The Rise of the Russian Empire: Russo-Armenian Relations

[Armenian]

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

The Amazing MIG



MiG-29M OVT (Wings of Russia 2007): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yXt4R...eature=related

[Armenian]

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

Russian border services marks 90th anniversary

Russian borderguards on Wednesday are marking the 90th anniversary of the founding of their service. On May 18, a decree by the Soviet Government established the main border protection department, to which officers of the former corps of Russia’s Border Watch transferred. Russia has the longest border in the world - more than 61,000 kilometers. The border service controlled by the Federal Security Service (FSB) is undergoing a new stage of development at present. By a decision of the Security Council in 2003, it transferred from the three-tier to two-tier management system comprising head office and regional departments. Two departments were set up in Lubyanka, Moscow -- the border deparment (land border) and coastguard -- which amass the main forces.

By the end of this year, the service in border troops will become fully professional. No conscripts were enlisted to the service since autumn 2006, and the last conscript will be discharged in the autumn of 2008. Simultaneously, the Russian border service has been implementing extensive events to develop the state border. It is carrying out the federal goal-oriented program "state border of the Russian Federation (2003-2010)." It is planned to finish the development of new stretches of the border, including with Kazakhstan, Ukraine and Baltic republics by 2011. Two hundred and sixteen facilities will be commissioned on the border with Kazakhstan by 2010, which has a length of 7,500 kilometers (or 33 percent of all Russia's land border). Russia is building modern infrastructure on the border. Borderguards are given state-of-the-art equipment, and means of communication and control.

Pilotless aircraft are added to their arsenal, which considerably eases work to control long stretches. More than 30 research and development projects are pursued within the framework of the program of armaments of Russia's border service in 2006-2015 and "the main guidelines for technical development of the border service for the period until 2015." Eleven thousand details, dozens of ships, boats and helicopters are daily on duty to protect Russia’s state border. Requirements to borderguards change over time. Depending on the place of service, border guards need to know the language of the neighboring state. Special task force units will be sent to the most dangerous areas beginning from 2010.

New uniforms have been designed for various climatic conditions. Last year, Russian border guards detained more than 6,200 border violators, and seized 520 million roubles of illegal goods, including 800 kilograms of narcotics. Russia's FSB coastguard service detained more than 400 vessels for poaching in the designated period, of which 12 Russian and six foreign ships were confiscated.

Source: http://www.itar-tass.com/eng/level2....2005&PageNum=0

[Armenian]

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

Ukraine Wants Russian Navy Out of Crimea

The Ukrainian President has signed a decree ordering the Cabinet to prepare by July 20 a draft law on terminating all international agreements on the presence of Russia's Black Sea Fleet in Ukraine. Russia's navy currently uses a range of naval facilities in the Crimea under an agreement signed in 1997, under which Ukraine agreed to lease naval facilities to Russia until 2017. The May 16 resolution on measures to ensure Ukraine's status as a naval power, enacted by Viktor Yushchenko on May 20, was posted on his official website Wednesday. Disputes between Russia and Ukraine over the lease of the base are frequent. Russia currently pays $93 million per year to lease the base from its ex-Soviet neighbor, which is paid for with Russian energy supplies. Ukraine's intelligence services barred Moscow Mayor Yuri Luzhkov on May 12 from entering the former Soviet republic over his "provocative" statements regarding the ownership of the Black Sea city of Sevastopol. Moscow's mayor made strong calls for the disputed ownership of a Russian naval base in Sevastopol to be transferred back to Russia. The head of the State Duma committee on CIS affairs, Alexei Ostrovsky, said in April that Russia could reclaim the Crimea if Ukraine was admitted to NATO. Media reported that President Vladimir Putin issued a similar threat at a closed-door speech to NATO leaders at the Bucharest summit earlier this month. Ukraine's Foreign Ministry confirmed last month that Russia had been invited to start talks in June on the withdrawal of its fleet from the Crimea, but said Moscow had yet to reply to the proposal.

Source: http://mnweekly.ru/politics/20080522/55330013.html

No love for NATO in Ukraine's pro-Russian enclave

Ukraine's pro-Western leaders hope to join NATO but the people of this Black Sea port, where Russian warships are moored at the quayside, want no part of it. "I just can't imagine that the boots of a NATO soldier may tread on this sacred land one day," said Vladimir, an 82-year-old pensioner, as he walked along the quay. "We want no NATO here," he said, his World War Two medals jangling on his chest. "This would mean to betray Russia." Sevastopol is in Ukraine but a majority of its residents are ethnic Russians and most regard it as a Russian town -- at least in terms of history, culture and emotion. That sentiment is reinforced by the presence here of the Russian navy's Black Sea fleet, and the fact that until 1954 the Crimea region that includes Sevastopol was part of Russia. "Imagine a NATO base in Sevastopol!" Vladimir Putin, then Russian president, said with an incredulous tone earlier this year after talks with Ukrainian President Viktor Yushchenko.

Ukraine says that cannot happen because its constitution bars the presence on its territory of any foreign bases other than the Russian Black Sea fleet. At a summit in Bucharest in April, NATO states agreed that Ukraine and Georgia could eventually join the Western military alliance, though they did not give a timetable. That angered Russia, which sees further NATO enlargement as a threat to its security and a new encroachment into its traditional sphere of influence. This month Sevastopol was again at the focus of the tension. Ukraine barred influential Moscow Mayor Yuri Luzhkov from entering the country after a speech in the port in which he said Russia should take it back from Ukraine. Moscow responded by blocking a deputy Ukrainian minister from entering Russia.

RUSSIAN FLAGS

Ukrainian flags fly over public buildings and official signs are in Ukrainian language. But these are swamped by a sea of Russian tricolor flags flying from the Black Sea fleet headquarters, by white-and-blue St Andrew's flags flying from Russian warships and by the Soviet military pennants sold in local shops. Blue tents scattered around the town collect signatures for a referendum to have the Russian fleet kept here permanently. Moscow's $93-million-a-year lease runs out in 2017. "We won't give up our Sevastopol!" thousands of people chanted as they listened to Luzhkov address a rally to mark the 225th anniversary of the creation of the Black Sea fleet. The opposition in Sevastopol -- as well as large swathes of Ukraine's Russian-speaking east and south -- to NATO membership is more than a domestic problem for Yushchenko. Polls show only a third of Ukraine's population favors joining the alliance, and that split makes some NATO member states in Europe skeptical about bringing in Ukraine.

The Crimean peninsula was a part of the Russian republic of the Soviet Union until 1954, when Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev signed it over to the Ukrainian republic as a "token of brotherly love".

That mattered little when both republics were part of the Soviet Union, but when Ukraine gained independence in 1991 it became a ticking timebomb. Through the 1990s, as the new Ukrainian state established its credentials, Crimea was gripped by periodic outbursts of pro-Russian sentiment but has since been generally calm. ar veteran Vladimir, who refused to give his family name, said he remembered the contribution the United States made during World War Two, supplying tinned meat and vehicles to the Soviet war effort. "Yes, they were good allies during that war," he said. "But today they have turned their bayonets against us."

Source: http://www.reuters.com/article/world...82598320080524

Envoy Says Black Sea Fleet Might Stay

29 May 2008ReutersA Russian envoy said Wednesday that Russia could continue to base its Black Sea Fleet in Ukraine after a lease deal runs out in 2017, defying Kiev, which says it does not want an extension. Ukrainian President Viktor Yushchenko last week ordered his government to prepare legislation on ending the Russian Navy's presence in the port of Sevastopol in 2017, prompting complaints from Moscow that he was being hasty. "We have never concealed our willingness to keep our presence in Sevastopol after 2017," said Russian envoy Vladimir Dorokhin, who has been involved in Black Sea Fleet talks with Ukraine. "It has been there for 225 years, and it's only natural … that this area is ideal for its deployment. "We don't understand this haste," he said. "Why do they think we need nine years for the fleet's withdrawal? Why not 15 years or five, or four? In the end, this is our fleet, yes? So this must be our headache."

Source: http://www.moscowtimes.ru/article/1010/42/367817.htm

[Angessa]

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

Ukraine Wants Russian Navy Out of Crimea

[/url]

I remember when american marines tried enter chimera last summer for some Nato-american joint militery training.(http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/spo...cle1083290.ece) They were met with protests till the marines finally got out. It such disgust to see american soldier disgrace Russian soil. Crimea is Russian land and will aways be so. The Ukrainians have no ties to that land there. Ukrainians are nothing but cowards and traitors and there as worst as the turks. I wish are government would have more backbone and take back land that belongs to us. It disgust me to think they Ukrainians are leasing that land to us.

[Armanen]

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

I remember when american marines tried enter chimera last summer for some Nato-american joint militery training.(http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/spo...cle1083290.ece) They were met with protests till the marines finally got out. It such disgust to see american soldier disgrace Russian soil. Crimea is Russian land and will aways be so. The Ukrainians have no ties to that land there. Ukrainians are nothing but cowards and traitors and there as worst as the turks. I wish are government would have more backbone and take back land that belongs to us. It disgust me to think they Ukrainians are leasing that land to us.

On a side note, what do you think of a possible union between Russia and Belarus? Are you in favor of it Angessa?

[Armenian]

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

The following is an excellent article written by the well-known American author and political commentator J.R. Nyquist. For those who are not aware of his writings, Nyquist is an ardent Russophobe. This individual believes that the initial stages of Gorbachev's Perestroika movement that lead to the Soviet collapse was a part of "a long-term strategic deception orchestrated by the Moscow-Beijing Axis." In other words, it was manufactured by top level strategists in the Kremlin in conjunction with the Chinese to undermine the economic supremacy of the western world. According to this line of reasoning, the longterm strategic attempt at the time went sour as the control of the central government was lost and the entire territory of the Soviet Union fell into disarray. Apparently, the recently established Shanghai Cooperation Organization, as well as other geopolitical maneuverings of China and Russia during the last few years, are Moscow's and Shanghai's attempt at realizing their initial anti-American agenda. In my opinion, a lot of the geopolitical matters regarding the "East" that Nyquist writes about does make some sense, if looked upon within a proper context. Nevertheless, this latest piece of his is definitely worth reading.

Armenian

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

ECONOMIC WARFARE IN THE FINAL PHASE

by J. R. Nyquist

This week the French President, Nicolas Sarkozy, warned against Russia’s use of energy as an instrument of foreign policy. Speaking before his ambassadors, the French President said: “Russia is imposing its return [as a great power] on the world scene by employing its assets, notably oil and gas, with a certain brutality.” A great power ought to be gentle in its economic or political superiority. The Russians, however, are accustomed to a more cynical use of their advantages. The language of the Russian president includes mockery, condescension and threats. The West cringes, the East advances. Who cares what the weak countries think? Their feelings are without consequence.

Russia is not only engaged in a military buildup. Russia wants to use its economic muscles. You might ask what economic muscles Russia could have? It is bankrupt, backward, hobbled, demoralized and generally dismissed as an effective economic actor. We must remember, however, that positions in the world economy can change, that tables can be turned. Last June, at the International Economic Forum in St. Petersburg, the Russians called for a “new international financial architecture.” Here is Russia’s “Final Phase” economic strategy. The financial vulnerability of capitalism is growing. Keep pushing oil prices higher. Weaken the dollar. Precipitate the inevitable “crisis of capitalism.” Let the have-not nations rise up. Let them throw off their dollar shackles. Let them unite with Russia and China in “one clenched fist.”

Russian President Vladimir Putin believes the United States is vulnerable. The emerging economies of Brazil, India and China – combined with Russia – can shove the hollowed-out American economy aside. After all, American economic ascendancy is “archaic, undemocratic and unwieldy,” according to Putin. As for Europe, its dependence on Russian energy exports will assure a smooth process of “Finlandization.” Such a process begins with gentle warnings from Russia’s ambassadors in Europe and ends with self-censorship. Russia’s economic penetration of Europe gives special leverage to Moscow. In other words, the Kremlin has entered into the Fabric of European political life – through agent networks, influence operations and business pressure. These relationships can be used to influence powerful people, to adversely affect the careers of anyone who opposes Russian interests.

Economic influence means political influence. As America is humiliated, as America retreats, Russia advances. The day might come when Europe pays for its energy in rubles. If this occurs, Europe would have to acquire a large store of Russian currency. Russia’s economic position would grow, and so would Russia’s hold on Europe. Moscow wants to build a global old exchange on Russian territory, knocking big financial players to one side. The Russians want to stun the American economy. They want to weaken an already weakened dollar.

In 1984 a Russian defector named Anatoliy Golitsyn wrote of the period following the collapse of communism. He warned of a renewed attack on the West, engineered by KGB strategists. He said that this attack had an economic dimension. In his 1984 book, New Lies for Old, he wrote: “’Liberalization’ in Eastern Europe on the scale suggested could have a social and political impact on the United States itself, especially if it coincided with a severe economic depression. The communist strategists are on the lookout for such an opportunity.” According to Golitsyn, the communist bloc tracks Western economic developments. They watch for developing weaknesses. “The communist bloc will not repeat its error of failing to exploit a slump as it did in 1929-32.” The smartest political observers know that a financial slump resurrects Marxism and its critique of economic freedom.

Referring to a deceptive phase of self-advertised Russian weakness, Golitsyn warned: “Information from communist sources that the bloc is short of oil and grain should be treated with particular reserve, since it could well be intended to conceal preparation for the final phase of the policy and to induce the West to underestimate the potency of the bloc’s economic weapons.” The economic weakness of Russia led Europe to feel safe about their growing dependence on Russian oil and gas. And now it is too late. Now we see how Russia and China have formed a military bloc. We see them supporting the nuclear ambitions of Iran, the paranoid buildup of Syria and Venezuela – the seduction of Latin America and the bloody unraveling of sub-Saharan Africa.

The U.S. financial situation worsens as the old communist bloc gathers its economic, political and military forces. Look at the new Russian weapons – nuclear missiles, tanks, jet fighters and more. Look at Latin America and notice what is happening in Venezuela, Bolivia and Colombia. The communists are advancing under various false flags. They seek the destruction of the United States. It doesn’t matter who is in the White House. It doesn’t matter what policy the U.S. is following. They want to destroy America, because America stands in the way of their plans.

If you live in America and want your children to be free, you’d better wake up. The actions of Russia are not in reaction to American “aggression” or “imperialism.” They are part of a long-established pattern of deception and exploitation. This is how the Russians behave. This is how they’ve always behaved. Most political pundits and “experts” will scoff at this statement. But let me ask them: Is it a coincidence that a KGB-regime has emerged in “democratic” Russia? Is it happenstance that this regime has formed a military alliance with communist China?

Shortly before her death, the Russian journalist Anna Politkovskaya asked whether the rise of Putin’s Russia was mere happenstance. In answer to this question she took a bullet in the back of the head. The silencing of those who ask the right questions is part of the old communist pattern. According to Mark Riebling, KGB defector Golitsyn’s 1984 book contains 148 falsifiable predictions. Of these predictions, 139 were “fulfilled by the end of 1993 – an accuracy rate of nearly 94 percent.” Today, Golitsyn’s accuracy rate is higher. Having predicted Russia’s use of oil as a weapon, having predicted a future alliance between Russia and China, it might be said that 141 out 148 of Golitsyn’s predictions have come to pass.

In recent months Russia tried to provoke a war between Israel and Syria. It turns out that the paranoia in Damascus was fueled from Moscow. The conventional analyst thinks the Russians are motivated by the prospect of further arms sales to Syria. But this is not the whole answer. Russia seeks to foment a greater military crisis with which to intensify the economic and energy crisis. The Russians and their allies are making trouble where they can. The hour is ripe. The U.S. president is weak. The American economy is troubled. One great push, one more straw upon the camel’s back, and capitalism might be overthrown – once and for all.

Source: http://www.financialsense.com/stormw...2007/0831.html

[Armenian]

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

More analysis from Nyquist

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

RUSSIA AND THE IRANIAN BOMB

by J. R. Nyquist

On Aug. 23 Frontpagemagazine.com interviewed Regnar Rasmussen, a military expert and interrogation specialist. The interview is of interest because of Rasmussen’s testimony indicating that Iran purchased nuclear warheads from the “former” Soviet Union in autumn 1992. This is a story that confirms a similar claim made by Yossef Bodansky in his book The High Cost of Peace. Bodansky says the Iranians initially intended to use their newly acquired nuclear weapons in a jihad to destroy Israel. The plan involved strategic coordination with Hezbollah, Syria and communist North Korea (which agreed to a simultaneous attack against American forces in the Far East). Tehran asked its terrorist allies “to refrain temporarily from attacking Western objectives in order not to attract attention to the Iranian-sponsored buildup until they were ready to strike out decisively.” Once the necessary forces were in place, Hezbollah was to play a unique role by setting up the pretext for a devastating assault on Israel. According to Bodansky, Hezbollah would provoke Israel into “a major escalation in Lebanon – so that the planned Syrian and Iranian ballistic-missile barrage against Israeli civilian and strategic objectives could be presented as retaliation for Israeli aggression.” Bodansky also says that a simultaneous terrorist offensive would be launched against the United States while Iranian kamikaze-style attacks would be organized against U.S. aircraft carriers in the Persian Gulf.

As Bodansky explained in his book, an Iranian nuclear assault on Israel was thwarted when an Israeli helicopter gunship attacked and killed Sheikh Sayyid Abbas al-Mussawi, the secretary-general of Hezbollah (roughly coinciding with the demise of North Korea’s dictator and a subsequent transition crisis in Pyongyang). Those who doubted the veracity of Bodansky’s work must now account for the testimony of Rasmussen, who learned many things from Iranian asylum seekers, including Iranian communists who had been trained in Soviet bloc countries. “The education was genuine and serious,” said Rasmussen, “but what really made my hairs stand on one end was the immense overweight of practical training in the preparation and use of explosives. It was taught to the Iranian students even down to the minutest details that these skills were deemed necessary if their ‘revolutionary aims’ were to succeed.”

The Russians also trained Middle Eastern men at the science of engineering, not so much from the standpoint of building large structures, but from the standpoint of knocking them down at a single blow. The communist bloc had an overall plan when it initiated its massive course of instruction for Muslim youth. And it was Rasmussen’s sense of this plan that was awakened as he watched the events of 9/11 unfold five years ago. “It is very important to bear in mind that the Iranians were nothing more than a tiny minority amongst the recruits of the Soviet Union,” he explained. “My Iranians told me that they had to stick together and protect each other … against the hordes of Arabs surrounding them everywhere on campus.”

Although the majority of communists in revolutionary Iran were slated for Islamic persecution, an elite subset of communists (trained in the Soviet Union) ended up working for the Islamic regime. “I would describe this group as the most dangerous and unpredictable of them all,” noted Rasmussen. The best and toughest communist agents working in Islamic Iran were tasked with infiltrating the Islamic hierarchy and intelligence services. The purpose of this infiltration should be obvious to any student of strategy: namely, to steer a regime of fanatical psychopaths toward conflict with America. This would not prove difficult because, as Rasmussen pointed out in the Frontpagemagazine.com interview, communism and Islamic fundamentalism share a common hatred of individualism and Western values. Furthermore, in terms of Moscow’s current objectives in the fight against Islamic terrorism, the Russians retain the files of each and every foreign student ever trained in the Soviet Bloc. So why haven’t they shared these files with the United States? (The answer should be abundantly clear.)

It seems that the Russians are following the same path they followed during the Cold War. As for Moscow’s supposed war against Islamic terrorism in Chechnya, the Chechen conflict is nothing more than a KGB/GRU organized provocation. The mild and unorthodox Islam practiced by the Chechen people bears no resemblance to the more virulent forms of Islam practiced in the Middle East. Furthermore, the terrorism of the Chechen bandits has been described by former KGB/FSB officer Alexander Litvinenko as staged diversionary operation for renewing Russia’s police state under the leadership of Vladimir Putin. According to Litvinenko, Chechen terrorism was organized and directed, from the outset, by Russian special services and the Russian General Staff. Last year, in an interview with a Polish journalist, Litvinenko stated that bin Laden’s right hand man, Ayman al-Zawahiri, is a long-time KGB agent trained in Russia.

Given all of this, it should not surprise anyone that Iran may have acquired nuclear weapons from the Soviet Union. According to Rasmussen, Russia trained many Iranian physicists (a fact reported by many researchers). And Russia continues to train Iranian nuclear experts, as a matter of policy. As anyone who consults a newspaper will see, the Russians will not back down from this activity. Together with their communist Chinese allies, the Russians lend practical support to the Iranians by threatening to use their veto in the U.N. Security Council (to prevent economic sanctions against the Iranian mullahs).

How did the Iranians acquire nuclear weapons from the former Soviet Union?

Rasmussen describes his involvement with sincere Soviet intellectuals who were moving toward political power after the collapse of Soviet power. The political failure of these people was due, says Rasmussen, to the “intrigues and dirty workings of the old KGB structures behind the curtain we all thought had fallen.” He further added, “Alas, no curtain ever fell. It was only moved to a position further backwards and deep into the dark shades of backstage.” Such a position is necessary if one intends to trigger a nuclear exchange between Muslim and Western countries.

It was a matter of profit and strategic convenience that the communist boss of Soviet Khazakstan, Nursultan Nazerbayev, sold three nuclear warheads to the Islamic leaders in Tehran. The price was supposedly $7.5 billion. This story has been confirmed by other sources, and has remained a closely guarded secret of the Israeli and American governments. Obviously, the Iranians could use the acquired Soviet nukes as models for making their own weapons. Furthermore, it may only be a matter of time before they initiate a nuclear war against Israel and the United States on their own timetable (in coordination with their Chinese, North Korean, Syrian and Russian allies).

A strategic sequence logically follows from the thinking of Iran’s leadership, which may be summarized by the oft-heard cry of “death to Israel, death to America.”

Source: http://www.financialsense.com/stormw...2006/0825.html

[Armenian]

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

Rice Rebukes Russia Over Activities in Disputed Arctic Waters

Slicing of Arctic cake to begin: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kHe3Keib0SQ

By Janine Zacharia

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice criticized Russia's activities on the resource-rich Arctic shelf as ``not helpful'' and called for international laws governing the disputed waters to be obeyed. Rice made the comments today at the Hofdi House in the Icelandic capital, Reykjavik -- where President Ronald Reagan and Soviet Premier Mikhail Gorbachev famously met in October 1986 to discuss arms control. A Russian mini-submarine planted a flag under the polar cap in August, a move Danish Science Minister Helge Sander at the time called a ``joke.'' Russia contends the underwater Lomonosov Ridge links Siberia to the Arctic seabed, evidence of which may allow the country to extend its territory under international law. Russia's government predicts the area may hold 10 billion tons of oil equivalent, as well as gold, nickel and diamonds. "I think we have to be concerned not just about the resources but about the resurgence of some activity that the Russians have been'' carrying out, Rice said alongside Icelandic Foreign Minister Ingibjorg Solrun Gisladottir. "We're quite aware of it. We speak to the Russians.'' Under the United Nations Law of the Sea convention, the countries on the Arctic Ocean have rights to economic zones within 200 miles of their shores. The UN will accept scientific data until 2014 and then decide on ownership of the parts of the Arctic claimed by Russia, the U.S., Canada, Norway and Denmark, through its semi-autonomous territory of Greenland. "We believe very strongly that international law needs to be respected here,'' Rice said. "This certainly shouldn't be an issue of conflict.''

Greenland Summit

Canada responded to Russia's flag-planting by saying it would move troops to its north to assert Arctic sovereignty. The five countries with Arctic shorelines will work for an "orderly settlement'' of their claims, their governments said in a joint declaration yesterday after concluding a two-day summit on the dispute in Ilulissat, Greenland. Rice's visit to Iceland followed the passage yesterday of a resolution by the country's parliament condemning the U.S. over the holding of terrorism suspects at the Guantanamo Bay naval base on Cuba. Rice defended the Guantanamo detention policy during the joint news conference with Gisladottir, who gave Rice a copy of the Icelandic resolution. "I strongly object to the notion that there are human rights violations at Guantanamo as is suggested in the resolution,'' Rice said. Rice said President George W. Bush would like to shut the Guantanamo prison, where the U.S. has sent terrorism suspects since January 2002, and is unable to because no adequate solution has been found for what to do with the detainees.

Source: http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?p...I&refer=canada

[North Pole]

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

TURKISH MILITARY ASSISTANCE TO AZERBAIJAN AND THE FOREIGN MERCENERIES DURING THE KARABAGH WAR

Source: http://www.panarmenian.net/library/eng/?nid=42&cid=10

It seems like they have been waiting for the break up of the USSR.

YouTube Video - The Saudi/CiA/Mi6 funded Chechen War

After watching this video I wanted to contact the Turkish embassy (or a cultural center) and ask them a question - what were Turkish guerrillas doing in Russian Federation? To fight the "hole war" or were the Turks used as a tool to advance the anti-Russian agenda?

[Armenian]

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

YouTube Video - The Saudi/CiA/Mi6 funded Chechen War

After watching this video I wanted to contact the Turkish embassy (or a cultural center) and ask them a question - what were Turkish guerrillas doing in Russian Federation? To fight the "hole war" or were the Turks used as a tool to advance the anti-Russian agenda?

Thank you for the video link North Pole. Do you have any more information regarding the Turkish involvement in the Chechen war? Is Turkey's involvement well known amongst average Russians today? Has the documentary called "Plan Kavkaz" (see video link below) gotten widespread attention in the Russian Federation?

This is a documentary I strongly suggest you all to watch.

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

Russian Film Accuses West of Orchestrating Chechen War

План «Кавказ» (2008) (Plan Caucasus Video): http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...L-j6T_Ag&hl=en

A new film released on Russia’s state-run Channel One has sparked as much international eye-rolling as controversy. Swirling around a central shadowy Turkish secret agent, the 55-minute “Caucasus Plan” implicates a series of western countries, including France, Germany, Turkey and the United States in orchestrating Russia’s war with Chechnya in the 1990s.

The Turkish embassy in Moscow has already discounted the “unfounded assertions regarding Turkey,” questioning the conclusions of the self-designated “documentary.” The film, which first aired on April 22nd, alleges that ENKA, a Turkish construction company with major market share in Russia, directly funded Chechen rebels. It also alleges that the U.S. State Department as well as Turkish authorities staged a number of cunning plots to exacerbate separatism in the North Caucasus region, including smuggling weapons and injecting the market with counterfeit dollars. France allegedly gave a hand by printing new regional passports, and Germany provided assistance by minting new currency. A statement from Channel One called the project an “investigative journalism” documentary based on a number of on-the-ground witnesses. In response, ENKA quickly released a statement: “We state that all information regarding our company broadcast on April 22 in ‘The Caucasus Plan’ TV program on Channel One is totally groundless and untrue. We deny all such accusations.”

Experts called the film a joke, adding that it resembles Soviet-style propaganda rather than a serious investigation. Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty quotes Said-Khasan Abumuslimov, a historian who was Chechnya’s vice president in the 1990s: “The Russians have always claimed that the Chechen struggle was instigated by outside forces,” he said. “They say we always wanted to live in peace with the Russians, but first Turkey, then England, and now America is sowing seeds of discord in the Caucasus. I don’t even want to comment on these silly allegations. This is not serious.”

Government critics commonly describe television in Russian as the most strictly government-controlled media. At the same time, television serves as the major source of news for the largest share of the population. Channel One (also called Rossiya), a state-run enterprise that broadcasts across the country, has been repeatedly criticized for serving as a Kremlin press-agency, and not a serious source of news. In September 2007, the channel aired another anti-Western special titled “Barkhat.ru” (lit. Velvet.ru). The prime-time special described a mass-conspiracy wherein the CIA was using foreign NGOs, the western media and opposition groups in an attempt to overthrow the government and foment a “color revolution” in Russia.

Source: http://www.theotherrussia.org/2008/0...g-chechen-war/

Russian journalist's film "Plan Kavkaz" caused bewilderment in Azerbaijan

The investigation made by Anton Vernitskiy, journalist of Channel One, in his film "Plan Kavkaz", shown on April 22 and dedicated to the attempts in early 1990s of external forces, including Baku and Ankara, to separate Chechnya from Russia, has caused bewilderment in Azerbaijan. The ORT journalist reminds the viewers about the events in the 1990s, when after collapse of the USSR Chechen leaders got a chance to appeal for help to foreign special agencies in implementing their mercenary separatist plans. The journalist's investigation asserts that Azerbaijan was then a serious player, and allegedly the then presidents of country Abulfaz Elchibey and Geidar Aliev rendered assistance to Chechen separatists. Khazar Ibragim, head of the press service of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Azerbaijan, has stated in his comments on Anton Vernitskiy's assertions that Azerbaijan had never interfered and does not interfere into home affairs of other countries. In his turn, Vafa Guluzade, former foreign policy state adviser, has named the Russian journalist's fabrications to be a lie. "Unlike Russia, Azerbaijan never helped separatists. The point is that Russia was irritated by Azerbaijani delay of Russia's confidential cargo for Iran; therefore, it has grown so furious. It's just one form of provocation," he said. We remind you that back on March 29, Azerbaijani custom inspectors detained at the "Astara" checkpoint a Russian road train with heat insulation equipment intended for the construction of the "Busher" Nuclear Power Plant in Iran. Negotiations of "Rosatom" representatives with the Azerbaijani Government on the fate of the cargo have brought no fruit so far. The Azerbaijani party asserts that Russia failed to submit the necessary documentation, detailing the character of the special equipment delivered for the "Busher" Nuclear Power Plant.

Source: http://eng.kavkaz.memo.ru/newstext/e...d/1213763.html