The Rise of the Russian Empire: Russo-Armenian Relations

[Armenian]

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

Putin’s Russia

RUSSIA is hosting the Group of Eight finance ministers’ meeting. So it is not surprising that the G8 nations have sought greater reassurances on smooth energy supplies from Russia to Europe and the world. The meeting coming as it does soon after Russia’s energy spats with its neighbours Ukraine and Georgia has brought to fore the continent’s concerns on Russian energy supplies, the largest after those from the Middle East. The whole of Europe was recently affected when Russia turned off its gas supplies to Ukraine.

While the G8 concerns on the energy front are understandable, it would be a mistake to expect Russia to surrender its position of strength on the issue. Of late, the former superpower has been sending powerful and distinct signals of its ambitions to play a bigger role on the world stage, just as it did until recently — until the collapse of the Soviet Union. Be it on the question of Iran or the ongoing row over Danish cartoons, Putin’s Russia has increasingly sought to charter a defiantly independent line from that of the West. Even on the question of Palestinian elections and the participation of Hamas in the peace process, Moscow has a distinct view of its own. Which isn’t bad for a balanced world.

Just as the Arab world is looking to expand its ties around the world, emerging players such as Russia and China are hoping to make new friends in the Middle East and North Africa. However, Russia can play a harmonising role on the world stage only by sorting out its problems at home, as in Chechnya, and with its neighbours to the West.

Link: http://www.khaleejtimes.com/Displaya... ion=editorial

[Armenian]

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

Putin says will invite Hamas leaders to Russia

MADRID, Feb 9 (Reuters) - Russian President Vladimir Putin said on Thursday he would invite Hamas leaders to Moscow, opening a crack in a wall of U.S.-led opposition to dealing with the Palestinian election winner until it recognised Israel.

Ismail Haniyeh, a senior Hamas official said in Gaza that leaders of the group, whose charter calls for Israel's destruction, "would be delighted" to visit Russia if Putin tendered a formal invitation.

"Maintaining our contacts with Hamas, we are ready in the near future to invite the Hamas authorities to Moscow to hold talks," Putin told a news conference in the Spanish capital Madrid where he was on a visit.

Hamas, considered a terrorist organisation by Washington, won a crushing victory over the long-dominant Fatah group in an election on Jan. 25. Haniyeh said Hamas leaders meeting in Cairo agreed to seek a unity government with other factions.

In New York, Russia's U.N. ambassador Andrew Denisov told a news conference that a key item on any agenda for any talks with Hamas would be "prevention and the stopping of all terror activities" as well as the group regarding Israel as an independent state, neighbour and partner.

Denisov also said Moscow would push for the "rejection of radical views and positions which are inappropriate" and tell Hamas to keep up the "momentum of the peace process".

Speaking through a Spanish interpreter, Putin said: "We haven't considered Hamas a terrorist organisation. Today we must recognise that Hamas has reached power in Palestine as a result of legitimate elections and we must respect the choice of the Palestinian people."

Setting U.S. rules of engagement with Hamas, President George W. Bush said in a Reuters interview a week ago that the group must abandon its goal of destroying Israel and disarm.

ISRAEL SURPRISED

Israel has said governments should not speak to Hamas unless it recognised the xxxish state and renounced violence. It has ruled out negotiating with the group, which has masterminded more than 60 suicide bombings against Israelis since 2000.

An Israeli government source voiced surprise at Putin's comments, calling them a departure from a position taken by the Quartet, to which Russia belongs along with the United States, European Union and United Nations.

"(Russia) agreed to the Quartet's statements, so people in Jerusalem are raising an eyebrow -- what's going on here?" the source said.

At a meeting in London on Jan. 30, Quartet representatives said the Palestinians risked losing international aid if Hamas did not renounce violence and recognise Israel. Hamas has rejected the demand.

Denisov said the Palestinian people did not deserve to be cut off from such funding and that stopping it would be "counter-productive".

U.S. State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said in Washington that the Bush administration had "contacted the Russian government about what their intentions are."

"If there are any contacts between the Russian government and Hamas, we would expect that they would send that very clear message, both in public and private, that is contained in the Quartet statement."

A State Department official said Russia had not revealed Putin's plan to invite Hamas leaders at the Quartet meeting.

Hamas has largely adhered to a truce militant factions declared in March and has suggested it could be extended further if Israel gave up land it captured in the 1967 Middle East War.

In violence involving other armed groups on Thursday, Israeli troops shot dead two gunmen who threw grenades at them near a major Gaza border crossing. Gaza militants also fired a rocket into an Israel town, causing no casualties.

Southern Commander Major-General Yoav Galant said Israel would "know how to respond" to such attacks, which have increased in recent weeks, but did not want to be dragged into more tit-for-tat violence.

Link: http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/L09221947.htm

[Armenian]

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

THE RUSSIAN REVERSAL

Note: This is the first of a two-part piece on Russia's
recent geopolitical moves in the former Soviet Union.

Summary

Recent events in Ukraine and Georgia and the recent scandal involving
British diplomats in Russia have hinted at Russia's attempts to
reassert control over its interior and periphery. Russian President
Vladimir Putin's administration has enacted laws restricting
nongovernmental organizations and has used natural gas policy to
impose Putin's will on Russia and the former Soviet states as well as
Europe. Moscow is preparing to try reversing the tide of pro-Western
"color revolutions" that have swept the region and shield its borders
from further Western political and economic encroachment by fortifying
its near abroad. In the next several years, Putin will consolidate
his power and find a way to remain in a position of influence beyond
the March 2008 elections.

Analysis

Russia has been especially active during the past several months in
consolidating power in the Kremlin and reinforcing its position in
its near abroad. The "color revolutions" in the former Soviet Union
(FSU) have destabilized the Russian flank and precipitated moves
to centralize and reinforce Moscow's power in the region. Recent
incidents in several FSU countries resulted from Russian action or
reaction and represent the former regional overlord's attempts to
slowly start its comeback.

Russia has for the past two decades conducted a policy of trying
to strengthen itself through economics at the cost of geographical
influence. Russian President Vladimir Putin has recently decided that
this plan will not give Russia the best chance to remain a strong
player in the world arena. Thus, in efforts to tie the periphery
back to Russia, Putin is making moves to create new tensions --
or exacerbate old ones -- in the friction points surrounding Russia.

Ukraine

Ukraine has been at the forefront of international attention of late,
primarily because recent events there have affected Western European
states. The Russo-Ukrainian natural gas debacle, which reduced supplies
to Germany and other countries, put Europe on alert and led it to
reconsider its current reliance on Russian energy. In particular,
Germany will delay and possibly scrap the construction of a natural
gas pipeline directly connecting it to Russia. The second gas shutoff
to Europe, blamed on cold weather and Ukraine's blatant siphoning
of natural gas meant for delivery to the Continent, has further cast
Russia as an unreliable energy partner.

However, Russia is willing to accept this economic risk to gain
geopolitically. Endangering Ukraine's political shift toward the West
is worth the inconvenience; Russia considers Ukraine's alignment a
paramount concern because Ukraine's geography is vital to Russian
security and physical integrity. Without Ukraine, Russia's ability to
control Belarus, the North Caucasus and other areas would be greatly
diminished. Putin might say he is involved in Ukrainian politics
out of concern for the Russian minority there, but he is certainly
involved for his own interests.

The Ukraine situation is further complicated by Russia and Ukraine's
takeover of each other's strategic objects on the Crimean peninsula.

Operating under a lease, the Russian Black Sea Fleet has its only
warm-water station on the peninsula and also maintains bases and
lighthouses along the coast. The Ukrainians are drawing attention
to the area in a bid to sway the upcoming Ukrainian parliamentary
elections in favor of President Viktor Yushchenko's faction. Russia
is portrayed as an aggressor and interloper, and the nationalistic
element in Ukraine is provoking hostilities in the Crimea in order to
inspire support for Yushchenko's Western-leaning Our Ukraine party,
which came to power in the Orange Revolution, in the run up to the
elections. Russia, meanwhile, will certainly supportwhichever candidate
toes its line during the elections.

The Caucasus

Trouble in the Caucasus has been prevalent lately as well. The region's
very nature lends to outside interference; the many disparate groups
in the Caucasus have warred for centuries and are vulnerable to
Russian influence. The mountainous terrain is conducive to ethnic
and social instabilities and tensions, of which outsiders have always
taken advantage.

Hostilities are on the rise between Russia and Georgia after a series
of announcements regarding the future of Georgia's secessionist
regions; tensions escalated further after three explosions cut
off energy supplies from Russia. On Jan. 17, Russia announced it
would consider heeding the Georgian Parliament's request to withdraw
peacekeepers from the disputed Abkhazia and South Ossetia. On the same
day, Georgian President Mikhail Saakashvili announced an additional
military draft. This series of actions, plus the recurrent tensions
in the Gali region on the Abkhaz border, indicate a willingness among
both the Russians and the Georgians to escalate the situation.

Explosions Jan. 22 along two natural gas pipelines and an electricity
transmission line -- all close to the Georgian border in Russia --
precipitated yet another confrontation. The incidents disabled energy
delivery to Georgia, which quickly rerouted supplies from Azerbaijan,
Iran and Turkey. Saakashvili had been pushing to diversify the
natural gas supply even before the explosions, and the transition to
alternative sources was relatively easy.

The question about the explosions is not who benefited from them --
the question is who among the beneficiaries took the initiative?

Georgian authorities have accused the Russians, specifically Russia's
military intelligence agency GRU. The Russians have blamed the Chechens
-- the Northern Caucasus has not grown any less volatile -- and pinned
a charge of terrorism to the investigation.

However, there are additional implications. The natural gas pipelines
were struck in Russia's North Ossetia, just across the border from
the Georgian-controlled South Ossetia. The electricity transmission
line went down in Russia's Karachaevo-Cherkessia, near Abkhazia. Both
of Georgia's breakaway regions are propped up by Russia, which also
supports the Armenian-populated Samtskhe-Javakheti, where Russia holds
an army base. Russia could use the energy infrastructure attacks to
try to destabilize Georgia and its leadership, which came to power
through the "Rose Revolution." Russia has shown that it is willing to
do what is needed to achieve its goals, even if it means withdrawing
support from certain regions.

Also in the Caucasus, the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict is resurfacing.

The Armenian-populated area of Azerbaijan was taken by force by
militants who also secured a corridor to Armenia and a surrounding
barrier. A tenuous cease-fire has been in place since 1994, and
now French President Jacques Chirac has invited the presidents of
Armenia and Azerbaijan to meet in Paris in February to negotiate
a settlement. However, Azerbaijan is in a position to escalate
hostilities. Since his recent re-election, President Ilham Aliyev has
been consolidating power in preparation for the income Azerbaijan will
receive when the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan oil pipeline launches (which is
due any time now). The revenue will surpass anything Azerbaijan has
ever collected, and the possibility of it buying arms and attacking
is substantial.

During his visit to Baku on Jan. 24, Russian Defense Minister Sergei
Ivanov said Russia wants to station peacekeepers in Nagorno-Karabakh
rather than risk depending on troops from the Organization for
Security and Cooperation in Europe, and that it is willing to arm both
Armenia and Azerbaijan. The Azerbaijani defense minister, in turn,
said if the negotiations do not go well, Azerbaijan is ready to retake
Nagorno-Karabakh by force. Armenia receives support from its diaspora
community, Russia and, to a lesser degree, from Iran and the United
States. Azerbaijan counts on U.S. financial and military support,
as well as heavy Western investments into its energy sector.

Russia would stand to benefit from its involvement in this conflict
as well, de-stabilizing both of the factions and establishing itself
in the Transcaucasus.

http://www.stratfor.com/products/pre....php?id=261389

[Armenian]

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

Russia wants to resurrect influence in Muslim world: Moscow woos Muslim world with guns, diplomatic roses as US loses ground.

By Sebastian Smith – MOSCOW

The huge arms deal with Algeria that Moscow announced on Friday demonstrates Russia's determination to resurrect influence in the Muslim world through weapons exports and challenges to Western-dominated diplomacy, analysts said.

Flush with oil and gas revenues and buoyed by its presidency of the Group of Eight, Russia is becoming a significant player -- and competitor with the United States -- in the Middle East for the first time since the Soviet crash of 1991.

The latest sign of President Vladimir Putin's drive to reestablish Russian clout was the announcement during his flying visit to Algeria on Friday of weapons sales worth 7.5 billion dollars (6.3 billion euros). Russia also agreed to cancel Algeria's Soviet-era debt.

Weapons are one of Russia's few internationally competitive products. In 2005 the export agency Rosoboronexport announced its best sales for years at 6.1 billion dollars, mostly to China, India and former Soviet client states in the Muslim world and Asia.

But Moscow's simultaneous writing off of 4.7 billion dollars of debt reveals the political nature of the arms trade, analysts said.

"There has never been a deal like that in the history of Russian military-industrial partnerships," the Kommersant business daily said on Saturday. It suggested that the real value of contracts might not have been more than 5.5 billion dollars.

"This visit was part of Russia's general policy in the Middle East," said Alexei Malashenko, an analyst at the Carnegie Centre in Moscow.

"Russia is coming back. The geopolitical strategy has changed. The rapprochment with the West is over and Russia is taking its own route."

That new strategy -- kick-started in April 2005 when Putin became the first Kremlin leader to visit Israel and the Palestinian territories -- coincides with a distinct cooling of relations between Moscow and Washington.

But Russia presents itself less as a competitor than an East-West middleman.

As builder of Iran's sole civilian nuclear power plant, Moscow says it can help resolve Tehran's standoff with the international community over a suspected secret weapons programme. In the only compromise plan on the table, Russia would assume responsibility for Iran's uranium enrichment.

Russia also ignored Israeli and Western suspicion at the start of March to hold talks with Hamas, arguing that the militant group, which is now the ruling party in the Palestinian territories, should be engaged, not made a pariah.

Another Western bugbear -- Syria -- will be allowed into Russia's diplomatic limelight this week when Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and his Syrian counterpart Walid Muallem meet in Moscow.

Russia has been at odds with European powers and the United States over how to ensure Syria's cooperation with a UN probe into suspicions of Syrian links to the murder of Lebanese ex-premier Rafiq Hariri.

Russia wants Syrian cooperation, Lavrov said ahead of the Moscow talks, but not for the issue to be used for "political means".

All these initiatives add up to a bold but risky policy that could leave Russia isolated, Malashenko warned.

"It's important these initiatives bring results, because otherwise they will boomerang on Russia," he said.

Link: http://www.middle-east-online.com/english/?id=15966

[Armenian]

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

The leader of Georgia's Moscow-backed breakaway region of South Ossetia said Wednesday that his territory will ask to be recognized as part of Russia.

"We intend to shortly lodge a petition with the Russian Constitutional Court because there are historical documents about Ossetia's status as part of Russia," Eduard Kokoity said in comments shown on Russian state television.

Speaking on a visit to North Ossetia, which is a Russian region, he said that Ossetia as a whole had historically been part of Russia since the 18th century.

South Ossetia has run its own affairs since breaking away from Georgian control in an 18-month war that ended in 1992. South Ossetia and another separatist province, Abkhazia, have close ties with Moscow, which has granted Russian citizenship to many of their residents.

Georgia's pro-Western leadership repeatedly has accused Russian peacekeepers, deployed to both provinces since the early 1990s, of siding with separatists, and has vowed to bring the two breakaway regions back under central government control, reports AP.

Link: http://english.pravda.ru/news/world/...7708-georgia-0

[Armenian]

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

China, Russia sign joint statement

BEIJING, March 21 (Xinhua) -- China and Russia signed a joint statement here Tuesday, pledging to tighten their ties by furthering cooperation in politics, energy and regional affairs. Recalling their ten-year-old strategic partnership of coorperation, Chinese President Hu Jintao and visiting Russian President Vladimir Putin agreed that "bilateral relations are at an unprecedented level of development".

Putin is on a two-day state visit to China from Tuesday to Wednesday. Apart from the joint statement, the two heads of state also attended the signing of 14 cooperative agreements after their talks in the Great Hall of the People. "The energy cooperation between China and Russia, as an important part of the Sino-Russian Strategic Partnership of Cooperation, is witnessing a high-level development, and is of great significance for further deepening bilateral economic cooperation," says the statement.

The two sides support companies from both nations to invest in the exploration of oil and gas resources and to tap energy potentials of both nations, according to the statement. Russia expressed its strong support for the one - China policy. "The Russian side will continue to adhere to the one - China policy and recognize the government of the People's Republic of China as the sole legitimate government of the whole of China," the statement says. And "Taiwan is an inalienable part of the Chinese territory."

Russia opposes Taiwan joining the United Nations and other international organizations that only sovereign nations could join,and will not sell weapons to Taiwan, says the statement.China and Russia, sharing a 4,300-km-long border, thoroughly settled their boundary disputes last year after 40 years of negotiations. The completion of delimitation and the smooth implementation ofthe agreement on strengthening military trust and mutual reduction of armed forces on the border areas, as well as the agreement on common economic use of certain islands in the border rivers and surrounding waters during the past ten years, are conducive to peace and friendship on the China-Russia border areas, the statement says.

[...]

Link: http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/20...nt_4328918.htm

Sino Russian Trade Soars

A report about the record scale of Sino-Russian trade, which reached $29 billion in 2005 -- a 37.1 percent increase -- came out in December and was supplemented in the first two months of this year. Importantly, during this period bilateral trade has been scrutinized in the context of the upcoming visit of the Russian president to China. The report's conclusion is that during Putin's presidency Sino-Russian trade has more than tripled. The point of departure is 2000, with the volume of trade amounting to $8.3 billion. The Russian economy has also grown, but not to such an extent. In other words, Sino-Russian commerce is surpassing Russia's economic growth as a whole.

China is not the only case in point. Trade with France has also almost tripled, reaching $9 billion a year. But these rates have not turned France into Russia's second trade partner after Germany. This place is occupied by China. It is difficult to quote accurate data because Russia and China have always engaged in border trade, which is estimated at several billion dollars on top of the official figure and makes the statistics extremely confusing. It is no surprise that Asia's importance for Russia is rapidly growing. Asia is attracting greater attention from the rest of the world as well.

The question of who it is better to trade with -- East or West -- does not depend on political preferences but is the choice of the market's invisible hand. Otherwise, why was there so much talk under former President Boris Yeltsin about the need to cross the $10 billion mark in Sino-Russian trade, a target which seemed unrealistic and was not achieved at that time?

After the year 2000, however, the situation underwent a dramatic change. Bilateral trade virtually doubled between 2003 and 2005, a rare case in world practice. Nevertheless, although China has become Russia's second partner after Germany, the reverse is not true. Russia's share in China's entire trade is a little over 2 percent. In other words, Moscow depends more on Beijing than the other way round. It is not easy to level out this imbalance.

Mutual economic dependence is a coveted target in international relations because it makes them stable, peaceful and predictable. Sino-U.S. relations are one example. In theory, the two countries should be extremely tense as many Americans are horrified by the prospect of China replacing the United States as the world's economic leader within the next 25-45 years. But in reality, Beijing and Washington treat each other with care.

Out of China's 863 large commercial airplanes, 534 are Boeings, for which the United States received $40 billion. A considerable portion of Boeing spare parts found all over the world are assembled in China. Moreover, China has already credited the U.S. economy with $300 billion, having bought securities from the U.S. Treasury. Even if the two countries are strategic rivals, this does not prevent them from being locked in a strong economic embrace.

Despite its trade record with China, Russia is not as economically important for China as the U.S. But China certainly needs Russia. The latest statistics of bilateral trade show the share of raw materials (oil, timber, fish, metals) in Russia's exports to China is on the upsurge. In 2005, this figure reached almost 90 percent of Russia's overall exports to China. As for oil deliveries, Russia is China's fifth-largest partner after Saudi Arabia, Iran, Oman and Angola.

But China cannot export raw materials because it has none. Instead, it has recently become the world's assembly shop. Both Moscow and Beijing are trying to find out a roundabout way of overcoming this unpleasant trend. Both sides want to make Russia's exports of raw materials more science-intensive. Russian President Vladimir Putin and his Chinese counterpart Hu Jintao agreed to draft a program on bilateral trade and economic cooperation for 2006-2010. Today, the Russian Ministry of Economic Development and Trade and the Chinese Ministry of Trade are working on this program. The document will be practically completed by the time of Putin's forthcoming visit to China.

The main goals of the plan are to at least double bilateral trade again to reach $60 billion by 2010, and attract $12 billion worth of Chinese investment to the Russian economy. These objectives require a change in the entire pattern of bilateral trade. Russia will not amend its intention to increase oil supplies to China. The amount, carried by trains alone, will be brought to 15 million tons. But apart from exporting oil, Russia is capable of offering energy generation technologies and these matters are now on the agenda.

[...]

Source: http://www.spacewar.com/reports/Sino...ade_Soars.html

[Armenian]

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

Russia, China looking to form 'NATO of the East'?

A six-member group, seeking to balance US power, meets in Moscow Wednesday.

By Fred Weir | Correspondent of The Christian Science Monitor

MOSCOW - Russia and China could take a step closer to forming a Eurasian military confederacy to rival NATO at a Moscow meeting of the six-member Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) Wednesday, experts say.

The group, which started in 2001 with limited goals of promoting cooperation in former Soviet Central Asia, has evolved rapidly toward a regional security bloc and could soon induct new members such as India, Pakistan, and Iran.

One initiative that core members Russia and China agree on, experts say, is to squeeze US influence - which peaked after 9/11 - out of the SCO's neighborhood. "Four years ago, when the SCO was formed, official Washington pooh-poohed it and declared it was no cause for concern," says Ariel Cohen, senior researcher at the Heritage Foundation in Washington. "Now they're proven wrong."

Wednesday's meeting is expected to review security cooperation, including a spate of upcoming joint military exercises between SCO members' armed forces. It may also sign off on a new "Contact Group" for Afghanistan. That would help Russia and China - both concerned about increased opium flows and the rise of Islamism - develop direct relations between SCO and the Afghan government. While this will be highly controversial given the presence of NATO troops and Afghans' bitter memories of fighting Russian occupation throughout the 1980s, the Russians have an "in" because they still have longstanding allies in the country.

In attendance Wednesday will be prime ministers of member states Russia, China, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan, and Tajikistan, as well as top officials from several recently added "observer" states, including Indian Foreign Minister Natwar Singh, Pakistani Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz, and Iranian Vice President Parviz Davudi.

The SCO's swift rise has been fueled by deteriorating security conditions in ex-Soviet Central Asia, as well as a hunger in Moscow and Beijing for a vehicle that could counter US influence in the region.

"Moscow is seeking options to demonstrate - to Washington in the first place - that Russia is still an important player in this area," says Fyodor Lukyanov, editor of Russia in Global Affairs, a partner of the US bimonthly journal Foreign Affairs. "China's ambitions are growing fast, and it also wants to turn the SCO into something bigger and more effective."

Russian leaders blame the Bush administration, with its emphasis on democracy-building, for recent unrest, including revolution in Kyrgyzstan and a putative Islamist revolt in Uzbekistan. "Washington wants to expand democracy, which it sees as a panacea for all social and geopolitical evils," says Sergei Karaganov, head of the Council for Foreign and Defense Policies, which advises the Kremlin. "But it is clear to us that any rapid democratization of these countries (in Central Asia) will lead to chaos."

An SCO summit last June demanded that the US set a timetable to remove the bases it put in Uzbekistan and Kyrgyzstan with Moscow's acquiescence in the wake of 9/11. In July, Uzbek leader Islam Karimov ordered the US base at Karshi-Khanabad to evacuate by year's end.

But two recent visits to Kyrgyzstan by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice appear to have secured the US lease on that country's Manas airbase indefinitely - albeit with a sharp rent increase.

"There is nothing to cheer about," says Mr. Cohen. "Washington has signaled to the Russians that we won't be seeking any new bases in Central Asia. Basically, we are doing nothing to counter the moves against us."

In joint maneuvers last August, Russian strategic bombers, submarines, and paratroopers staged a mock invasion of a "destabilized" far eastern region with Chinese troops. This month, Russian Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov proposed holding the first Indian-Chinese-Russian war games under SCO sponsorship. "In principle, this is possible," he said. "The SCO was formed as an organization to deal with security issues."

Should states like India and Iran join, the SCO's sway could spread into South Asia and the Middle East. "India sees observer status [in the SCO] as a steppingstone to full membership," says a Moscow-based Indian diplomat who asked not to be named. But he added that India, which has recently improved its relations with the US, does not want to send an anti-US message. "We would hope the Americans would understand our desire to be inside the SCO, rather than outside," he says.

While the SCO's potential looks vast on paper, experts say internal rivalries would preclude it from evolving into a NATO-like security bloc. "What kind of allies could Russia and China be?" says Akady Dubnov, an expert with the Vremya Novostei newspaper. "The main question for them in Central Asia is who will gain the upper hand."

Still, the idea of a unified eastern bloc has strong appeal for some in Moscow. "It's very important that regional powers are showing the will to resolve Eurasian problems without the intrusion of the US," says Alexander Dugin, chair of the International Eurasian Movement, whose members include leading Russian businessmen and politicians. "Step by step we're building a world order not based on the unipolar hegemony of the US."

Says Cohen: "Eventually they'll wake up to this challenge in Washington. But will it be too late?"

Source: http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/1026/p04s01-woeu.htm

Russia and China: Joint Military Exercises

Russia and China conducted their first joint military exercises, dubbed “Peace Mission 2005,” last week. Many observers contend that the maneuvers were meant to send a clear message to the United States, Japan, and the rest of the world that the jury is still out over power in Taiwan and Central Asia.

TAIPEI — Taiwan Daily (liberal, pro-independence), Aug. 21: “If one wants to analyze why China and Russia want to jointly start such military drills, a relatively more reasonable answer will be that China wants to use this military exercise to make a show of its force to the ‘U.S.-Japan security alliance.’ Russia, on the other hand, is attempting to use this drill to release the strategic pressure it encounters in East Europe and Central Asia. … The situation on the Korean peninsula will be the next [that is worth observation]. Since both China and Russia are participants of the Six Party Talks as well as standing members of the U.N. Security Council, the joint Sino-Russia military drill will not only attempt to place pressure on the ‘U.S.-Japan alliance’ but will also seek to form a new alliance among the participants of the Six Party Talks. China has already [succeeded in] maintaining a close relationship with South Korea. If it could create a new cooperative relationship with Russia following the joint military exercise and apply it on the Korean peninsula, it will be able to form a confrontational situation between the ‘China-Russia-Seoul-Pyongyang’ [force] and the ‘U.S.-Japan alliance’ once the fourth round of Six Party Talks is resumed.”
— Lai I-chung

LONDON — Financial Times (centrist), Aug. 19: “’Peace Mission 2005,’ the first joint military exercise launched yesterday by China and Russia, is not the innocent peacekeeping drill its name suggests. It represents a significant deepening of the military relationship between a former superpower and an emerging one, and therefore will be closely watched by the only current superpower, the U.S. … If these war games were really about peacekeeping, they would not require the mock amphibious assaults, attack submarines and Russian long-range strategic bombers that military analysts say are involved. …”

SINGAPORE — Business Times (pro-government, financial), Aug. 19: “The growing American preoccupation with the Middle East has come with a major cost. Since 9/11 and against the backdrop of the mess in Iraq, the United States has been less engaged in dealing with the core geo-political and geo-economic problems of East Asia. If anything, American approach towards East Asia has been dominated by reactive and ad-hoc policies centered mostly on security issues, and in particular, the North Korean nuclear crisis and Taiwan. Even more troubling has been the failure of the Bush administration to develop a coherent strategy towards China. Instead, U.S. policy towards Beijing is looking more and more like a set of confused responses to the pressures coming from a coalition of protectionists, neoconservative ideologues and China bashers. It’s not surprising, therefore, that the United States is finding itself more and more marginalized in the political and economic changes that are taking place in East Asia as it faces a more diplomatically engaged and energetic China.”

TOKYO — Sankei Shimbun (right-wing), Aug. 19: “The first joint-military exercise between China and Russia, ‘Peace Mission 2005,’ has begun. Both countries say that the exercise ‘is not targeted against a third country.’ However, it appears that it [exercise] is targeting the ‘common strategic goal’ of the Japanese-U.S. alliance, as it includes training based on the supposition of ‘landing in Taiwan,’ among other things. China is definitely accelerating the modernization of its military, and we cannot help but have concerns over it. … Such moves reflect the joint interests of China and Russia of opposing U.S. rule by reinforcing military cooperation. … The primary purpose of the plan for the joint-exercise, which China proposed one year ago, was to ‘train for anti-terrorism.’ However, on the exercise plan this time, it appears that Russia’s intention is to urge the Chinese side to conduct exercises in which the Russia side will mobilize the latest equipment. … Along with its economic development, China has modernized its weapons and equipment. However, in recent years, it is placing emphasis on reinforcing its air and naval power. It [the reinforcement] is on the supposition of a contingency over Taiwan, and it is believed that it is based on a strategy to prevent U.S. military intervention. …”

TAIPEI — Taipei Times (liberal, pro-independence, English language), Aug. 19: “It is not difficult to see what the real target of such an exercise is. … Although Russia’s overall military power still lags behind that of the U.S., it is still more powerful than that of China. … This is an indirect indication of an improvement in Chinese-Russian relations, as both nations share the aim of increasing their influence in the Asia-Pacific region. The Russian government has attached considerable importance to these exercises. … The U.S. has shown interest in both the scope and format of the drills, as well as the effectiveness of the weapons that are employed. Washington is even more interested to learn about their methods of communication, the command and control mechanism, the application of electronic parameters and the exchange of intelligence between the two nations. The exercises are expected to have a significant impact on the balance of power in Asia and are also an opportunity for China and Russia to make the U.S. take note of their growing military strength. …” — Chang Yan-ting

Source: http://www.worldpress.org/Asia/2138.cfm

[Armenian]

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

Russians Sense the Heat of Cold War

Intensifying U.S. Criticism of Government and Its Role in Region Provokes Resentment

By Peter Finn
Washington Post Foreign Service
Monday, April 3, 2006; A14

MOSCOW -- In this city, it's beginning to feel like a new Cold War, driven by what many people here see as an old American impulse: to encircle, weaken or even destroy Russia, just as the country is emerging from post-Soviet ruins as a cohesive, self-confident and global power. The specter of a U.S. nuclear first strike even resurfaced this month. An article in Foreign Affairs magazine, published by the Council on Foreign Relations, suggested that the United States could hit Russia and China without serious risk of retaliation. That sent heads spinning here with visions of Dr. Strangelove.

"The publication of these ideas in a respectable American journal has had an explosive effect," former Russian prime minister Yegor Gaidar wrote in an article in London's Financial Times newspaper. "Even those Russian journalists and analysts who are not prone to hysteria or anti-Americanism took it as an outline of the official position of the U.S. Administration." "Today, it's accepted by most of the establishment that we are under pressure, that we are being surrounded, and it's leading to a defensive nationalist vision," said Sergei Rogov, director of the Institute of the United States and Canada in Moscow.

Intensifying U.S. criticism -- that Russia is rolling back democratic institutions, interfering in the countries of the former Soviet Union and using its vast energy resources to further its interests -- is leading to widespread resentment here and seen as little more than self-serving rhetoric. Russians widely believe that U.S. programs to promote democracy in Ukraine, Georgia and Belarus are a Trojan horse intended to sideline Russia and expand NATO.

Academics point to reports such as one released recently by the Council on Foreign Relations: "To ease Russian pressure on neighboring states," it said, "the United States should work to accelerate those states' integration into the West." "We are gradually being pushed to the northeast of the Eurasian continent away from the seas . . . to the place where the depths of freezing is more than two meters," said Natalia Narochnitskaya, vice chairman of the international affairs committee in the State Duma, the lower house of Russia's parliament, and a member of the nationalist Rodina Party.

She rues the loss of the three Baltic states to European Union and NATO membership and the possible loss of Russia's naval presence on the Black Sea. "The messianism of American foreign policy is a remarkable thing," she said. When Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice speaks, Narochnitskaya said, "it seems like Khrushchev reporting to the party congress: 'The whole world is marching triumphantly toward democracy but some rogue states prefer to stay aside from that road, etc. etc.' "

The Sept. 11, 2001, attacks appeared to put U.S.-Russian relations on a new and remarkable footing. President Vladimir Putin facilitated the stationing of American troops in Central Asia to support military operations in Afghanistan. In 2002, Putin, still regarded as a reformer, was offered a year-long chairmanship of the Group of Eight leading industrial democracies. Today, some public figures in the United States, including Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), have suggested that President Bush boycott the G-8 summit in St. Petersburg this summer to register dismay at Russia's foreign policy and its internal direction.

Many U.S. officials hold up the administration of President Boris Yeltsin in the 1990s as imperfect but headed in the right direction; people here say those years were simply chaotic. "For a person of democratic and liberal persuasions, I can say that Russia has never been freer or more affluent," said Sergei Karaganov, chairman of the Russian Council on Foreign and Defense Policy. "Putin inherited a non-state, so he first wants to build a state and create the conditions for modernization and democracy. Do I worry about some domestic developments? Of course. I could be more critical than most Americans. But it's like blaming winter for following autumn."

In Moscow, strains in the relationship are viewed more as a result of the United States' inability to accept the fact that Russia is no longer the servile entity of the 1990s -- when it blustered but, in the end, always caved because it was weak. "We have safeguarded and will safeguard our national interests," Russian Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov told reporters last week. "If someone dislikes this, this is not our problem."

On certain issues, such as the nuclear ambitions of North Korea and Iran, Russian officials say they will work with the West, but on their own terms. There is, for instance, broad agreement with the United States that Iran should not acquire nuclear weapons, but little consensus on what steps to take to prevent that from happening. Russia is opposed to imposing sanctions on Iran, with which it has strong economic ties.

But in the area known as Russia's "near-abroad," the former Soviet republics at its periphery, Russia and the West often take diametrically opposed views of the same situation. In Belarus, Western governments condemned the recent reelection of President Alexander Lukashenko as a farce. Russia declared the contest free and fair, as it has in contested ballots across the former Soviet Union. Even if Russians recognize electoral fraud, they are not going to concede the point, said Rogov. "My suspicion is that since we see no better alternative, we prefer the status quo -- no matter how bad it is."

Narochnitskaya said the underlying issue is not democracy but influence. "The hysteria around Belarus and the demonization of President Lukashenko has more to do with his anti-NATO, anti-Western stand than his lack of democracy," she said. "Belarus is a missing piece of the puzzle assembled from the Baltics to the Black Sea. There are points on the map where we can yield, but there are some where it's important not to do so."

The point that appears to animate Russians most is Ukraine. Since that country's Orange Revolution, the popular protests that swept President Viktor Yushchenko into power 16 months ago, relations between the two countries have soured. At the beginning of this year, the Russian state-owned energy giant Gazprom briefly cut off natural gas supplies, which are critical to Ukraine's heavy industry and households. In parliamentary elections last month, Yushchenko's party suffered a humiliating setback to a Moscow-backed candidate.

In Washington and European Union capitals, the cutoff was seen as punishment for Yushchenko's Western orientation, particularly his desire to bring Ukraine into NATO. For Russia, such a move would be anathema. The defense and civilian industries of the two countries remain closely intertwined, and Russia's Black Sea fleet is based in the Crimea on Ukrainian territory. "The idea of admitting Ukraine into NATO is hammering the final nail into the coffin of Russia as an independent great power," Rogov said. "We go out, you go in. Unfortunately, it's almost a consensus in Russia that the West is trying to isolate Russia."

Link: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...200749_pf.html

[Armenian]

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

Russia Intends to Revise Policy towards Armenia

/PanARMENIAN.Net/ Administration of the Russian President intends to revise its policy line in relations with Armenia, said professor Mikhail Meyer, the Director of the Institute of Asian and African Studies of Moscow State University. In his words, relations with a strategic partner as Armenia is for Russia, should be closer. «Absence of scientific and cultural ties between our countries in latest 10-15 years have had a negative impact on the relations. After the collapse of the USSR a situation that is very unfavorable for Russia was formed: it does not have specialists on CIS countries. Now the state of affairs started improving, however there is a lack of Armenian teachers, especially grabar (ancient Armenian),» the professor noted.

He also remarked that certain progress is available on the way of Armenia and Russia becoming closer. «Academician Mikhail Piotrovsky was in Yerevan lately, my colleague Vitaly Naumkin is in Yerevan now, specialist on Arab countries Dmitry Frolov is soon expected to arrive. We almost do not know the works of contemporary Armenian historians, however I hope the gap will be filled,» Mikhail Meyer remarked. Professor Mikhail Meyer is in Yerevan on the invitation of the South Caucasian branch of the Caucasus Democracy Institute development foundation.

Link: http://panarmenian.net/news/eng/?nid=17147

[Armenian]

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

Russia's plans to build pipeline to far east

Pipeline politics

Mar 22nd 2006
From The Economist Global Agenda

Energy-rich Russia has proposed piping gas and oil to resource-hungry China. But Russia’s record of using energy exports to promote its foreign policy interests suggests that, if the new pipelines are actually built, supplies could be a source of friction rather than friendship

RUSSIA and China have much in common. The huge countries share a border of 2,700 miles (4,300km) and a history of autocratic rule. And both are enjoying economic booms. But while Russia prospers by exporting oil and gas from its vast reserves, China is a voracious importer. On March 21st Russia’s president, Vladimir Putin went a little way towards keeping both economies bubbling in the long term, while making the most of the mismatch.

Mr Putin, in Beijing for talks with China’s leader, Hu Jintao, agreed a number of deals that could partly slake China’s huge thirst for energy. Gazprom, Russia’s state-controlled gas monopoly, will construct pipelines from Siberia that should start pumping gas to China in five years. State oil firms from the two countries will run joint-ventures. And, perhaps more importantly, China National Petroleum Corporation agreed to stump up $400m towards an oil pipeline between eastern Siberia and China.

China should not celebrate too soon on the last deal, at least. Mr Putin failed to give any details of the construction or time-scale of the oil pipe, though his energy minister said work would begin this year. Russia has long deliberated about the route the pipe should take, with both China and Japan desperately keen for it to come to them. As usual, final plans will depend upon the conclusions of a “feasibility study”. The environmental impact of such a big project could be enormous. The pipe’s proximity to Lake Baikal, the world’s largest single store of fresh water, and its effect on the haunts of a rare species of leopard apparently trouble Russia’s planners. More pressing, however, are the interests of the Russian state.

Lobbying from Japan and China on the route of the pipeline has gone on for some years. Japan wants it to reach the shore of the Sea of Japan, where tankers could distribute the black stuff to Japan and China, and elsewhere in Asia and America. Japan is ready to put a hefty sum towards construction costs to secure a deal. This route would be far longer than one to the proposed terminus in China.

Mr Putin has suggested that the pipe will run to the coast and a spur will supply China with his country’s oil. But his silence on details may be intended to suggest that all options are still open while Russia waits for more concessions. That, at least, is typical of Russia’s use of its oil and gas as instruments of foreign policy. Even the promise of a pipeline is a useful means of wielding influence over neighbours, both to the east and to the west. Russia may hope for a favourable outcome in a territorial dispute with Japan over the Kuriles, a chain of islands linking Japan to Russia. Or, with China, it might expect better co-operation in Central Asia.

China’s quest for “energy security” has sent it far and wide. Last year, CNOOC, a state oil firm, even tried to buy America’s Unocal, though Congress stymied the move. Russia previously blocked Chinese firms from buying stakes in its oil firms, so the proposed joint-ventures count as something of a concession. Chinese state-controlled oil firms are also busy picking up assets in various corners of Africa, Venezulea, and most galling to Russia, in the former Soviet republics of Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan.

Keeping a grip

Russia’s grip on the oil and gas of Central Asia and the Caucasus loosened after the break up of the Soviet Union. But through Transneft, the state-run Russian monopoly that owns many pipelines in the region, it retains serious clout. Until recently much of the energy exports from these areas went through Russia. Last year, however, a consortium led by BP opened a huge pipeline between Baku, on the Caspian Sea, and the Turkish port of Ceyhan. When operational it will give the West access to the region’s oil and gas through a pipeline that avoids Russia. Last year a pipeline opened between Kazakhstan and China which may yet extend to the Caspian oil fields. Until then most Kazakh oil was piped through Russia.

Mr Putin has responded by consolidating the state’s hold over domestic oil and gas reserves. Last year, Gazprom, the giant state gas company, bought Sibneft, a private Russian oil producer. Earlier, Rosneft, another state-controlled oil firm, acquired the main production operation of Yukos, a private energy company that had been dismembered by Russia’s state. Yukos’s boss, Mikhail Khodorkovsky, was also thrown into jail, perhaps partly because he planned to build a private oil pipeline to China (he also meddled in internal Russian politics). Foreign oil companies have also been blocked from making any new investments in Russia.

Such tight control of energy exports lets Russia manipulate relations with its near neighbours. It cut supplies to Ukraine at the start of the year as the two countries rowed about the cost of gas. Many suspect, too, Mr Putin was punishing Ukraine’s pro-western government. Russia subsidises gas exports to Belarus, buying the staunch loyalty of its leader. When Belarus’s leader, Alyaksandr Lukashenka, irked the Kremlin in 2004 Russia turned off the taps, if only briefly. A new pipeline across the Black Sea, carrying gas to Turkey, raises questions over Russia’s influence on that country. And western Europe in general is increasingly reliant on Russian energy exports. Though the dispute in Ukraine was settled quickly, it highlighted doubts over Russia’s reliability as a supplier. At the very least it made clear that—as China and Japan know only too well—the provision of energy supplies has political, as well as economic, ramifications.