The Rise of the Russian Empire: Russo-Armenian Relations

[Armenian]

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

Here is another news report that I wanted to post here for a long time. Perhaps many of you remember the assassinated Russian FSB agent turned British spy, Alexander Litvinenko, had written in his published book that the Armenian Parliament building shootings of 1999 was organized by top level officials within Russia's special services. Vladimir Putin was the Foreign Minister of the Russian Federation at the time. I remember that soon after the killings a Russian government source was quoted as stating that the shooting was the work of Americans (I will try finding it and post it here). Although Armenian authorities have not revealed any hard evidence implicating Russia in the crime, or the United States for that matter, it needs to be mentioned nonetheless that the only entity that directly gained from this blatantly bloody action was Moscow and to a lesser extent the pro-Russian ruling administration in Yerevan today.

Armenian

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

'SHOOTING OF THE ARMENIAN PARLIAMENT WAS ORGANIZED BY RUSSIAN SPECIAL SERVICES' FSB Colonel Claims

Former employee of Russia's Federal Security Service, colonel Alexander Litvinenko, stated form his political asylum in Great Britain that the shooting of Armenian parliament on October 27 of 1999 was organized by Russian special services, more precisely Russian Military Reconnaissance.

"Pursuing certain political aims, the Russian special services often turn to subversive activity. Many know in highest echelons of Russia's special services that the shooting of the Armenian parliament in 1999 was organized by RMR. This sabotage enabled Russia's political elite to prevent signing of the agreement on Karabakh settlement. If I am not mistaken, it was said that president Aliyev and Kocharian were to sign a memorandum at the Istanbul summit of OSCE. The peaceful process was developing aloof from Russia's control and that made Russian special services to carry out the special mission in the Armenian parliament", Litvinenko told Real Azerbaijan online newspaper (www.realazer.com).

Litvinenko said that he personally recruited employees of Azerbaijan's special services who occupy high positions today as well. "I was working at the anti-terror department. We actively engaged against Azerbaijan. I personally recruited 12 employees of Azeri National Security Service", he noted. "There are now 30 agents of Russian special services. Why? Because Putin does not trust Ilham Aliyev. Putin needs alternative sources of information. All Russia's institutes of Azerbaijan carry out tasks of the center, watch and control Aliyev", Litvinenko said.

Source: AZG Armenian Daily #079, 03/05/2005

[Armenian]

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

Russian 102nd Military Base, Gyumri Armenia

Russian 102nd Military Base (video presentation): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=noqMHlYYNrc

Russian 102nd Military Base is a Russian military base in Gyumri, Armenia, part of the Transcaucasian Group of Forces. It was formerly the Soviet Army's 127th Motor Rifle Division. The base is about 120 kilometers (75 miles) from the Armenian capital Yerevan. There are 3,000 Russian soldiers officially reported to be stationed at the 102nd Military Base located in Gyumri. In early 2005, the 102nd Military Base had 74 tanks, 17 infantry fighting vehicles, 148 armored personnel carriers, 84 artillery pieces, 30 Mig-29 fighters and several batteries of S-300 anti-aircraft missiles. A great deal of military hardware has been moved to the 102nd Base from the Russian military bases in Batumi and Akhalkalaki, Georgia which includes 35 tanks and armored vehicles and 370 pieces of military hardware. The military base is part of a joint air defense system of the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS), which was deployed in Armenia in 1995. Furthermore, Armenian air force relies upon the Russian Mig-29s located in the military base, for the defense of the Armenian airspace.

The Russian military base was deployed on the territory of Armenia as early as 1996. The bilateral treaty states that the Russian military will be in the base for 25 years, but Armenian authorities have said that if needed this time-frame can be reviewed, and exclusively in the direction of prolongation. Also Russia does not pay Armenia for the military base stationed in Gyumri; moreover the Armenian side takes care of all public utilities water, electricity, etc. In 1997, Armenia and Russia signed a far-reaching friendship treaty, which calls for mutual assistance in the event of a military threat to either party and allows Russian border guards to patrol Armenia’s frontiers with Turkey and Iran. Previously the 127th Motor Rifle Division consisted of the 123rd, 124th, and 128th Motor Rifle Regiments, the 992nd Artillery Regiment, and the 116th Independent Tank Battalion. The 123rd Motor Rifle Regiment was formed from the former 164th Motor Rifle Division in Armenia.

Source: http://www.gyumri.eu/102nd_military_base.htm

3624th Russian Air Force Base, Erebuni Armenia

MiG-29s in Erebuni Air Base, Armenia (video presentation): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qvOrSCRYlsQ

Satellite imagery of the 3624th Russian Air Force Base in Erebuni: http://virtualglobetrotting.com/view...ce=0&mid=23205

[Illuminator]

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

I would not believe a single thing that traitorous moslem monkey jooo azzkissing lowlife says. He was just in israel before his death and there is mounting evidence that he was involved in trying to transfer radioactive substances to chechen terrorists.

[Illuminator]

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

Great video.

[Armenian]

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

Russia launches 3 satellites to expand its space navigation system

MOSCOW - Russia on Tuesday launched three satellites to complement its space navigation system, officials said. The satellites were sent into orbit on a Proton-M rocket that blasted off successfully from the Baikonur launchpad in Kazakhstan, said Russia's Federal Space Agency spokesman Alexander Vorobyov. They are to join Russia's Global Navigation Satellite System, or GLONASS - the equivalent of the U.S. Global Positioning System, or GPS. The system, which serves both military and civilian purposes, was developed during Soviet times and is supposed to have 24 satellites. Their number dwindled after the 1991 Soviet collapse, but the government has earmarked funds to revive the system to its full strength thanks to Russia's windfall oil revenues. Russia's First Deputy Prime Minister Sergei Ivanov said that Tuesday's launch would bring the GLONASS satellite fleet to 18 - the number necessary to provide navigation services over the entire Russian territory. He said Monday that the system would be available worldwide by 2010, for which it would need to have 24 satellites.

Source: http://canadianpress.google.com/arti...3l4Eba2U0EHwOA

[Armenian]

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

Liquid Arms

Russia has exported record-high $7 billion arms in 2007, First Deputy Prime Minister Sergey Ivanov said on Monday. Still, it came short of $1 billion as a ship construction contract with Algeria was frozen over tensions in the bilateral relations. Russian arms sales have doubled over the past seven years when arms exports have been overseen by Rosoboronexport’s former CEO and Rostekhnologia’s new director general Sergey Chemezov. Sergey Ivanov said on Monday “there are good reasons to say that this year the benchmark of $7 billion has been surpassed” to beat the record of $6.5 billion in 2006. Arms exports are growing on major deals signed between 2004 and 2006. During that period a number of Muslim countries were buying a lot of arms from Russia at the backdrop of U.S. military interventions in Afghanistan and Iraq as they perceived Moscow if not as America’s enemy but at least a rival. In the meantime, the Russian military industry has bounced back from the 1990s slump on export contracts which built groundwork for large-scale serial supplies.

The biggest part of the contracts was executed by Rosoboronexport, the state arms exports agency which was set up in November 2000. Arms producers and designers are now allowed to export only spare parts and do repairs and modernization of the hardware they have exported. Rosoboronexport was first headed by Alexander Belyaninov but it was Sergey Chemezov who was doing preparations for all major deals. Mr. Chemezov went on to take the helm at the firm in April 2004. His old friendship with Vladimir Putin made sure that the state was very supportive of Russian arms export projects. On November 26, 2007, Mr. Chemezov became head of the state-run corporation Rostekhnologia which will merge with Rosoboronexport. Over Sergey Chemezov’s seven years in Rosoboronexport, sales of Russian arms abroad went up from $3.68 billion in 2000 to $7 billion this year.

Rosoboronexport would not comment on Mr. Ivanov’s announcement on Monday. Mikhail Dmitriev, head of the Federal Military and Technical Cooperation Service, said that “aviation is still in the greatest demand – Su and MiG jets and Mi helicopters”. Russia will have exported 70 Su-30 fighters alone to India, Algeria, Venezuela and Malaysia worth $3 billion this year. “This was a record-breaking year for us,” Oleg Demchenko, president of the Irkut corporation, told Kommersant. “The plant in Irkutsk will assemble 43 Su-30MKI, Su-30MKM and Su-30MKI(A) fighters by the end of the year. We were not producing as much even in the Soviet times.”

There have also been major deals in missile defense systems. Early this year Mr. Ivanov announced a contract with Iran on the Top-M1 short-range complex to be executed. Meanwhile, Russia is still doing a contract with China on a long-range system S-300PMU-2. Scheduled naval supplies have failed. Indian fleet officials said in September that the leasing of the Chakra nuclear submarine of the 971 Shchuka-B project was put off until June 15, 2008 after the Amursky Shipyard in Komsomolsk-on-Amur was 9 months late with the construction. Russia also insisted that the bill should grow from $650 million to $785 million. India agreed to the postponement but would not have the price reviewed. Several contracts with Algeria which were part of an $8 billion package deal signed during Vladimir Putin’s visit to the country in March 2006 have been frozen at Algerian authorities’ initiative. The chill in the bilateral relations seems to be linked to the domestic situation in the country as well as France’s resurgence in the region.

Apparently, these reasons can account for a $1 billion drop in exports compared to estimates at the start of the year. Mikhail Dmitriev said in February: “In 2007 we may reach the level of $8 billion in military and technical cooperation.” Still the named $7 billion may be viewed as a rough estimate. For example, in 2005, results of the year’s arms trade were revised several times. In December 2005, the Federal Military and Technical Cooperation Service reported the year’s exports to reach $5.1 billion, which was $700 million below 2004’s indicator. Russian President Vladimir Putin revealed later at a session of the Military and Technical Cooperation Commission revised figures of the exports of $5.3 billion. In January 2006, Sergey Ivanov was already quoting a figure of “over $6 billion”. Finally, Mikhail Dmitriev in February announced exports to stand at $6.126 billion in 2005.

In the short term, Russian arms exports are likely to keep growing, which is proved by a rise in exporters’ contract portfolios. Mr. Dmitriev said in February that the portfolio was worth $30 billion, $20 billion of which accounts for Rosoboronexport, which will make sure Russia exports are at least no less than in 2007 for two or three years to come. The head of the Federal Military and Technical Cooperation Service said on Monday: “Currently the portfolio is worth over $32 billion, which allows us to be confident about military and technical cooperation in the future. The start has been launched by Rosoboronexport which will have a portfolio of orders of $24 billion.” Exports in 2008 are also expected to be dominated by air force supplies including Su and MiG fighters to India, Venezuela, Indonesia and Syria. There are also supplies of missile defense systems to China and Syria, military ships to Vietnam, and submarines to India and Algeria.

But experts say that Russian arms exports might slump in three or four years’ time. “We will reach some sort of ‘tableland’ with the $7 billion,” Ruslan Pukhov, director of the Strategy and Technology Analysis Center, told Kommersant. “Our export will be keeping at the same level in the next three to four years if the current political situation in the world persists. But this ‘tableland’ may be followed by a dramatic fall.” The expert says that the Russian military industry is desperately understaffed especially with highly-skilled workers. At the same time, inflation in the industry is higher than the national average. In 2007, prices in Russia will grow some 12 percent while the military and industrial complex will see a 20 percent jump. Mr. Pukhov also said that the industry sees a steep growth of overhead expenses as it is not using energy saving technologies. As a result, Russia may not be able to produce some specimens of arms while others will be impossible to sell at a competitive price.

Source: http://www.kommersant.com/p839684/r_...s_Export_2007/

[Armenian]

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

Construction of Black Sea Fleet base in Novorossiisk on track

Construction of a base for the Black Sea Fleet in the port of Novorossiisk is proceeding according to schedule, Russia's defense minister said on Wednesday. "Today I have visited Novorossiisk, our Black Sea Fleet base there - the one that we are building as part of a federal program," Anatoly Serdyukov told President Vladimir Putin. President Vladimir Putin signed a decree in 2003 setting up an alternative naval base for the Black Sea Fleet in Novorossiisk, which the Navy said will be ready by 2012, after Ukraine demanded the base in Sevastopol be closed by 2017. Russia has allocated 12.3 billion rubles (about $480 million) for the construction of the new base between 2007 and 2012. The construction of other facilities and infrastructure at the base, including units for coastal troops, aviation and logistics, will continue beyond 2012, the admiral said. Russia and Ukraine signed an agreement in 1997 stipulating that the Black Sea Fleet's main base in Sevastopol, on the Crimean Peninsula, be leased to Russia for 20 years, with the possibility of extending the term. The annual rent of about $100 million is deducted from Ukraine's debt for Russian energy supplies. In addition to the main base, the Black Sea Fleet maintains two airfields and a ship re-supply facility on the Crimean Peninsula. But Ukrainian President Viktor Yushchenko said previously that the current rent could be increased in the future.

Source: http://en.rian.ru/russia/20071226/94260539.html

[Armenian]

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

Moscow hails ballistic missile tests

Russia has successfully tested a new generation of land- and sea-based ballistic missiles in the latest signal of the revival of its military capability. The Russian military on Tuesday carried out a xsecond successful test of the RS-24 intercontinental ballistic missile, capable of carrying multiple warheads - first tested last May.

The missile was fired from a mobile launcher at the xPlesetsk space centre in northern Russia. Its multiple test warheads hit their designated targets in the Kura test range on the Kamchatka peninsula in the Pacific. At the same time, Russia launched its second successful test in a week of the submarine-launched RSM-54 or Sineva hybrid ballistic xmissile - which in its final stage becomes a cruise xmissile. It also hit a target in Kamchatka, Russia's defence ministry said. The tests come amid vehement Russian opposition to US plans for a missile defence system in eastern Europe. Although the US has said the system is aimed not at Russia but at "rogue" states such as Iran, Moscow has warned that the plans could upset the strategic xbalance of forces.

Russia has promised an "asymmetric" response, including missiles capable of circumventing any antixmissile system. Russia's strategic missile forces said the RS-24 would strengthen their ability to "penetrate missile defence systems and strengthen the nuclear deterrent potential of Russia's strategic nuclear forces". "The RS-24 will form the backbone of the Strategic Missile Forces and safely ensure the security of Russia and its allies through the mid-century," the Russian forces said. The RS-24 is based on the existing Topol-M, which can carry a single warhead as far as 6,000 miles (10,000km). Strategic missile forces said the RS-24 was designed to replace ageing Soviet-era weapons such as the SS-19 Stiletto and SS-18 Satan.

Russia also demonstrated its technological abilities on the same day by launching a rocket carrying three more satellites for its Glonass global positioning satellite system, taking the totalin place to 18. The launch completed the system's coverage of Russia. Six more satellites are due to be launched next year, giving the system global coverage by 2009 and turning it into a rival to the US Global PositioningSystem.

● Iran's defence minister said yesterday that Tehran had agreed to buy an S-300 surface-to-air missile system from Russia, according to Iranian media reports quoted by Reuters from Tehran. "The S-300 system, under a contract signed in the past with Russia, will be delivered to Iran," Mostafa Mohammad Najjar told Fars News Agency, without xgiving details. "The timing of the delivery . . . will be announced later," he said. The ISNA news agency carried a similar report. In a deal criticised by the west, which fears that Tehran might want to build nuclear bombs, Russia this year said that it had completed a contract to deliver TOR-M1 tactical surface-to-air missiles to Iran.

Source: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22400089/

Russia’s Submarine Successfully Fired IBM

K-114 Tula nuclear submarine has successfully fired an intercontinental ballistic missile, RIA Novosti reported. The warhead of the missile hit the target in Kura training ground of Kamchatka, people in the Navy’s news service specified. The missile was fired from submerged condition. K-114 Tula submarine was constructed under the Project 667BDRM. It was rebuilt and upgraded in Severodvinsk a few years ago. The missile-carrying submarines of this type are armed with sixteen RSM-54 missiles of D-9RM system. These submarines that are 167-meter long and 12-meter wide have submerged displacement of 18,200 tons and are capable of going down to the depth of 400 meters. The crew has 135 members. The recent launch from K-114 Tula submarine was the fourth launch carried out by Russia’s Navy in 2007 and this year's second launch of RSM-54 missiles. Russia’s Navy also fired a RSM-50 and a RSM-56 Bulava in addition to two RSM-54s.

Source: http://www.kommersant.com/p-11818/IBM_submarine/

[Armenian]

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

As predicted, they are jealous...

Myth of the Strongman

So Time magazine is the latest to swoon at Vladimir Putin's "steely confidence and strength," his "chiseled facial features and those penetrating eyes." The Russian president is a man of "contained power," Time finds, whose gaze says: "I'm in charge." Time's elevation of Putin as Person of the Year is not all hagiography by any means. The designation is reserved for consequential but not necessarily beneficent figures. Time found Putin to be charmless and humorless, a czar who has "dramatically curtailed freedoms." But the magazine buys into the central myths that Putin has fostered, that the Bush administration consistently has promoted and that increasingly are accepted as historical truth. Foremost among these is that, by transforming democracy into autocracy, Putin also transformed chaos into stability. Russia a decade ago, Time senior editor Nathan Thornburgh observes, was "a rudderless mess, defined most by a bestial crime rate and Boris Yeltsin's kleptocracy in the Kremlin."

In fact, crime worsened after Putin succeeded Yeltsin as president in 2000, as did corruption. In a useful corrective to the conventional wisdom just published by Foreign Affairs magazine, Michael McFaul and Kathryn Stoner-Weiss of Stanford University cite official Russian statistics to show that the average annual total of murders increased from 30,200 between 1995 and 1999 to 32,200 between 2000 and 2004. Meanwhile, in 2006 Transparency International ranked Russia at a new low of 121 out of 163 countries for corruption, the Stanford experts point out, "putting it between the Philippines and Rwanda." And, while soaring oil prices larded the Russian treasury and the government payroll more than doubled, Russians were dying younger (life expectancy for Russian men is 59 years), getting sicker, having fewer children and drinking more.

What then is the basis of the myth? Russia is more prosperous today than when Putin took over, and Russians at all income levels have benefited. Like all post-Communist countries, it endured a rise in poverty and political upheaval in the first half of the 1990s. In 1997-98, Russia along with other "emerging markets" suffered a financial crash. Yeltsin appointed a new prime minister, Yevgeny Primakov, who restored fiscal solvency and began Russia's recovery, before Putin appeared on the scene. The forlorn babushkas selling their personal effects that many foreigners remember were ancient history by the time Putin took power. Putin continued the economic reforms in his first years, to good effect. But as he clamped down on political freedoms, he also went after independent businesses and began to resocialize the economy, dampening investment. Stunningly, even with all its oil, Russia's rate of economic growth fell from second among the 15 post-Soviet republics in 2000 to 13th in 2005. "If there is any causal relationship between authoritarianism and economic growth in Russia," McFaul and Stoner-Weiss conclude, "it is negative."

Russia, like Poland, Estonia and many other countries, went through tough post-Communist times. It was approaching a safe shore by the time Putin took office. Yeltsin's greatest sins involved impinging on democracy -- not allowing too much of it -- but he nonetheless bequeathed Putin a country with a lively press, competitive political parties and an energized civil society. Like Poland, Estonia and the rest, Russia could have opted for prosperity and democracy. Putin made a different choice. Why then is he so popular? There's the oil boom, of course, and the fact that government-controlled television -- the only kind now -- lionizes him ceaselessly. But maybe the better question would be: Is he so popular? Generally, an answer could be derived in two ways. One is polling. But the Kremlin has gradually sapped the independence of Russia's polling industry, just as it did with the media, and it's fair to ask how honestly respondents will be evaluating -- publicly, speaking to strangers -- a leader whose enemies tend to end up poisoned, shot or in prison.

The other method is elections, and here perhaps we should defer to Putin's considered judgment. Garry Kasparov, the famous chess grandmaster, wanted to run for president against Putin's handpicked successor. A candidate must be nominated at a public meeting, but no one would rent Kasparov a meeting hall. Officials menaced his wife and daughter when they sought to fly out of the country. Kasparov himself was jailed when he attempted to take part in a political demonstration. Ten days ago, he finally gave up. Why would a leader of such steely confidence, heroic achievement and massive popularity be so afraid of political competition? Perhaps he will explain at Time's awards banquet.

Source: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...122302070.html

Putin? Really?

Time magazine gives Vladimir Putin way too much credit for Russia's economic recovery.

As an exercise in journalism, Time's annual selection of a "Person of the Year" has always been a strange ritual. Although the magazine annually devotes gobs of resources and dozens of print pages to selecting and reporting on a winner, the editors take great pains to emphasize that the choice is not an "honor." Rather, as Managing Editor Richard Stengel explains, the selection goes to "the person who has most profoundly influenced the world during the past year, for better or for worse." That Stalin and Hitler are previous winners underscores Stengel's point. But leaving aside the value of journalists engaging in a process that is a "subjective one," which includes "no measuring stick or algorithm" but just "feels right" and ends up choosing Stalin (twice), this year's selection of Russian President Vladimir Putin is particularly odd, if only judged by the criteria that Time editors themselves establish. The selection of Putin is based on a theory about recent Russian history that is simple, powerful, and wrong.

In the 1990s, so the Time story goes, Russia was a place of lawlessness, economic depression, and instability. In the last decade, however, Russia has become a place of order, economic growth, and stability. The cause for the change: Putin. As Stengel theorizes, "Individuals can make a difference to history, and Russia's Vladimir Putin, our choice for 2007, proves the point." Time's theory about Putin and Russia contains three central flaws. First, the positive change so trumpeted is exaggerated. Second, the positive change that has occurred between the 1990s and the last several years has little if anything to do with Putin. Third, the Time theory that Putin's democratic rollback has been a necessary condition for achieving stability and growth—they call it the "grand bargain"—is simply wrong. In fact, there is no evidence at all—and most certainly not in the 36 pages Time devotes to Putin and his Russia—that greater autocracy has caused either order or growth. Autocracy's re-emergence under Putin has coincided with tremendous economic growth but has not caused it. If anything, Putin's autocratic turn has reduced the economic gains from what they would have been had democracy survived.

In proving Putin's greatness, the word stability appears most often in the Time coverage; on his "report card," this is the only subject in which Putin gets an A. But finding evidence of this new stability, both in Time's reporting and in reality, is difficult. Time writers conflate "central authority" with "stability," a real no-no in my business of political science, since there are lots of autocracies in the world that do not provide stability (think of Angola, among other examples). Lower crime rates, less corruption, fewer terrorist attacks, better health conditions, or more secure property rights are some conventional measures of strong, stable government, yet Putin's Russia has made amazingly little or no progress on any of these indicators, despite eight years of economic growth. The only hard evidence of stability in the Putin era is economic growth. During Putin's tenure, growth in Russia has averaged an impressive 6.7 percent; real disposable income has increased by more than 10 percent a year; consumer spending has skyrocketed; unemployment has fallen from 12 percent to 6 percent; and poverty, according to one measure, has declined from 41 percent to 14 percent. Russians have never been richer. Public opinion polls show that this economic growth, after a decade of recession, makes Russians feel more stable and better off compared to the Yeltsin era.

But did Putin have anything to do with this recovery? Surprisingly, for a theory based on the role of the individual in making history, Time's writers use almost no "action verbs" to describe Putin's economic policies. And there's a reason that Putin seems like an observer, rather than an actor, in this central drama of his era: It's because he was one. Russia's economic transformation from communism to capitalism followed a very similar pattern to all countries in the region. Given the dreadful initial economic conditions, every post-Communist government was compelled to pursue some degree of price and trade liberalization, macroeconomic stabilization, and eventually privatization. The entire region experienced economic recession and then began to recover several years after the adoption of reforms. Russia followed this same general trajectory and would have done so under Putin or Yeltsin. Had Putin become president or prime minister in January 1992, he would never have appeared on the cover of Time.

Russia's economic turnaround came after a financial meltdown in August 1998 that finally forced the Russian government to pursue prudent fiscal policies and a more rational exchange-rate policy, including a major devaluation. As a result of these painful but necessary reforms, Russia's economy finally began to grow a year before Putin came to power. In addition to coming to power well after the painful reforms necessary to jump-start growth had been implemented, Putin benefited from another force not of his making: rising world oil prices. As the price of oil moved from $10 a barrel in 1998 to over $90 a barrel today, anyone in the Kremlin would have reaped the credit for Russia's economic recovery. But is being in the right place at the right time "leadership—bold, earth-changing leadership"? Putin did implement some important tax reforms and established a stabilization fund to ensure that the windfall revenues would not be spent frivolously or in an inflationary manner. The main drivers of Russia's economic rebirth, however, were world commodity prices, not Putin's leadership.

In fact, the change in which Putin's leadership is most apparent—growing autocratic rule—has slowed economic growth, not spurred it. Corruption, a drag on growth, has skyrocketed under Putin's "central authority." Renationalization and redistribution of property directed by Putin's autocratic regime have caused declines in the performance of formerly private companies, destroyed value in Russia's most profitable companies, and slowed investment, both foreign and domestic. Investment in Russia, at 18 percent of GDP, is stronger today than ever before, but well below the average for democracies in the region, such as Poland and Estonia. Perhaps the most telling evidence of Putin's personal impact on Russian growth is provided by regional comparisons. Between 1999 and 2006, Russia ranked ninth out of the 15 post-Soviet countries in terms of average growth. In 2006, the Russian economy outperformed only Moldova's and Kyrgyzstan's. That's leadership? Time's claim, therefore, that Putin has provided a "grand bargain" of more growth for less freedom is indeed a "subjective one," based on "no measuring stick or algorithm."

Comparing Russia with Ukraine especially underscores the fallacy. Russia and Ukraine share hundreds of years of culture and history and endured the hardships of the 1990s. But today the two countries have two big differences: Russia has oil and gas, and Ukraine does not; Russia is an autocracy, Ukraine is not. Yet, despite these differences, democratic Ukraine has managed annual growth rates higher than autocratic Russia's, despite having to pay dearly for—rather than reaping profits from—higher energy prices. So, why was the erosion of democracy necessary for economic growth? How did taking control of Russia's independent TV stations help to balance the budget? How did arresting Garry Kasparov earlier this month foster investment? One can only wonder how much faster Russia would have grown with a more democratic system, complete with an independent media to expose corruption, a genuine courts system to prosecute illegal seizures of property, and a real opposition to check the Kremlin's predatory behavior.

In mistaking correlation for causation—in arguing that the coincidence of Putin's time in power and Russia's economic recovery proves that "individuals can make a difference to history"—Time has delivered a public relations coup to Putin. Kremlin officials have already applauded. For those in Russia still fighting for independent media and still convinced that objective journalism is a noble aspiration, Time's decision to celebrate Putin with this un-honor most certainly doesn't "feel right," and it most certainly doesn't feel like journalism. Some traditions should come to an end.

Source: http://www.slate.com/id/2180857/

[Armenian]

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

Armenian oil refinery could get green light in February

Armenian Energy Minister Armen Movsisyan announced that next February, a team of Armenian, Russian and Iranian researches will present its final viability report on the construction of an oil refinery in southern Armenia to process Iranian oil. The report should detail the profitability, or lack thereof, of an Armenian oil refinery and a plan to send oil in a U-turn back to Iran. The refinery, which would be built near the Iranian border, could cost about USD 2 billion, according to the news agency Regnum. Its capacity should be in the region of 6.5 million tons of crude oil a year, producing 3.3 million tons of diesel and 2.8 million tons of petrol. The finished product could wind up in Armenia, Iran and possibly other markets. The Russian and Armenian presidents were said to have hammered out a plan for the refinery in a Sochi meeting at the start of this year.

Source: http://www.messenger.com.ge/issues/1...con_three.html

Armenian minister says only his country capable of using nuclear power

On December 22, Armenian Energy Minister Armen Movsisyan said that the international community would oppose any Georgian or Azerbaijani bid to construct a nuclear power station, according to the news agency Regnum. Armenia’s regional neighbors do not have the experience needed to build and maintain a nuclear reactor, Movsisyan said, adding that only Armenia, which has operated the Metsamor nuclear power plant since the 1970s, is capable of safely using nuclear energy. “The international community has a loyal relationship towards the building of a new nuclear power station in Armenia,” Movsisyan concluded. Yerevan is decommissioning the aging Metsamor station at an estimated cost of USD 345 million, Regnum reports. The Armenian government is now looking to build a new nuclear power plant, with a projected cost of USD 2 billion.

Source: http://www.messenger.com.ge/issues/1...con_three.html

Armenia can launch uranium output within 2-5 years

Armenia can launch uranium output within 2-5 years, said RA Energy Minister Armen Movsisyan. At the best, Armenian and Russian experts will accomplish the essential research during a year. Preparations for the output may take from 1 to 5 years, according to him. “Uranium enrichment in Armenia is expedient from the economic standpoint, since there are no major commercial pools in the republic,” the Minister said, Rosatom.ru reports. Last month Armenia decided to join the Russia-Kazakhstan agreement on establishment of an international center for enrichment of uranium in Angarsk (Irkutsk region of Russia). Presently, the terms of geological prospecting are being determined. According to preliminary data, uranium resources in Armenia total no less than 30 thousand tons. Rosatom specialists suppose that the figure can double.

Source: http://www.panarmenian.net/news/eng/?nid=24464