s impossible for each nation to hold individually the whole repertoire. What we’re seeing here is the ability of several nations to provide a capability together that no-one could alone.” [8]

The BBC also quotes Lieutenant Eduardo Lopez, a Spanish air officer or pilot, as saying “right now all these countries [meaning NATO members] are working together. You realise you can operate as a joint force community…” [9]

NATO is clearly pooling its resources together; but what for? The answer lies eastward in the Eurasian Heartland where Russia, Iran, China, and their allies have gradually huddled together in sculpting a far larger Eurasian counter-alliance. A new cycle of global war seems to be in the works for the Twenty-First Century. According to various reports in Russia approximately a quarter of the population believe that Russia and the U.S. will eventually go to war in the future. In China there are also similar views amongst the population.

Kosovo and Monetary Colonization

The euro is officially shared by thirteen E.U. members and their dependencies. However, it is also used by Montenegro and Kosovo too.

In a divulging statement Amelia Torres, an E.U. spokeswoman, claimed that the E.U. opposed currency “euro-ization” in other states unless they join the European Union: “The conditions for the adoption of the euro are clear,” she told reporters. “That means, first and foremost, to be a member of the EU.” [10]

The fate of Kosovo under this declaration in the eyes of the E.U. is clear. It should also be noted that it has been under the presence of NATO troops and both U.S. and E.U. officials that Kosovo adopted the euro as its currency.

A Dangerous International Trend: World War in the Horizon?

As tensions rise over Kosovo in the Balkans, tensions between Russia and China with the U.S. and NATO are also rising in regards to Iran and other countries and issues. From Myanmar (Burma) and the Korean Peninsula to Sudan and the Balkans, the U.S. and its allies are facing-off against Russia, China, and their allies. The Persian Gulf and the Levant are also two of these fronts where Iran and Syria are opposing the encroachment of the U.S. and NATO.

The SCO and the CSTO alliance have also signed an October 2007 defence agreement which formalizes the existence of a Sino-Russian military bloc from Eastern Europe to the Pacific shorelines of Asia. [11] All the members of CSTO, with the exception of Belarus and Armenia, are members of the SCO. China is now a semi-formal CSTO member. Russia has also announced that all CSTO members will enjoy internal Russian prices on military hardware. [12]

The U.S. Secretary of Defence, Robert Gates, has also wrapped up an official tour of Latin America in Suriname. The U.S. is contemplating establishing a base in Suriname, near Venezuela. [13] This is part of a broader effort to encircle and isolate Venezuela and its Latin American allies. The U.S. Secretary of Defence’s tour itinerary also is a giveaway to American intentions in Latin America. His tour included Chile (which borders Bolivia), El Salvador (near Nicaragua), Columbia (next to Venezuela), Peru (bordering both Bolivia and Venezuela), and Suriname.

On Iran’s borders with NATO-garrisoned Afghanistan a new Iranian air base has been built. The Russian News and Information Agency, RIA Novosti, has reported that during the inauguration of the air base the Commander of the Air Force stated “The base is designed to enhance the combat readiness of our Armed Forces in standing up to possible aggression against our country.” [14] Clearly the new Iranian air base is in response to NATO forces in Afghanistan and the U.S. air base built in Afghanistan next to the Iranian border. The U.S. is also building bases on the Iranian border in Iraq and constructing military positions next to the border areas of Russia, China, and Belarus.

The U.S., along with Australia, Canada, Britain, and Guam has also planned large scale war games and anti-terrorist security exercises that involve NORAD, the Pentagon, and the U.S. Department of Homeland Security. The exercise appears to anticipate some form of nuclear reprisals in the continental United States that could be part of a terrorist attack (that may be blamed on Iran) or military attacks from China and Russia. [15]

Vigilant Shield 2008 ties a terrorist attack scenario to the domestic use of the U.S. military within American cities and a broader global war. It is already known from the statements about Vigilant Shield 2007, which was held in 2006, that the U.S. is contemplating a nuclear war against Russia and China, in connection with attacks on Iran. [07]

Source: http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0710/S00331.htm

[Kanki]

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

Whatever,Kosova lands belong to Albanian people...

[Armenian]

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

Whatever,Kosova lands belong to Albanian people...

I'm not sure who Kosovo belongs to but I am sure that eastern Anatolia, Nakhichevan and Nagorno Karabagh belong to Armenians. And Turks such as you that support Kosovar Albanians, not to mention Cypriot Turks, should understand us Armenians better. Nevertheless, please take discussions that have nothing to do with the Russian Federation to another thread.

[Armenian]

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

Russia to appoint firebrand politician to NATO: source



President Vladimir Putin has signed a decree appointing a nationalist politician as Russia's permanent representative to NATO, a source close to the situation told Reuters on Wednesday. Putin signed a decree on Tuesday appointing Dmitry Rogozin, the flamboyant former head of Russia's Motherland party, to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, said the source, who asked not to be named.

"Rogozin has been appointed permanent representative to NATO," the source said. "The decree was signed by Putin yesterday."

Rogozin, who calls himself parliament's "chief diplomat", has called for Russia to rearm to counter the threat from the Western military alliance, whose expansion he said placed a foreign army at Russia's borders. A Kremlin spokesman declined to comment. The decree only becomes effective on its official publication. Russia's three main news agencies said the Kremlin had not confirmed the Reuters report, but they quoted an unnamed source in the Foreign Ministry as saying Rogozin could be appointed as a diplomat, possibly dealing with NATO affairs.

When asked by Reuters whether he had been appointed, Rogozin said: "I do not have any official information about this, so I can say nothing at the moment." He was quoted in 2004 by local news agencies as saying that NATO was a U.S.-dominated body that carried out "the rather aggressive interests of the United States."

NATO is viewed with great suspicion in Russia, where officials say expansion eastwards shows the alliance is being used by the United States and top European powers to counter Russian influence. Rogozin made his Motherland party highly popular with attacks on the West and calls to curb illegal immigration.

He resigned as leader of his party last year under what activists said was pressure from the Kremlin, disturbed by his popularity. And he was featured in election campaign advertisements in 2005 that a Moscow court said incited racism. Rogozin, 43, was born into a Moscow military family and studied journalism at Moscow University. He worked as Putin's representative in negotiations with the European Union over the status of Kaliningrad, a Russian enclave, after EU expansion. Konstantin Totsky, the current permanent representative, was appointed by Putin in March 2003. He is 57.

Source: http://www.reuters.com/article/world...29172920071024

[Armenian]

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

Soviet-style food prices return to Russia



The Kremlin has been accused of abandoning a commitment to market economics after it imposed Soviet-style price controls on basic food items in an attempt to shore up President Vladimir Putin's popularity. The state's extraordinary intervention in the market has been seen as a pre-election manouevre to assuage growing discontent among Russia's poor over soaring food prices. But analysts said that it also underscored the weakness of Russia's apparently mighty economy — an achievement for which Mr Putin has claimed credit to almost universal adulation among his people. advertisement The Kremlin tried to portray the controls, which will see prices frozen on staples such as bread and milk at their October 15 levels, as a voluntary and patriotic gesture undertaken by Russia's food producers and retailers. But analysts said that business leaders were coerced into making concessions that could do greater economic damage in the long term.

"It is known for a fact that they were summoned to the Kremlin," said Masha Lipman, a political analyst at the Moscow Carnegie Centre. "It's easy to imagine the conversation. They were told to fix prices voluntarily — or else. And of course they will comply. Business in Russia always complies." The cost of food has soared in Russia in recent months, with milk rising 9.2 per cent in September alone. In some regions, bread is reported to have doubled in price since the beginning of the year. The dramatic inflation has spooked the Kremlin. With Yeltsin era shortages and the empty shelves of the Communist era still fresh in Russia's collective memory, the price of food can often make or break a president's popularity.

Until now, Mr Putin has enjoyed widespread support, basking in approval ratings of over 70 per cent. But the issue of food price inflation — blamed on rising global costs, higher salaries and pensions and old-fashioned local greed – has begun to dominate political discourse. While Russians blame the crisis on the government rather than on Mr Putin — who is universally credited with raising salaries — the Kremlin has decided to take no chances ahead of back-to-back parliamentary and presidential elections in December and March.

Highlighting the government's anxiety, ruling party politicians have begun to revert to the rhetoric of the Communist era. Mr Putin has railed at regional monopolies in the food market and speculators — considered in Soviet times as the country's greatest traitors -- for artificially inflating prices. Upper house Speaker Sergei Mironov, who is often used to float controversial Kremlin-backed proposals, has even suggested re-introducing a state food monopoly. While the state's intervention may help to stave off the Kremlin's greatest fear — that of panic buying and hoarding which could seek the crisis spiraling out of control — economists say the policy damages Russia's free market credentials.

The Kremlin has already come under criticism for expanding the state's presence in the oil and gas sectors at the expense of private enterprise. It is energy that has driven the Russian economy, which continues to grow at rates far outstripping western rivals, and with oil prices just below record levels of $90 a barrel a slowdown is unlikely. But the inflation crisis, economists argue, shows how one-dimensional and vulnerable the Russian economy really is.

"The fact that in this situation the government could come up with no measures except for administrative interference shows how weak the economy really is," said Pavel Trunin, an economist at the Gaidar Institute in Moscow. "It shows that the economy is dependent on oil prices."

Source: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main...5/wruss125.xml

[skhara]

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

That looks pretty tasty.