Watch Russia’s presidential inauguration broadcast LIVE!

[Armenian]

Re: Watch Russia’s presidential inauguration broadcast LIVE!

Iran hails Putin's landmark visit

Iran on Tuesday hailed the visit of Russian president. "The landmark visit to Tehran of Vladimir Putin is a major event itself but more importantly is the failure of a US-Zionist scenario organized to make the Russian president cancel his trip," the official news agency IRNA said in an editorial. President Putin is the first Russian president who visits Iran after about 65 years when the then president of Russia, Josef Stalin, visited the country in 1943 along with his British and US counterparts. Iran claims Israel tried to prevent this historic visit. "About 24 hours prior to President Putin's visit to Iran, certain Zionist sources started a new bid and a psychological warfare to prevent his visit claiming that there was an imminent "assassination plot" against the Russian president during his Tehran visit," the editorial added. During his stay in Iran, Putin stressed that Moscow would not allow other countries to use its soil for attacking the Caspian Sea littoral states. He made the remarks in his speech at the second summit of the Caspian Sea littoral states. The Russian president arrived in Iran Tuesday morning at the head of a high-ranking delegation to attend the summit.

Source: http://www.albawaba.com/en/countries/Iran/217641

Putin Warns Against Use of Force on Landmark Visit to Iran

Russian President Vladimir Putin has warned against the use of military force in the Caspian region. The Russian leader is in Iran for a summit of the five Caspian Sea nations. VOA's Challis McDonough has more in this report. Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, left, and his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin during an welcoming ceremony in Tehran, Iran, 16 Oct 2007 Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, left, and his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin during an welcoming ceremony in Tehran, Iran, 16 Oct 2007 Speaking on a landmark visit to Tehran, President Putin said no Caspian nation should let its territory be used to attack another Caspian state. The Russian leader's comments are seen as a reference to rumors that the United States is considering military action against Iran, because of its nuclear program. Mr. Putin spoke at the opening session of a summit of the five nations bordering the Caspian Sea. This is the first time a Kremlin leader has visited Iran since World War Two. Mr. Putin's trip is being watched closely for signs of movement in the nuclear standoff between Iran and the West. Russia has been a key mediator in the crisis. The Iranian and Russian presidents are scheduled to hold direct talks focusing on the nuclear issue. Mr. Putin went to Tehran despite a warning by Russian security services of a possible plot to assassinate him there.

Source: http://voanews.com/english/2007-10-16-voa8.cfm

Putin reaffirms commitment to Bushehr completion

Russia will complete the construction of the Bushehr nuclear power plant in southern Iran, President Vladimir Putin said Tuesday. Russian nuclear equipment export monopoly Atomstroyexport has been building Iran's first nuclear power plant despite opposition from Western countries and amid international concerns that the Islamic Republic is pursuing a covert nuclear weapons program. "Russia said from the start that it would not only sign a contract but see it though," Putin, who is on a two-day official visit to Iran, told a news conference in the capital, Tehran. "We are not going to go back on our commitment," he said. The completion of the plant, being constructed under a 1995 contract, came under threat in February 2007 after Russia complained of funding shortfalls. Moscow said Tehran had only covered 60% of the required funds by the fourth quarter of 2006, and completely stopped payments in mid-January. Iran denied any payment problems, and accused Russia of delaying tactics. The Russian leader said the delays were mainly caused by certain technical and legal difficulties dating back to the initial 1975 construction contract between Iran and Germany, which has never been implemented. "At the start of the construction we received German equipment, which is obviously outdated," Putin said, adding that some other subcontractors, including South Korea, failed to provide equipment under relevant contracts with Iran. "In addition, there are certain legal provisions in the [Russian-Iranian] contract that have to be revised and amended," the president said. Putin also said Russia would start supplying fuel to Bushehr when a commissioning date is set, and contract obligations are amended. "Under International Atomic Energy Agency rules, nuclear fuel will be supplied several months before a nuclear reactor is commissioned," he said.

Source: http://en.rian.ru/russia/20071016/84182133.html

[Armenian]

Re: Watch Russia’s presidential inauguration broadcast LIVE!

Venezuela Building Military Capacity with Russian Help

The Power and Interest Report (PINR), an independent organization that provides conflict analysis services, has published a new paper on the continued acquisition of military arms by Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez. The paper, published October 25, was authored by W. Alejandro Sanchez and is titled "Venezuela Continues to Purchase Russian Weapons."

According to the paper, President Chavez recently agreed to buy five submarines from Russia in an arms purchase deal that adds to the huge arsenal already procured by Venezuela. The submarines are reported to have the ability to fire torpedoes, lay mines, and shoot surface-to-air missiles. PINR says the purchases are part of a move to strengthen Venezuela's military might in its region of influence.

Venezuela and Russia have been in partnership for military arms sales for some time now, with previous agreements for the acquisition of jet fighter planes, small arms weapons, and military helicopters. There have also been reports, PINR says, that Russia is planning to open arms factories in the South American nation to produce weapons and ammunition for Venezuela. The justification provided by President Chavez for Venezuela's arms build-up is that a strong military force is necessary to counter the ambitions of the United States in the region.

The new PINR paper argues that Venezuela is not just trying to strengthen its position in the region, but is in fact on a quest to shift the balance of power in the area in its favor. PINR says that while the arms build-up does not endanger the United States, a powerful Venezuelan military armed with advanced Russian weapons could cause threatening powers to hesitate before taking action against Chavez's government. The arms purchased do, however, create a problem for neighboring countries, particularly Columbia, that have been in conflict with Venezuela before, the paper notes.

Additionally, PINR says, there is concern about the development of a competition for arms in South America, with other nations seeking to boost their military power as a counterweight to Venezuela's growing military strength. Chile and Peru, as well as Brazil, are noted to have joined in the acquisition of new and improved military hardware. Particularly worrisome for the United States is Venezuela's continued slide toward authoritarian rule, sometimes a dangerous course for a country armed with modern weaponry and a strong military.

In closing, the paper says, Chavez is working to better relations with Russia through the purchase of Russian weapons and military equipment. The result, according to PINR, is that Venezuela is increasingly becoming the country to be reckoned with in Latin America and the Caribbean, confronting U.S. interests in the region.

Source: http://www.associatedcontent.com/art..._capacity.html

Venezuela to Buy Russian-Made Planes

Venezuela plans on buying 12 Russian-built military planes, including Ilyushin-76 transport planes and Ilyushin-78 refueling aircraft, an air force official said Wednesday. Under President Hugo Chavez, Venezuela has already purchased some $3 billion worth of arms from Russia, including 53 military helicopters, 100,000 Kalashnikov assault rifles and 24 SU-30 Sukhoi fighter jets. Air Force Col. Oswaldo Hernandez Sanchez did not provide any details regarding the planes to be purchased from Russia, saying only that he expected them to arrive in Venezuela late next year. Chavez — a former army lieutenant colonel — says Venezuela needs new transport planes to replace Hercules C-130 planes because of maintenance problems caused a U.S. ban on arms sales to the South American country. The U.S. State Department imposed the ban, which affects the sale by other countries of any military hardware containing U.S. technology, citing a lack of support by Chavez's government for counterterrorism efforts and its increasingly close relations with Iran and communist-led Cuba.

Source: http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5g...Xo9LQD8TBLN680

President Chavez Adds Russia to His Anti-U.S. Arsenal

Yesterday, President Hugo Chavez started his trip to Russia in the southern city of Volgograd. Vladimir Putin, with whom the Venezuelan leader will meet tomorrow, appears unfazed by the fact that by receiving Hugo Chavez, he is ranking himself amongst Alexander Lukashenko [authoritarian President of Belerus] and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad [President of Iran]. Moscow is anticipating the signing of lucrative arms export contracts during the visit, while Caracas is eager to create an anti-American petroleum bloc.

'DISARMING' HOSPITALITY

A delegation of dignitaries, including Volgograd Governor Nikolay Maksyuta and a Cossack ensemble called "Azure Flower," met the Venezuelan president at the Volgograd airport. As the president stepped onto the ladder, Governor Maksyuta rushed to hug and kiss him. Chavez greeted Maksyuta like an old friend and Azure Flower struck up a Cossack song. They gave Hugo Chavez a glass of vodka on a saber, and Chavez drank it down in a single gulp. The party then traveled to Volgograd City Hall where Chavez held talks with Governor Maksyuta, Nikolay Pumpyansky, the head of a pipe production company called TMK, President of LUKOIL, Vagit Alekperov, and some local businessmen. Chavez preferred not to hold a press conference, but gave a speech on the porch of City Hall. He began his impromptu speech with the words, "Long Live Lenin!" waiving to the gaping onlookers gathered around a monument to Lenin, and then wished the same to, "Volgograd, Putin and the entire Russian Government."

The Venezuelan leader said that during his visit to Moscow, he was going to discuss the construction of a plant to produce pipes in Venezuela, in order to build an immense 8,000 kilometer [5,000 mile] pipeline that would run across the entire length of Latin America, and which is estimated to cost some $20 billion. Hugo Chavez reported that he was planning "another project with the participation of Russian Aluminum [RUSAL]" but he gave no other details. "We are trying to break the American blockade," Chavez said. "They want to disarm us and reign over the entire world."

Chavez never made it to Volgograd's military enterprises, although the visits were on the agenda. He said he had already been to the Barrikady plant of the Russian Research Institute of Space Instrument-Making, and he decided not go to the Volgograd Tractor plant, where armored vehicles had been prepare for him, because he was running late. Today [July 27], Venezuela's leader will visit the Izhevsk Mechanical Plant. Later, he will set out for Moscow to meet Vladimir Putin.

RIFLES

Hugo Chavez has been arranging his visit to Russia for quite some time. The Venezuelan President greatly wanted to come much earlier - even as early as May or June. The Russian side, however, on the eve of the G-8 Summit, preferred to put off the visit and lower its status to an ordinary working meeting, with informal talks with Vladimir Putin. Hugo Chavez agreed to this, since the Russia trip is of enormous value to him. The visit is important in two senses: technical and ideological. Hugo Chavez expects to derive two major benefits: to obtain a major weapons purchase from Russia, and to teach another lesson to the United States. Hugo Chavez has spent years honing his role as leader of global anti-Americanism. For Hugo Chavez, Latin America is the first front for his plans, as he works diligently to surround Venezuela with an axis of state-adherents to his revolutionary Bolivarian ideas. These activities have met with mixed success so far. A friendly regime has been established in Bolivia, but Chavez' allies are suffering defeat in Ecuador, Peru and Mexico.

In spite of a luke-warm reception on the continent for his Bolivarian ideas, the President of Venezuela has not given up his fight. And one of the main levers he has to apply pressure with appears to be Russian weapons. Two months ago, the Venezuelan leader declared a total halt to purchases of weapons to the United States, just a few weeks after the U.S. introduced an embargo on arms sales to Caracas. The two actions were provoked by the growing level of military and technical cooperation between Venezuela and Russia. Moreover, Chavez obviously expects to become a key distributor of Russian weapons in Latin America. Chavez motives for buying increasing amounts of Russian arms, which is repeated by him almost every day: "the threat of an American military invasion." According to him, Washington has mapped out a plan for attacking Venezuela, and Caracas is familiar with the details. Chavez frequently instructs his people on how they should prepare to hold the line against the United States - blow up oil deposits, go to the mountains and "defend every street, every hill and every corner" with Kalashnikovs from Russia.

The United States, however, is convinced that Hugo Chavez is arming himself not for the sake of protection, but in order to accelerate the spread of his ideas in Latin America. Moreover, Washington claims that some of the weapons purchased by Chavez will be passed on to the Columbian rebels, who have been fighting a civil war against the government for over 30 years. In any case, his visit to Russia is certain to bolster Hugo Chavez and his supporters and increase Washington's concerns. Back in 2005, Caracas and Moscow signed a scandalous contract for the sale of 100,000 Kalashnikov assault rifles. The contract was executed, and the first shipment has already been pressed into service by the Venezuelan army. Chavez, however, has never hid the fact that he thinks 100,000 Kalashnikovs is insufficient. Venezuela is ready to buy 920,000 additional rifles and is now in talks with Rosoboronexport, Russia's military export agency, to set up the licensed production of AK-103 assault rifles in Venezuela. In addition, a contract has been signed to supply Venezuela with 33 Russian Mi-35 helicopters and 24 Su-30MK2 jets, to replace the American F-16 currently used by the Venezuelan Air Force. The contracts are estimated at $3 billion.

THE OIL WEAPON

But an even more important weapon for Chavez - this is oil. Venezuela is one of the most important oil exporters in the world, and a vital supplier of energy to the United States. For this reason, Chavez has positioned himself as a world champion of high oil prices. The Venezuelan leader is a major agitator for reducing oil production quotas at OPEC, something that would trigger hikes in fuel prices. Hugo Chavez' battle for influence against the U.S. is not only in Latin America. Its second front - is the entire rest of the world. Long ago, He began persistently drawing to himself leaders whose interests are to a certain degree - at odds with U.S. policy. This has never been as clear as during his present tour: The trip looks like a ritual "global tour" of the "Axis of Evil." At the beginning of the trip, he met Fidel Castro in Buenos Aires. With Fidel's blessing he went to see Alexander Lukashenko, "the last dictator of Europe [Belarus]. The two leaders met for the first time in Minsk and had a good time propagating anti-American rhetoric. Giving advice to Alexander Lukashenko, Chavez said, "the jaws of imperialism and hegemony hang over Belarus. Our countries must keep our hands on the hilts of our swords."

From Russia, the President of Venezuela will travel to Iran. The encounter of the two most outspoken critics of America - Hugo Chavez and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad – promises to be the climax of his tour. Initially, Chavez planned to visit North Korea and meet Kim Jong-il, but the Venezuelan leader gave up the idea without explanation, and decided to go to Vietnam, Qatar and Mali instead. Significantly, the Venezuelan leader virtually placed Russia among the rogue states. Vladimir Putin, who agreed to meet Chavez in the course of his visit, has put himself in the company of Ahmadinejad and Lukashenko. After hosting the G8 Summit, Moscow is again demonstrating when it suits its interests, it can respond to Western criticism by turning to its enemies. Energy resources are central to Chavez and this "axis" he has assembled. Venezuela, Iran, Russia and Qatar - the countries that Hugo Chavez is to visit - are all major oil and gas suppliers. Therefore, the Venezuelan leader's tour is undoubtedly to create an anti-Western oil bloc. It is obvious that this is the same purpose as the leaders who receive him. Hugo Chavez has gone on anti-American oil tours nearly every year since he assumed office. Only his first such trip in 2000 bypassed Russia. That year he went to Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Iran, Indonesia, Libya, Nigeria, Algeria and even Iraq, where he met Saddam Hussein. Since 2001, leaders of oil powers have become increasingly reluctant to meet Chavez, and furthermore, he never visited Saddam Hussein again. Yet, the Venezuelan never fails to come to Moscow.

Source: http://www.watchingamerica.com/kommersant000011.shtml

[Armenian]

Re: Watch Russia’s presidential inauguration broadcast LIVE!

The Sino-Russian Alliance: Challenging America's Ambitions in Eurasia



Encircling Russia and China: Anglo-American Global Ambitions Backfire

“Today we are witnessing an almost uncontained hyper use of force – military force – in international relations, force that is plunging the world into an abyss of permanent conflicts. As a result we do not have sufficient strength to find a comprehensive solution to any one of these conflicts. Finding a political settlement also becomes impossible. We are seeing a greater and greater disdain for the basic principles of international law. And independent legal norms are, as a matter of fact, coming increasingly closer to one state’s legal system. One state and, of course, first and foremost the United States, has overstepped its national borders in every way.”

-Vladimir Putin at the Munich Conference on Security Policy in Germany (February 11, 2007)

What American leaders and officials called the “New World Order” is what the Chinese and Russians consider a “Unipolar World.” This is the vision or hallucination, depending on perspective, that has bridged the Sino-Russian divide between Beijing and Moscow. China and Russia are well aware of the fact that they are targets of the Anglo-American alliance. Their mutual fears of encirclement have brought them together. It is no accident that in the same year that NATO bombarded Yugoslavia, President Jiang Zemin of China and President Boris Yeltsin of Russia made an anticipated joint declaration at a historic summit in December of 1999 that revealed that China and the Russian Federation would join hands to resist the “New World Order.” The seeds for this Sino-Russian declaration were in fact laid in 1996 when both sides declared that they opposed the global imposition of single-state hegemony.

Both Jiang Zemin and Boris Yeltsin stated that all nation-states should be treated equally, enjoy security, respect each other’s sovereignty, and most importantly not interfere in the internal affairs of other nation-states. These statements were directed at the U.S. government and its partners. The Chinese and Russians also called for the establishment of a more equitable economic and political global order. Both nations also indicated that America was behind separatist movements in their respective countries. They also underscored American-led amibitions to balkanize and finlandize the nation-states of Eurasia. Influential Americans such as Zbigniew Brzezinski had already advocated for de-centralizing and eventually dividing up the Russian Federation.

Both the Chinese and Russians issued a statement warning that the creation of an international missile shield and the contravention of the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty (ABM Treaty) would destabilize the international environment and polarize the globe. In 1999, the Chinese and Russians were aware of what was to come and the direction that America was headed towards. In June 2002, less than a year before the onslaught of the “Global War on Terror,” George W. Bush Jr. announced that the U.S. was withdrawing from the ABM Treaty.

On July 24, 2001, less than two months before September 11, 2001, China and Russia signed the Treaty of Good-Neighbourliness and Friendly Cooperation. The latter is a softly worded mutual defence pact against the U.S., NATO, and the U.S. sponsored Asian military network which was surrounding China.[1] The military pact of the Shanghai Treaty Organization (SCO) also follows the same softly worded format. It is also worth noting that Article 12 of the 2001 Sino-Russian bilateral treaty stipulates that China and Russia will work together to maintain the global strategic balance, “observation of the basic agreements relevant to the safeguard and maintenance of strategic stability,” and “promote the process of nuclear disarmament.” [2] This seems to be an insinuation about a nuclear threat posed from the United States.

Standing in the Way of America and Britain: A “Chinese-Russian-Iranian Coalition”

As a result of the Anglo-American drive to encircle and ultimately dismantle China and Russia, Moscow and Beijing have joined ranks and the SCO has slowly evolved and emerged in the heart of Eurasia as a powerful international body. The main objectives of the SCO are defensive in nature. The economic objectives of the SCO are to integrate and unite Eurasian economies against the economic and financial onslaught and manipulation from the “Trilateral” of North America, Western Europe, and Japan, which controls significant portions of the global economy.

The SCO charter was also created, using Western national security jargon, to combat “terrorism, separatism, and extremism.” Terrorist activities, separatist movements, and extremist movements in Russia, China, and Central Asia are all forces traditionally nurtured, funded, armed, and covertly supported by the British and the U.S. governments. Several separatist and extremist groups that have destabilized SCO members even have offices in London. Iran, India, Pakistan, and Mongolia are all SCO observer members. The observer status of Iran in the SCO is misleading. Iran is a de facto member. The observer status is intended to hide the nature of trilateral cooperation between Iran, Russia, and China so that the SCO cannot be labeled and demonized as an anti-American or anti-Western military grouping.

The stated interests of China and Russia are to ensure the continuity of a “Multi-Polar World.” Zbigniew Brzezinski prefigured in his 1997 book The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and the Geostrategic Imperatives and warned against the creation or “emergence of a hostile [Eurasian-based] coalition that could eventually seek to challenge America’s primacy.” [3] He also called this potential Eurasian coalition an “‘antihegemonic’ alliance” that would be formed from a “Chinese-Russian-Iranian coalition” with China as its linchpin. [4] This is the SCO and several Eurasian groups that are connected to the SCO.

In 1993, Brzezinski wrote “In assessing China’s future options, one has to consider also the possibility that an economically successful and politically self-confident China — but one which feels excluded from the global system and which decides to become both the advocate and the leader of the deprived states of the world — may decide to pose not only an articulate doctrinal but also a powerful geopolitical challenge to the dominant trilateral world [a reference to the economic front formed by North America, Western Europe, and Japan].” [5]

Brzezinski warns that Beijing’s answer to challenging the global status quo would be the creation of a Chinese-Russian-Iranian coalition: “For Chinese strategists, confronting the trilateral coalition of America and Europe and Japan, the most effective geopolitical counter might well be to try and fashion a triple alliance of its own, linking China with Iran in the Persian Gulf/Middle East region and with Russia in the area of the former Soviet Union [and Eastern Europe].” [6] Brzezinski goes on to say that the Chinese-Russian-Iranian coalition, which he moreover calls an “antiestablishmentarian [anti-establishmentarian] coalition,” could be a potent magnet for other states [e.g., Venezuela] dissatisfied with the [global] status quo.” [7]

Furthermore, Brzezinski warned in 1997 that “The most immediate task [for the U.S.] is to make certain that no state or combination of states gains the capacity to expel the United States from Eurasia or even to diminish significantly its decisive arbitration role.” [8] It may be that his warnings were forgotten, because the U.S. has been repealed from Central Asia and U.S. forces have been evicted from Uzbekistan and Tajikistan.

“Velvet Revolutions” Backfire in Central Asia

Central Asia was the scene of several British-sponsored and American-sponsored attempts at regime change. The latter were characterised by velvet revolutions similar to the Orange Revolution in Ukraine and the Rose Revolution in Georgia. These velvet revolutions financed by the U.S. failed in Central Asia, aside from Kyrgyzstan where there had been partial success with the so-called Tulip Revolution. As a result the U.S. government has suffered major geo-strategic setbacks in Central Asia. All of Central Asia’s leaders have distanced themselves from America.

Russia and Iran have also secured energy deals in the region. America’s efforts, over several decades, to exert a hegemonic role in Central Asia seem to have been reversed overnight. The U.S. sponsored velvet revolutions have backfired. Relations between Uzbekistan and the U.S. were especially hard hit. Uzbekistan is under the authoritarian rule of President Islam Karamov. Starting in the second half of the 1990s President Karamov was enticed into bringing Uzbekistan into the fold of the Anglo-American alliance and NATO. When there was an attempt on President Karamov’s life, he suspected the Kremlin because of his independent policy stance. This is what led Uzbekistan to leave CSTO. But Islam Karamov, years later, changed his mind as to who was attempting to get rid of him.

According to Zbigniew Brzezinski, Uzbekistan represented a major obstacle to any renewed Russian control of Central Asia and was virtually invulnerable to Russian pressure; this is why it was important to secure Uzbekistan as an American protectorate in Central Asia. Uzbekistan also has the largest military force in Central Asia. In 1998, Uzbekistan held war games with NATO troops in Uzbekistan. Uzbekistan was becoming heavily militarized in the same manner as Georgia was in the Caucasus. The U.S. gave Uzbekistan huge amounts of financial aid to challenge the Kremlin in Central Asia and also provided training to Uzbek forces. With the launching of the “Global War on Terror,” in 2001, Uzbekistan, an Anglo-American ally, immediately offered bases and military facilities to the U.S. in Karshi-Khanabad.

Source: http://www.payvand.com/news/07/sep/1274.html

Russia, China 'closer'

CHINESE Premier Wen Jiabao's visit to Russia, which ends today, has emphasised rapidly improving ties between the two countries, which were strained for most of the last century. Energy has topped the bill in Mr Wen's talks with President Vladimir Putin and Prime Minister Viktor Zubkov. Large, reliable sources of energy are China's greatest import need, and energy is Russia's dominant export, driving its recent growth. Mr Wen sought to advance plans to build gas and oil pipelines from Russia to China. But the pro-Kremlin newspaper Vremya Novostyei editorialised that while the decision to build the pipelines was a joint one "that benefits both countries", China had so far appeared unwilling to pay the international market price - by which Moscow means the price the Europeans are paying. Russian construction of two nuclear reactors at Tianwan in China's Jiangsu province, just north of Shanghai, is proceeding rapidly. The first two units began operating earlier this year. Mr Wen has also signed 10 co-operation agreements during his visit and has marked the completion of a cultural "Year of China" in Russia. Mr Putin assured Mr Wen that Russia's policy towards China would not change after he left office next March, when presidential elections are due. The leaders said relations between the countries had never been as good. The nations are increasingly co-ordinating their efforts within multilateral agencies including the UN, where they both want to curb Western moves to intervene on human rights grounds in countries mired in traumatic conflicts. And they are working closely in building up the Shanghai Co-operation Organisation, which includes most countries in Central Asia, into a powerful security and economic alliance. But rapidly growing trade is at the core of the links.

Source: http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au...5-2703,00.html

Russia, China Seal Power Agreements

Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao and Zubkov attending the Russia-China economic forum that took place on Tuesday. Russia signed deals Tuesday to help China develop another uranium enrichment facility and to build two more nuclear reactors for a power station on China's eastern coast, nuclear officials said. State nuclear firm Tenex said it signed a deal to help China build a fourth gas centrifuge enrichment facility to produce low-enriched uranium suitable for use in civilian power stations. The Federal Atomic Energy Agency said its building contractor, Atomstroiexport, also signed a deal to build two more reactors at the Tianwan plant in Jiangsu province, where Russia finished building two reactors this year. "The Tianwan atomic station has become a glittering example of mutually beneficial cooperation between China and Russia in the sphere of nuclear energy," Atomstroiexport said in a statement. President Vladimir Putin, who rules the world's second-biggest oil exporter, says relations with China are at a historic high, and Chinese President Hu Jintao describes Putin as his "good friend." The agreement for the nuclear reactors at Tianwan is preliminary and does not set a time frame or price for the reactors, but it is potentially worth several billion dollars. Each Russian nuclear reactor is worth about $2 billion and takes about five years to build, but China could get a discount because Russia has already built two reactors there. The first 1-gigawatt reactor began commercial operation in May and the second in July. Russia also signed an agreement to set up another gas centrifuge enrichment facility with an annual capacity of 500,000 separative work units, or SWU, a Tenex spokesman said. An SWU is a unit of measurement of the effort needed to separate the U-235 and U-238 atoms in natural uranium in order to create a final product that is richer in U-235 atoms. Speaking at an economic forum of government and business representatives from the two countries Tuesday, Prime Minister Viktor Zubkov said Russia wanted to increase high-tech industry exports to China. Technology exports "constitute the narrowest area of Russian-Chinese cooperation," Zubkov said. The country's "share of Chinese markets can and must be bigger." Crude oil products accounted for 54 percent of $15.75 billion in Russian exports to China last year, according to the Economic Development and Trade Ministry.

Source: http://www.moscowtimes.ru/stories/2007/11/07/041.html[

[Armenian]

Re: Watch Russia’s presidential inauguration broadcast LIVE!

Pipeline Cements Russia’s Hold on Europe’s Gas Supply

Russia strengthened its grip on Europe’s energy supplies on Friday as it signed a major gas deal with Bulgaria that analysts said would further undermine the European Union’s attempts to diversify its energy sources. Under the agreement, the $15 billion South Stream pipeline will be built under the Black Sea, allowing Russia to send natural gas directly to Europe through Bulgaria and bypassing Turkey, which has been a crucial transit route for Russia’s gas exports to European markets. The pact, signed by President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia and his Bulgarian counterpart, Georgi Parvanov, was sealed after late-night negotiations with Gazprom, Russia’s state-owned energy monopoly. Mr. Putin and Mr. Parvanov also signed an agreement for the construction of a nuclear power plant, the first Russian one to be built in a European Union country. Construction began in the 1980s but was halted in 1990. Planning for the project was revived in 2003.

The agreement on the South Stream pipeline dealt another blow to Nabucco, a major European Union gas pipeline project designed to diversify energy sources and reduce dependence on Russia. The union intends to buy gas from Iran and Azerbaijan and ship it through Turkey in pipelines that are run to Southern and Western Europe. But disputes over the routes, financing and how to deal with Iran’s nuclear program have delayed the project. Bulgaria, which joined the European Union a year ago, is also a member of the Nabucco consortium. The other countries are Austria, Turkey, Hungary and Romania. Russia has an almost complete monopoly over Bulgaria’s energy market, said Ognyan Minchev, director of the Bulgarian office of the European Council on Foreign Relations. “The E.U., shockingly, acts like a naïve bystander, completely blind to the major strategic reconfiguration that is taking place in the Balkans,” Mr. Minchev said. Under the terms of the South Stream deal, Russia and Bulgaria will each have a 50 percent stake in the Bulgarian portion of the pipeline.

The 560-mile pipeline will cross Bulgarian territory, transporting around 1 billion cubic feet of Russian gas a year. In Bulgaria, it will branch into two spurs: one going west to Italy, the other going north into Austria or Hungary. Analysts said the deal could undermine Bulgaria if it later sought alternative energy sources. “The 50-50 deal is not enough to defend Bulgaria’s national interests,” Mr. Minchev said. Russia is poised to take over the state-owned Petroleum Industry of Serbia, which would increase Gazprom’s influence in the Balkans, analysts said. “What the E.U. lacks is political will in dealing with these energy issues and pushing Nabucco forward,” said Borut Grgic, director of the Institute for Strategic Studies, an independent policy center in Ljubljana, Slovenia.

Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/19/wo...l?ref=business

Russia's Pre-Caspian pipeline a blow to EU & U.S.

President Putin has signed an agreement with his Kazakh and Turkmen counterparts to build the Pre-Caspian Sea gas pipeline. The U.S. and EU have been pushing for the alternative Trans-Caspian pipeline which would bypass Russia. Russia's Caspian project, known as the Pre-Caspian pipeline is designed to provide huge reserves of gas from Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan with a route through Russia to European markets. “This pipeline will provide long-term large supplies of gas to our partners. It will also become a considerable contribution to energy stability in Europe. In a telephone conversation with the President of Turkmenistan we have confirmed our common intention to carry out existing agreements and develop our partnership,” said Putin. “We also discussed our co-operation in atomic energy, in particular the joint construction of an atomic energy station in Kazakhstan and the further integration of the nuclear industrial facilities of our countries.

Source: http://www.russiatoday.ru/news/news/18749

Russian bonds reinforced

Prime Minister Costas Karamanlis yesterday threw his weight firmly behind Russian President Vladimir Putin during an exceptionally cordial meeting in Moscow where the two leaders agreed to boost bilateral ties, particularly in the crucial energy sector. Karamanlis heaped praise on Putin whom he referred to as «a friend» and congratulated him three times for his landslide victory in parliamentary elections in Russia earlier this month. Karamanlis appeared to plant Greece firmly in Moscow's camp, describing Russia as a «strategic partner.» «The historic ties between our countries are strengthening, particularly in the sphere of energy,» Karamanlis said. His comments followed the signature of a protocol - by Greek, Russian and Bulgarian officials - for the creation of a company to oversee the construction of the much-awaited Burgas-Alexandroupolis oil pipeline. Construction is to begin in the summer.

Source: http://www.ekathimerini.com/4dcgi/_w.../12/2007_91334

Pre-Caspian Pipeline Angers U.S. Because It Does Not Fit Its Policy - Denisov

Russia's agreements with Central Asian countries to build a pre-Caspian gas pipeline "are getting on Washington's nerves" because they do not fit its energy transportation strategy, Russian First Deputy Foreign Minister Andrei Denisov told Interfax. "The U.S. has been lobbying the idea of an East-West energy corridor for a long time. Its aim is to arrange the transportation of hydrocarbons from the Caspian region bypassing the territories of Russia and Iran," he said. The Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan and Baku-Tbilisi-Erzerum pipelines have already been built, the deputy minister said, adding that "this notorious trans-Caspian gas pipeline is intended to support them". "The political motives behind all of these projects are evident. The pre-Caspian pipeline clearly does not fit this concept, which has caused (Washington's) nervous reaction," he said. However, he refrained from commenting on statements by several U.S. officials on the pre-Caspian pipeline. "The decision to build the pre-Caspian pipeline was reached based on a careful calculation both of the benefit to the participants from the implementation of this project, and the conditions required to bring it into existence," Denisov said. He said that possible technical and ecological risks of the project have been reduced to nothing, because the pipeline will follow an existing route along the Caspian shore. "As regards the trans-Caspian pipeline, which is mainly being supported by players outside the region, this route is still primarily virtual," he said.

Source: http://www.cdi.org/russia/johnson/2007-150-23.cfm

Russian government approves Caspian gas pipeline agreement

Russia's government has approved a Caspian gas pipeline cooperation agreement with Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan, a senior government official told the president's conference with the Cabinet on Monday. The natural gas pipeline will run from Turkmenistan along the Caspian coast of Kazakhstan and onto Russia, and will pump 10-20 billion cubic meters of gas to Europe via Russia's pipeline network. Deputy Prime Minister Sergei Naryshkin said President Vladimir Putin had instructed the government to make the most of a planned working visit by Kazakh leader Nursultan Nazarbayev in order to move ahead with the implementation of the project. The deputy premier said the agreement also involved a provision on a feasibility study of the project, the implementation of which will begin in the second half of 2008. The document remains to be ratified. ""The agreement is ready for signing,"" Naryshkin said. Russia, Turkmenistan, and Kazakhstan agreed to build the pipeline in May 2007 and were to finalize it in September, but had failed to agree on the price of supplies...

Source: http://www.tehrantimes.com/index_View.asp?code=158930

Caspian Pipeline Deal Close

Turkmenistan, Russia and Kazakhstan will sign an agreement Thursday to build a natural gas pipeline along the Caspian Sea coast, the Turkmen government said Tuesday. The statement, on the Central Asian nation's official state Web site, came after months of uncertainty. After a preliminary agreement was formalized at a signing ceremony attended by the presidents of the ex-Soviet republics in May, the deal was stalled by disagreements on the price of gas supplies. Late last month, Russia gave in to Turkmen price demands and agreed to pay $130 per 1,000 cubic meters of natural gas in the first half of 2008 and $150 in the second half. Turkmen President Gurbanguli Berdymukhamedov and Russian Industry and Energy Minister Viktor Khristenko discussed the pipeline during talks in the Turkmen capital Ashgabat, the Turkmen state Web site said Tuesday. News that the deal will soon be sealed will likely disappoint the U.S. and the European Union, which have been lobbying for a rival pipeline to be built under the Caspian Sea, bypassing Russia...

Source: http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/fn/5387312.html

ANKARA'S NABUCCO POLICY ANGERS SOME

Some European energy experts believe that Russia's latest deals with Turkmenistan and Kazakhstan -- which could jeopardize Turkey's policy of becoming an energy route for Caspian oil and gas, bypassing the strategic and busy Bosporus and Dardanelles straits -- should be seen as a serious blow both to Turkey and the EU's aspirations to reduce reliance on Russian gas and energy. The renewed risks of Russia's increased dominance in the Caspian region first surfaced when Russian President Vladimir Putin signed an agreement with Bulgaria and Greece in March for building the Burgas-Alexandroupolis pipeline to carry Russian oil. Then came the news from Turkmenistan early last week that Putin and the region's main energy producers, Turkmenistan's President Gurbangul Berdymukhamedov and Kazakhstan's Nursultan Nazarbayev, shook hands to build a pipeline along the Caspian Sea coast to ship Turkmen natural gas to Western markets via Kazakhstan and Russia. A few days before, Nazarbayev said at a May 10 meeting in the Kazakh capital of Astana with Russian President Putin, that 17 million tons of Kazakh oil might be used in the Burgas-Alexandroupolis project, the Russian Itar Tass news agency reported. All this news obviously represented a blow to both US and European efforts to secure alternatives to Middle East oil and gas that are intended to be independent from Russian influence, such as US-backed Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan (BTC) pipeline, which has started carrying oil to the European markets via Turkey's Ceyhan port in the south. It may be true that the two deals are also expected to reduce Kazakhstan's interest in routes connecting with the BTC pipeline. Russia's deals with Turkmenistan, in particular, also have the potential to affect the Nabucco natural gas pipeline project, which will transport natural gas from Turkey to Austria, via Bulgaria, Romania, and Hungary as it is intended to reduce Europe's dependence on Russian gas...

[Armenian]

Re: Watch Russia’s presidential inauguration broadcast LIVE!

A bear at the throat

Apr 12th 2007, From The Economist

The European Union is belatedly grasping the riskiness of its dependence on Russian gas, but it is disunited and short of ideas for how to reduce it

RUSSIA'S president, Vladimir Putin, must be feeling smug. His strategy of using the country's vast natural resources to restore the greatness lost after the break-up of the Soviet Union seems to be paying off. If power is measured by the fear instilled in others—as many Russians believe—he is certainly winning. The Soviet Union relied on its military machine for geopolitical power: its oil and gas were just a way to pay for it. In today's Russia, energy is itself the tool of influence. To use it the Kremlin needs three things: control over Russian energy reserves and production, control over the pipelines snaking across its territory and that of its neighbours, and long-term contracts with European customers that are hard to break. All three are in place. For all the talk of a common strategy towards Russia, the EU is divided and stuck for an answer.

Gazprom, Russia's energy giant, cherished by Mr Putin as a “powerful lever of economic and political influence in the world”, has long-term supply contracts with most European countries, including France, Germany, Italy and Austria. It also has direct access to these countries' domestic markets. The EU reckons that half its gas imports now come from Russia. Newer EU members, such as Hungary and the Czech Republic, are almost entirely dependent on Russian gas. Moreover, a pipeline network that it inherited from the Soviet Union gives Russia control over gas imported from Central Asia. The EU has few ideas for how to deal with its chief energy supplier. “We know we should do something about Russia, but we don't know what,” one Brussels official says. “In the EU we negotiate on the rules, whereas Russia wants to do deals.” The deals are coming thick and fast. Last month, Russia secured one to build an oil pipeline from Bulgaria to Greece that will bypass the Bosporus. Symbolically, it will be the first Russian-controlled pipeline on EU territory. The pipeline will carry Russian and Central Asian oil straight to the EU, avoiding Turkey.

Oil can at least be bought from elsewhere. The bigger worry is about the EU's dependence on Russian gas. The flow of natural gas depends on the routes and control of pipelines, as European consumers were reminded when Russia switched off the gas supply to Ukraine just over a year ago and Ukraine started to steal Russian gas that was destined for the EU. Russia's pipeline routes encircle the EU from the north and south. Russia and Germany have teamed up to build a gas pipeline under the Baltic Sea, bypassing Ukraine and Poland (see map). Gerhard Schröder, a former German chancellor signed up by Mr Putin to preside over this Nord Stream pipeline, claims that it will make Europe safer. But a study by Sweden's Defence Research Agency concludes that it will divide the EU and increase dependence on Russia. It will let the Kremlin turn off gas supplies to Ukraine, Poland and Belarus without affecting “more important” customers. Understandably, Poland is anxious. The pipeline will increase the flow of gas to Germany and hook in countries that do not yet consume much Russian gas, including the Netherlands and Britain.

In the south, Russia has a pipeline across the Black Sea which supplies gas to Turkey. Now Russia wants to extend this Blue Stream pipeline to Hungary. That would compete directly with Europe's own plan to build a pipeline called Nabucco from Turkey to Austria. Nabucco has been one of the EU's few concerted responses to Russian domination of its gas supplies: it would be filled up with gas from Central Asia and thus bypass Russia altogether. But it is now creating more friction than unity.

Hungarian rhapsody

Last month Hungary's prime minister, Ferenc Gyurcsany, called Nabucco a “long dream”. Instead, he suggested that Hungary would support the extension of Blue Stream. Gazprom already supplies 80% of Hungary's gas and has promised to build a large gas-storage facility that could be a hub for central Europe. “Blue Stream”, enthused Mr Gyurcsany, “is backed by a very strong will and a very strong organisational power.” (When Hungary was accused of undermining the EU's common energy policy, the tart response was that it was impossible to undermine something that did not exist.) As well as controlling pipelines, Gazprom has also been busy buying up pieces of Europe's gas infrastructure. It owns 35% of Wingas, a German distribution company, and also has stakes in the Baltic countries' distributors. It has 10% of the interconnector pipeline between Belgium and Britain and wants a similar share of a British-Dutch link. It is also muscling its way into electricity, oil and liquefied natural gas (LNG) projects. “It is not enough for us to meet 25% of global gas consumption. We want to be the biggest energy company in the world,” Alexander Medvedev, Gazprom's deputy head, has said of his company's modest ambition.

Most European governments have been careful not to alienate Russia. As long as Gazprom plays by the rules, they say, it should be allowed to invest in their markets. Belgium recently said it had no problems with Gazprom owning parts of its infrastructure. Russia, in contrast, has a big problem with foreign companies owning, let alone controlling, any of its natural resources. It has bullied Royal Dutch Shell into ceding control of the Sakhalin-2 project in the far east of the country; it has blocked BP's plan to develop a gas field in eastern Siberia; and it has kept foreign companies out of the development of the giant Shtokman field in the Barents Sea, saying that it will go it alone. In the same spirit, the Kremlin has flatly ruled out ratifying the EU's energy-charter treaty, which would require it to open up its gas pipelines to other countries and other suppliers. The Russians have made a mockery of a joint declaration on energy issued at the G8 summit they chaired in St Petersburg last July. The declaration called for more honesty, competition and transparency. Yet just two days later, Mr Putin enshrined into law Gazprom's monopoly position as the sole exporter of gas.

Then there is the talk of creating a gas equivalent to the OPEC oil-exporters' cartel. On April 9th Russia joined other gas producers in Qatar to discuss the possibility, and offered to lead a study into gas pricing. The next meeting of the group will be in Moscow. With almost 60% of the world's gas concentrated in just three countries —Russia, Iran and Qatar—the notion of a cartel sounds appealing. But fixing prices for a commodity that is not traded on world markets will prove much harder than it has been for oil. Even so, as Mr Putin said earlier this year, “it would be a good idea to co-ordinate our activities.” Gazprom has already signed a memorandum of understanding with Algeria's Sonatrach to co-operate in gas production. This has unnerved European consumers, as Algeria is their third-largest supplier of gas, after Russia and Norway. America, too, is nervous. “Russia's commercial and political shadow over the governments in central Europe makes it harder for us to deal with our allies,” says a senior State Department official.

The EU's dependence on Russian energy is hardly new. Nor is tension between Russia and America. “The Americans were constantly telling us we were too dependent on Russian gas in the 1970s and 1980s,” says Sir Rodric Braithwaite, a former British ambassador to Moscow. Yet, throughout the cold war, Russia remained a reliable gas supplier. Why should things be different now? First, says, Cliff Kupchan, director of the Russian programme at Eurasia Group, a consultancy in Washington, DC, the Soviet Union was politically more predictable than its successor. “It was run by geriatrics, but we knew that one geriatric would succeed another.” Russia's political stability is ephemeral. It relies on Mr Putin's will, not on an institutional transfer of power. With nationalism on the rise, it is anybody's guess who will be in charge of Russia in ten years' time.

A second difference is that the energy relationship between the Soviet Union and the West stopped at the border—albeit the border of the Soviet block. The oil and gas ministry, Gazprom's predecessor, did not try to take over any of western Europe's infrastructure. Gazprom has no scruples about using its muscle to buy such assets. Gazprom's desire to control their pipelines has been central to Russia's recent clashes with Ukraine and Belarus. Third, the Soviet energy business was run by technocrats who implemented centrally planned decisions. Today, it is controlled by former KGB men obsessed with money and power. Gazprom has several ex-KGB members on its board of directors. Rosneft, the state-controlled oil champion, is chaired by a former agent who is now deputy chief of the Kremlin staff. “People in Europe have a natural apprehension about their homes being heated by these people,” says one commentator on Russia.

Yet dependence cuts both ways. Europe may depend on Russia for half its gas imports, but Russia is dependent on Europe for the bulk of its export revenues. Repeated threats by the Kremlin to divert the flow of gas to China mean little without pipelines that it would take many years to build. Switching off gas to Europe will never make commercial sense for Gazprom. The fear in some EU countries is that commercial interests may one day become secondary to political ones. Of 55 cut-offs, explicit threats or coercive price actions by Russia since 1991, only 11 had no political underpinnings, according to the Swedish defence study.

Running on empty

If all this is not worrying enough, there is another, more immediate source of concern for the EU: that Russia may be physically unable to produce enough gas to satisfy demand. Even worse than being dependent on a company like Gazprom may be to be dependent on a Gazprom that is short of gas. The output of Gazprom's three super-giant fields, which account for three-quarters of its production, is declining at a rate of some 6-7% a year. Output from a new gas field brought on stream in 2001 has already peaked. Last year, Gazprom decided to develop a massive field in the Yamal peninsula—frozen and barren Arctic land—but that will take years. Meanwhile, Russia's domestic demand for gas is growing by more than 2% a year. For all its swagger, Russia is short of gas, a problem that is already affecting its electricity-generation capacity. This does not reflect any lack of reserves—Russia has the world's biggest—but rather a longstanding failure to invest enough in their development.

Gazprom has argued that it will invest in new fields only if it can pre-sell the output to Europe. Instead it has been spending lavishly on pipelines and downstream assets. This has a certain monopolistic logic. Raking in the middleman's profits from exports is easier and more lucrative than investing billions in developing new fields for a domestic market which, although it consumes two-thirds of Gazprom's production, generates hardly any profits, as regulated Russian gas prices are much lower than most European ones. Meanwhile, Gazprom relies on Central Asia, especially Turkmenistan, to plug the gap in gas supplies, which makes many investors and consumers nervous. A study by UBS, a bank, concludes that Turkmenistan may have signed contracts to supply twice as much gas after 2009 as it can actually produce. The nervousness over potential shortages of gas, though, plays in Gazprom's favour: as with talk of a gas OPEC, it prods the Europeans into striking special deals with Gazprom.

Gazprom's position is reliant on support from Europe's national energy champions such as Gaz de France, ENI of Italy and Ruhrgas of Germany. Companies such as Ruhrgas and Gazprom have each other's interests at heart. Indeed, Ruhrgas owns about 7% of Gazprom, worth some $17 billion, and has a seat on Gazprom's board. ENI and Enel of Italy this month acted directly for Gazprom when they bought the expropriated gas assets of the bankrupt Yukos company in a controversial auction. Under a pre-arranged deal, the two Italian companies agreed to cede control of these assets to Gazprom, which was too cautious to bid in its own name. In return ENI and Enel were given a foothold in Russia's gas fields and possibly a seat on the board of Gazprom's oil company. Gazprom also has long-term gas contracts with ENI, which gives it direct access to Italian consumers. Gazprom has similar arrangements in Germany and France. Vladimir Milov, the head of the Institute of Energy Policy in Moscow, says that the links between Gazprom and its European counterparts amount to a cartel between wholesale buyers and sellers. The losers in this game are European consumers who are forced to pay gas prices that are several times higher than the wholesale price which their national companies pay to Gazprom.

Trying to persuade Russia to break up Gazprom's monopoly is a futile task. The best way to increase the EU's energy security would be for it to liberalise its own market and unbundle its national utilities. This would cut profit margins in gas distribution, and thereby reduce Gazprom's appetite for European domestic assets. It would encourage European network operators to invest in interconnectors between electricity grids and pipeline networks, weakening Russia's ability to play off one customer against another. No wonder Gazprom does not warm to the idea of European energy liberalisation, which it has called “the most absurd idea in the history of the world economy”.

Dependence of different groups of European countries on gas imports from Russia (percentage of imports from the RF in total consumption)

[..]

Source: http://www.economist.com/displayStor...ory_id=9009041

[Armenian]

Re: Watch Russia’s presidential inauguration broadcast LIVE!

The year Russia flexed its diplomatic muscle

This was the year that Vladimir Putin bared his chest for the world. Pictures of the Russian president fishing shirtless in Siberia with his biceps bulging, were distributed by the Kremlin with a clear message: a tough leader for a tough country. In 2006, a resurgent Russia asserted itself principally through the energy markets by demanding higher prices for its oil and gas and threatening to cut off those refusing to pay. This year, Moscow has flexed its muscles over a much broader front, challenging the US and the European Union over issues ranging from missile defence and Kosovo to election observers.

This approach has generated growing criticism in the EU and the US. But within Russia, a dose of foreign policy nationalism has gone down very well, boosting Mr Putin's popularity, contributing to his party's triumph in this month's parliamentary elections. The Russian leader is now well placed to manage next year's presidential poll, after nominating Dmitry Medvedev as his successor and having Mr Medvedev name Mr Putin as his future prime minister. Mr Putin set the tone early in the year with a widely reported speech in Munich in which he attacked the US, saying: "The US has overstepped its borders in all spheres - economic, political and humanitarian, and has imposed itself on other states... Local and regional wars did not get fewer, the number of people who died did notget smaller but increased. We see no kind of restraint - a hyperinflated use of force." Given conditions in Iraq, his claims were not wholly unreasonable. But his tone reminded many observers of the rhetoric of the cold war. The Russian president was deliberately antagonising and provoking his western counterparts. His words have been accompanied by action, notably in the field of military security. The Kremlin is furious at Washington's plans to install anti-missile defence bases in Poland and the Czech Republic.

Russian officials reject American arguments that the missiles, an element in a global shield against "rogue" states, will not and could not be aimed at Russia or Russian missiles. In the Kremlin's view, the US claims are disingenuous, as any missile base could easily be expanded at a future date. Russian officials also see the plans as a political provocation - an extension of western power into Moscow's former sphere of influence. Officials argue that having failed to stand up to the west over Nato expansion and raised more effective questions about EU enlargement, Russia must not give any more ground. Under former president Boris Yeltsin, who died this year, an impoverished Russia robbed of its self-confidence often grumbled at the west but was too weak to respond. Under Mr Putin it is reacting by attacking some of the core east-west security agreements struck during the cold war. This month, Russia is pulling out of the Conventional Forces in Europe treaty - an agreement limiting troop deployments in Europe - on the ground that it was never ratified by western countries.

Moscow is also questioning the 1987 Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces treaty, which restricts the stationing of medium-range missiles, on the grounds that ownership of such weapons is no longer the preserve of the US and Russia. The arguments are at an early stage but could complicate discussions over an even more significant agreement - the Start treaty, controlling long-range weapons, which expires next year. Russian officials argue that there is nothing unreasonable in their actions, adding that it was Washington that first abrogated an arms control treaty when, in 2001, it pulled out of the 1972 Anti- Ballistic Missile Treaty so that it could develop the missile shield. Russian analysts also point out that in practical terms, Moscow's military power is a fraction of the US's. Even after recent increases, Russia's defence budget is about 5 per cent of the US's and will struggle to finance even the renewal of ageing Soviet-era arsenals, let alone fund a significant expansion.

The missiles dispute has developed in line with other east-west, arguments, notably over Kosovo, where the diplomatic conflict is coming to a head. Moscow has stood by its traditional ally, Serbia, and backed Belgrade in its refusal to contemplate Kosovo's independence. Russia this summer prevented a US-led bid to secure United Nations approval for an independence plan and has promised to maintain its veto. The likely result is a unilateral declaration of independence by Kosovo, supported by the US and most EU members, though not the whole Union. Russia is responding by encouraging separatists in the Georgian territories of Abkhazia and South Ossetia, and in Moldova. But how far Moscow intends to go is still unclear. Russia has also been embroiled in arguments with its neighbours, notably Estonia where the clumsy dismantling of a Soviet-period war memorial provoked demonstrations by local ethnic Russians, a wave of protest from Moscow and cyberattacks on Estonian government websites. Georgia has accused Russia of interference in its affairs, including an alleged missile attack on an official outpost. In Ukraine, aides to Viktor Yushchenko, the pro-west president, have complained about Russian political backing for separatist parties.

Meanwhile, Kremlin officials have ruthlessly pursued their main domestic aim - to remain in power after next March's presidential election. Russia has brushed off international criticisms of the parliamentary election and its failure to grant early access to monitors from the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe. Last week, Mr Putin named Mr Medvedev, chairman of Gazprom and a first deputy prime minister, as his chosen successor. Mr Medvedev, a relatively pro-western liberal who owes most of his career to Mr Putin, is viewed favourably by investors. But the endorsement of the taciturn lawyer is also seen as proof of Mr Putin's determination to maintain a hold of the levers of power after he steps down. Mr Medvedev more or less confirmed this by declaring that he would appoint Mr Putin as prime minister if, as seems certain, he is elected president, to ensure political and economic continuity. Elsewhere in the region, parliamentary elections in Ukraine resulted in a strong showing for Yulia Tymoshenko, the maverick former prime minister. But prolonged in-fighting involving Ms Tymoshenko, Mr Yushchenko, and Viktor Yanukovich, the prime minister, have delayed the formation of a government. In Georgia, president Mikheil Saakashvili responded to demonstrations and calls for his resignation with a state of emergency and the announcement of a snap presidential election on January 5.

Further west, Polish voters unexpectedly ended two years of rule by its combative prime minister, Jaroslaw Kaczynski, head of the conservative Law and Justice party. The country rejected his divisive tactics and his clumsy handling of foreign affairs in favour of the conciliatory policies offered by Donald Tusk, leader of the liberal Civic Platform and the new prime minister. In south-east Europe, Romania and Bulgaria rejoiced at joining the EU in January but have since been beset by criticisms from Brussels about their shortcomings in running the public administration and the courts and in fighting corruption. But their difficulties pale in comparison with the challenges facing most of the former Yugoslavia, where there are renewed fears of violence in Kosovo and in Bosnia. The EU is trying to ease tensions by engaging governments in talks on association agreements that are designed to lead to future membership.

Almost everywhere in the region, energy remains high on the agenda. With oil prices hovering below $100 a barrel, energy-importing countries are concerned about securing supplies - and reducing their reliance on Russia, the largest oil and gas supplier. The year has seen increased competition for hydrocarbon resources and government moves to strengthen control. In Russia, Gazprom, the state-controlled energy group, started the year by wresting control of the big Sakhalin-2 gas project from Shell, the Anglo-Dutch group, and its Japanese partners and paying $7.5bn for a 50 per cent-plusone- share stake. In Kazakhstan, the administration is now embroiled in talks with Italy's Eni over the future of the huge Kashagan oilfield. Elsewhere, Chinese investors are competing for access to central Asian resources with Russian and western companies. The unexpected death of Turkmenistan's leader, Saparmurat Niyazov, has led to a flurry of interest in hiscountry, with foreign companies seeking investment projects.

Meanwhile, among the consuming nations of the EU, there are efforts to reduce dependence on Russian-supplied fuels by developing alternative routes, including the Nabucco gas pipeline, which would run from the Caspian region to central Europe via Turkey. But Gazprom has responded with its own plans, notably South Stream, a pipeline that would run from Russia under the Black Sea via the Balkans to central Europe, and Nord Stream, the controversial Baltic Sea pipeline. Financing will be an issue for all these projects. Across the region, economies have grown at unprecedented rates in the past few years, generating rising living standards in most countries, even if tens of millions still struggle with poverty. In a recent annual economic survey, the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development forecast an average increase in gross domestic product for the region in 2007 of 7 per cent - the highest ever. It predicts a slow down next year to about 6 per cent. Officials are watching the impact of the global financial turmoil and decelerating growth in the US but so far do not see any significant overall effects. Others are less sanguine, including the International Monetary Fund, which has warned of the risks to countries with high current account deficits, such as the Baltic states, Romania and Bulgaria.

Foreign investment is running at record levels, with the EBRD forecasting an inflow of $76bn for 2007. The lion's share is going to central and south-east Europe, with the republics of the former Soviet Union attracting far less. While investors are increasingly willing to assume the risks involved in putting money deep into Russia and other ex-Soviet states, they still feel more comfortable in present and prospective EU member states. However, the region has a long way to go before achieving living standards comparable to those in western Europe. It was only last year that average incomes finally exceeded 1989 levels. And some countries have still to pass that statistical milestone, including Russia (which should do so this year), Ukraine and Georgia. Within countries there are sharp differences between wealthy cities, such as Prague, Kiev and Moscow, and the impoverished provinces. Similar gaps exist between resource-rich regions, such as western Siberia, and poor ones such as the troubled northern Caucasus.

Source: http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/4b197342-a...0779fd2ac.html

[Armenian]

Re: Watch Russia’s presidential inauguration broadcast LIVE!

Russia’s Geopolitical Counter-Offensive in the Former Soviet Union

In the last two to three years Russia has been on a geopolitical offensive in the countries that were formerly part of the Soviet Union. It has been gradually regaining the ground lost in the aftermath of the American invasion of Afghanistan and the Georgian, Ukrainian and Kyrgyz revolutions. Central Asia. The first major victory for Russia came in Tajikistan in 2004. The country was drifting towards the West following the ouster of the Taliban from neighboring Afghanistan. Moscow worked vigorously to bring the nation back under its sway. The Kremlin repeatedly threatened the Tajik government of Imomali Rakhmonov with the expulsion of one million Tajik workers from Russia, while offering debt relief for the return to Moscow’s orbit. In October of 2004 Russian President Putin and Tajik leader Rakhmonov signed an agreement. Russia agreed to let Tajik laborers remain in Russia and forgave the country $240 million of its $300 million debt.

[...]

The South Caucasus

Russia has been equally aggressive on its southern flank in the Caucasus. Moscow managed to further increase its already overwhelming influence in Armenia. It upgraded the Russian military base in Giumry, in the northern part of the country and successfully completed the process of acquiring Armenia’s power distribution network in September 2006. The Russian energy monopoly RAO UES already owns most of Armenian hydroelectric plants and manages the finances of the nuclear power station in Metsamor. In addition, the Kremlin controlled Gasprom is Armenia’s single gas provider. Russian gas generates 40% of Armenia’s electricity, another 40% coming from Russian controlled Metsamor. Gasprom also owns the country’s biggest thermal plant. In November 2006 the giant Russian mobile phone operator Vimpel-Communications bought 90% of the shares in Armenia’s national telecommunications company, ArmenTel, from the Greek firm OTE.

In April 2007 Moscow announced joint uranium excavation venture of Armenia’s uranium reserves, which is scheduled to begin later in this year. Yerevan also agreed to join the International Uranium Enrichment Center, located in Irkutsk region of Russia. Some Armenian experts express their deep concern over Moscow’s suffocating influence in all spheres of the country’s life. However, this doesn’t change the overall picture. The nation remains bound to Moscow to such degree that it leaves even President Putin satisfied. During one of his meetings with Armenian President Robert Kocharian (in February 2007, after the Russian takeover of the Armenian power grid) he half happily and half ironically declared that “there is no issue which can not be solved between Armenia and Russia”. The Kremlin kept Yerevan under close watch to make sure that the piping of the new Iranian-Armenian gas pipeline (that opened in March 2007, transporting gas into Armenia) was small in diameter. Thus Moscow prevented Iran and Armenia from exporting gas to other countries and avoided international competition with Russian Gasprom.

In contrast to Armenia, neighboring Azerbaijan drifted away from Russia and closer to the United States and NATO alliance. In 2006 Moscow attacked Azerbaijan, threatening to increase gas prices twofold. Azerbaijan President Ilham Aliyev defied the Kremlin and on his part threatened to stop the export of gas from Russia to Azerbaijan and the import of oil from Azerbaijan to Russia. In 2005 the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan oil pipeline became operational, transporting Azerbaijani oil via Georgia and Turkey to the West. In 2006 the Baku-Tbilisi-Erzerum pipeline went into operation. It significantly increased the political weight and strategic importance of Azerbaijan, brought it closer to the West and reduced Russian influence in the South Caucasus. Nevertheless, Moscow effectively kept the Karabakh conflict frozen, with a large portion of Baku’s political and diplomatic resources chained to the issue. The Kremlin also succeeded in maintaining its lease on an anti-Missile radar facility in the northern Azerbaijani city of Gabala. Realizing Azerbaijan’s huge importance as an energy rich country, with a highly geostrategic location in Caucasus and in the Caspian basin, the Kremlin doesn’t (and will not) spare its efforts to bring Baku back under Moscow’s influence. So there will be ever increasing pressure applied from Moscow towards Azerbaijan in the coming months or even years, if necessary.

Pro-Western Georgia has been the Kremlin’s main target in southern Caucasus. Russia fully realizes the huge significance of Georgia. If it regains influence over the country Moscow kills two birds with one stone: it gets direct land access to its satellite Armenia and neutralizes increasingly anti-Russian Azerbaijan, which heavily relies on Georgia to transport its abundant gas and oil resources to the West. Moscow has been doing everything it can to bend Georgia and Mikhail Saakashvili’s pro-Western government to its will. Russia heightened tensions in Abkhazia, South Ossetia and the Armenian populated Javakheti region in southern Georgia; sponsored and organized pro-Russian political groups to create social protests and undermine the government; supported anti-government armed revolt of Georgian warlord Emzar Kvitsiani in western Georgia; banned Georgian wines and mineral waters from Russian markets; raised gas price threefold; cut off all air and land connections with the country and deported hundreds of Georgian immigrants from Russia.

However, Saakashvili turned out to be a hard stone for Moscow to break. He managed to accelerate significant political, economic and military reforms in the country. He brought Georgia even closer to the West and to its goal of integration in NATO and eventually into the European Union. Saakashvili’s administration, with Western support, succeeded in starting the withdrawal of Russian military bases from Georgia. The Russian Army will leave the country entirely by the end of 2008. The opening of Baku-Batumi-Ceyhan oil pipeline (in 2005) and the Baku-Tbilisi-Erzerum gas pipeline (in 2006) strengthened Georgia’s national security and regional and international position. However, besides many successes achieved in the nation-building process in the last several years, Georgia’s future is not entirely certain. Moscow doesn’t seem ready to retreat: it is lobbying hard in European capitals (using its energy clout) against NATO membership for Georgia, simultaneously subjecting the nation to almost daily, heavy political and economic blackmail.

Western Frontline

Russia has been similarly aggressive on its geopolitical frontline in post-Soviet Europe. After the humiliation of the Ukraine’s 2004 presidential elections, Moscow worked hard to contain and reverse the Orange Revolution. First, in winter of 2005 Russia heavily hit the country by doubling natural gas prices (gas raw that caused a disruption of gas supplies to Europe). Then, the well-organized and well financed Ukraine’s pro-Russian “Party of Regions” based on Russian speaking voters in the country’s east, gained a vital 33% in Ukraine’s March 2006 parliamentary elections. The formerly disgraced Victor Yanukovich (the leader of the “Party of Regions” and the loser of disputed 2004 presidential elections) was catapulted into the position of Prime-Minister. Since then, he effectively halted the country’s integration process into NATO. Profound disagreements between President Yushenko’s and his pro-Russian Prime-Minister’s policies’ resulted in the dissolution of the Ukrainian parliament in April 2007 and plunged the country into a deep political crisis, that continues to be filled with uncertainty. In addition, by issuing clear threats to the territorial integrity of the Ukraine, Russia’s Ministry of Defense succeeded in maintaining its naval military facilities on the Black Sea coast.

[...]

Conclusion

Russia lost a great deal of influence in 1990’s and then in the first years of the new millennia, following the American invasion of Afghanistan and Georgian and Ukrainian revolutions in countries of the former Soviet Union. However, Putin’s Russia never gave up its hegemonic aspirations. But Moscow also realized that economically week Russia, with a disastrous war still going in Chechnya, couldn’t afford an ambitious foreign policy. Putin’s Russia rose quietly and gradually. After the September 11 attacks, Putin agreed to let Americans establish military bases in Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan. In fact Russia could do very little to stop Washington at that time. However, in exchange Russia got a free hand in Chechnya. By 2004-2005 Moscow basically crushed the Chechen rebellion killing the main Chechen field commanders. At the same time the Kremlin consolidated Russia’s entire energy sector in the state’s hands, sending disobedient oligarchs to jails or exile. Moscow gradually acquired about 30%-40% of Europe’s energy markets and unfolded a large scale geopolitical counter-offensive in the countries of the former Soviet Union.

Russia’s tactics were basically the same against post-Soviet states: Moscow allies with semi-authoritarian, corrupt, stagnant and isolated regimes (Uzbekistan, Belarus, Tajikistan) guaranteeing their survival in exchange for their obedience to Moscow. Under the banner of keeping stability in a country and in a wider region Russia poses as a policeman, supporting regimes militarily in case of domestic turbulence. Then Russia establishes (or expands already existing) military presence in a country, tightly chaining a nation’s military complex to its own (Armenia, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan). Simultaneously Russian state monopolies move in on a country, establishing their dominance on a nation’s energy resources (Turkmenistan), energy infrastructure (Armenia, Tajikistan) and their transportation routes (Kazakhstan). In the beginning, the Kremlin backed Russian companies promise many investments, not only in energy sector but also in other sectors of economy, such as telecom, tourism, transportation. However, Moscow never invests enough (or any) capital to make meaningful change. It merely chains local economies to its own, guarantees its dominance, prevents international economic competition and leaves local societies frustrated and impoverished (Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Belarus, Armenia).

Against pro-Western post-Soviet countries Russia deploys various tactics: supports shady separatist regimes (against Moldova, Georgia, Azerbaijan); cuts off gas supplies and astronomically raises prices (Georgia, Moldova, Ukraine, Azerbaijan); applies economic sanctions (Moldova, Georgia); manipulates elections in cooperation with local corrupt and criminal elites (Ukraine); detonates local pro-Russian or Russian forces (Georgia, Ukraine, Estonia). Today Russia is not the world’s strongest country, but it definitely is the strongest power in the former Soviet Union. It had some setbacks and failures in the last few years but overall Moscow is in a much stronger position than it was 4-5 years ago. The Kremlin’s geopolitical successes were contributed to by the instability in the Middle East, high energy prices, wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and not enough activity from the European Union in the nations of the former Soviet Union. Today Russia represents the single biggest threat to the national sovereignty and security of post-Soviet states. Moscow’s goal is not a mere dominance in the region. Russian strategic planners and policy makers have made it amply clear that the Kremlin wants to bring the whole former Soviet landmass under the Russian dominated “Eurasian Union”. Moscow’s new KGB run regime has political will, determination and aggressiveness to do just that. As long as America continues to be bogged down in Iraq and Afghanistan and Europe shows timidity in confronting new Russian neo-imperialism, the Kremlin will find it less and less difficult to achieve its goals. Undoubtedly, there are very hard days ahead of those former Soviet countries which really care for their freedom and future.

Source: http://www.abkhazia.com/content/view/121/2/

[Armenian]

Re: Watch Russia’s presidential inauguration broadcast LIVE!

During the Soviet Union's collapse western policy makers feared a potential emergence of a new alliance spearheaded by Russia, some called it an alliance of "Orthodox" Christian nations. This western paranoia about the great potential of the Russian state continues to this day. Measures taken by certain western powers to undermine Russia since the collapse of the Soviet Union have backfired. Russia today, along with China, is fast emerging as 'the' global power of the twenty-first century. Many political analysts in the west have begun to realize this ominous fact. And many politicians and special interest groups alike have begun to fear. The so-called "war on terrorism" which is being waged within the Mideast and Central Asia has more to do with a longterm western attempt to isolate and undermine Russia and China than with fighting a mythical Islamic terror group called Al-Qaeda. Nevertheless, Russia is on a fast paced rise. As a result, the numbers and intensity of proxy wars fought between Russia and West will continue to rise as well.

Although there are a few wrinkles that need to be ironed out, for better or for worst, Armenia's future lies with the Russian Federation. Why Russia? Besides the centuries long history between Armenians and Russians, besides the fact that due to a Russian presence in the region there is an Armenia in the Caucasus today, besides the fact that Russia is amongst the most culturally and technologically advanced nations on earth - Armenians need to understand that the twenty-first century potentially belongs to Russia. Russia's great potential within this century is essentially the reason why we are currently seeing a frenzy of activity in the West. West's intention is to contain and undermine the Russian Federation throughout Eurasia. What's more, Armenians need to understand that Russia is a natural bulwork against pan-Turkism, western imperialism and Sunni fundamentalism.

I am very glad that the "Hanrapetakan" party in Armenia, represented today by president Serzh Sargsyan, has had the strategic foresight to make sure that Armenia remains firmly within Moscow's sphere of influence. Concurrently, I am grateful that Moscow continues to realize the vital strategic importance of the Armenian Republic within the volatile Caucasus. Why is Armenia important for Russia? For geostrategic reasons, namely to keep NATO and Turks out of the Caucasus and to secure its oil/gas distribution networks, Moscow needs Armenia as a powerful state in the region. And as noted above, for geostrategic, economic and survival reasons - Armenia needs Russia. The fact of the matter is, the West has no real interests within the tiny landlocked resource-less Armenian Republic other than to make sure official Yerevan does not interfere with their regional projects. The West's interest in the region is primarily the exploitation of Caspian Sea basin oil and gas, keeping the large powerful nation of Turkey within its sphere of influence and keeping Russia at bay, out of the Caucasus. Needless to say, without the Russian factor at play in the Caucasus, the every existence of the Armenian nation can be at risk. For the West, Armenia is simply a geopolitical obstacle, a nuisance.

Thus, the formula that promotes Russo-Armenian relations today is relatively a simple one: For Russia, Armenia is a strategic Caucasian gate, a foothold that it has to protect for its national interests. For Armenia, Russia is a sustainer that it needs to stay alive in a very volatile and complicated geopolitical environment. For a small, landlocked and resources-less nation surrounded by historic enemies in an increasingly complicated world, Armenia has no other option but to place its longterm and short term hopes on Mother Russia. May God bless the Russo-Armenian alliance.

Armenian

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

Sargsyan Wins Putin's Seal of Approval

President Vladimir Putin and Serzh Sargsyan on Monday pledged continuity in bilateral relations, as the Armenian president-elect made Moscow his first destination after being declared the winner in a controversial election last month. "I know that political processes in Armenia are not developing easily, but we very much hope that everything we have built up in bilateral relations in recent years will remain and develop further in the future, regardless of events inside Armenia," Putin said at the start of the talks in the Kremlin.

Sargsyan was elected in a Feb. 19 vote that the opposition says was rigged. The growing protests that followed were then violently dispersed by police and a 20-day state of emergency was imposed. The state of emergency ended last week. Sargsyan thanked Putin for Russia's support, including its backing in the run-up to the Armenian vote. "Both [Armenian President Robert Kocharyan] and our ambassador passed your personal messages on to me, and I will be honest: Never before have we witnessed such an unambiguous approach," he said. Sargsyan's trip comes on the heels of a visit by Kocharyan, who came to Moscow for an informal Commonwealth of Independent States summit on Feb. 22.

Putin congratulated Sargsyan, currently prime minister, on his victory, while Sargsyan said the election of First Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev as Putin's replacement in March instilled hope that the bilateral relations would continue to develop positively. Sargsyan met Medvedev earlier on Monday. Sargsyan is to be inaugurated on April 9, while the ceremony for Medvedev will take place on May 7. The talks between Putin and Sargsyan were to focus on expanding trade and economic relations, including nuclear cooperation, the Kremlin said in a statement on Monday. Armenia has been invited to join Russia's international uranium enrichment center in Angarsk and is expected to finalize its commitment in the near future.

Azhdar Kurtov, an analyst with the Russian Institute of Strategic Studies, said continuity in relations with Yerevan was important for Moscow, as Armenia remains virtually its only ally in the South Caucasus. "Armenia has been successful so far in keeping the Caucasus from drifting toward the West or, rather, the south," said Kurtov, who focuses on the CIS. Landlocked Armenia borders Azerbaijan, Georgia, Iran and Turkey, in a region that is becoming a key transit route for oil exports to European and world markets. Georgia and Azerbaijan have both said they are interested in NATO membership.

Source: http://www.themoscowtimes.com/storie...03/25/003.html

Putin: Russian-Armenian relations entering new level

“Despite the hard times in the political process in Armenia, Armenian-Russian are going to develop at a new level,” president of Russia Vladimir Putin said at a meeting with Armenia's president-elect Serzh Sargsyan in Kremlin. Vladimir Putin said at the meeting that he is informed of complicated internal political processes in Armenia. Nevertheless, he observed, Russia hopes that, regardless the course of internal political events in Armenia, “everything that has been created in the preceding years, is preserved and developed in the future.” Sargsyan, for his part, said that Armenia needs to further develop relations with Russia. “We have always appreciated your help to Armenia,” Sargsyan noticed. To remind, Sargsyan has already met on March 24 with Russia's president-elect Dmitry Medvedev. He is also expected to meet with prime minister Viktor Zubkov and Moscow mayor Yuri Luzhkov.

Source: http://www.regnum.ru/english/975875.html

Sargsyan: Armenia to develop relations with Russia in all fields

President-elect Serzh Sargsyan of Armenia and Dmitry Medvedev of Russia met in Kremlin Monday. Welcoming the guest, Mr Medvedev said, “This visit testifies the high level of the Russian-Armenian ties. I hope for further development of our relations.” “Armenia is willing to develop relations with Russia in all fields on the basis of existing agreements,” the RA President-elect remarked. Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and his First Deputy Andrey Denivos also attended the meeting, NEWSru.com reports.

Source: http://www.panarmenian.net/news/eng/?nid=25472

Yuri Luzhkov: Moscow among Armenia’s major partners

Last year the commodity turnover between Moscow and Armenia increased by 65 per cent, Moscow’s Mayor Yuri Luzhkov said at a meeting with Armenia’s President-elect Serzh Sargsyan. “In the initial half of 2007 the turnover amounted to $70,5 million, increasing by 65 per cent during the year,” he said, adding that Moscow is one of Armenia’s major partners. “We opened the House of Moscow in Yerevan where entrepreneurs can get all necessary information for establishing their business in Armenia. A new wholesale center will open in Moscow soon. A new Armenian Church will be built,” the Mayor said. He also congratulated Serzh Sargsyan on election President of Armenia, wished him every success at the post and voiced hope for further development of the Armenian-Russian strategic partnership, Novosti Armenia reports.

Source: http://www.panarmenian.net/news/eng/?nid=25477

V. ZUBKOV: “ARMENIA CAN ALWAYS RELY ON RUSSIA”

The labor visit of the president-elect Prime Minister of Armenia Serzh Sargsyan in the Russian Federation is over. Yesterday in the evening he returned back to Yerevan. Before his return he had a meeting with the Prime Minister of the RF Viktor Zubkov. According to the Government public relations department, Zubkov congratulated Serzh Sargsyan for his victory in the presidential elections. He said that he was sure Sargsyan’s experience and skills in the state governing sphere will contribute to the salvation of the problems. “We sincerely wish our friend and relative Armenia to be developed. And Armenia can always rely on Russia’s support,” mentioned Zubkov. The Prime Minister of the RF highly evaluated the activities carried out by Serz Sargsyan in the development and improvement of the Armenia-Russian inter-governmental committee. Note that Serzh Sargsyan had meetings with the president of Russia Vladimir Putin, the new president Dmitry Medvedev, and the mayor of Moscow Yuri Luzjkov.

Source: http://www.panorama.am/en/politics/2008/03/25/gov/

Putin hopes to develop relations with Armenia

Russian outgoing President Vladimir Putin said he hopes to develop relations with Armenia despite the difficult political situation in the republic. In his meeting with Armenian president-elect Serzh Sarkisyan on Monday, President Putin said, “Despite the difficult political situation in Armenia, I hope that relations will develop dynamically.” “We hope that whatever the internal political situation develops in Armenia what we did in the previous years we’ll continue to develop in the future,” the Russian outgoing president said. Putin congratulated Sarkisyan on the convincing victory in the presidential elections. The Armenian president-elect said his country “needs further development of relations with Russia”. “We’ve always praised your assistance in the pre-election campaign,” Putin told Sarkisyan. “Both the president (Robert Kocharyan) and our ambassador (to Russia) gave me your message. I can say we’d never felt such approach,” Sarkisyan said. He also expressed hope for further development of cooperation with Russia. “We know Dmitry Medvedev as your like-minded person. Armenia hopes that his taking office will facilitate the development of relations between the two countries. We need further strengthening of cooperation,” Sarkisyan said.

Source: http://www.itar-tass.com/eng/level2....9712&PageNum=0

Russia and Armenia are to move on in strategic partnership

The newly elected Armenian president made Russia its first official visit. The two countries are to deepen relations. Yesterday the new Armenian president Serge Sarkisian visited Moscow. The Russian and Armenian presidents discussed the wide range of bilateral cooperation in political, military and other spheres. The two countries share the same opinions in lots of international problems. Yesterday in the focus of attention was Nagorno-Karabakh issue and trade-economic relations, strengthening on the gas cooperation. Russia and Armenia are bound with strategic partnership relations. Russia satisfies all Armenian gas needs and has one third of all investments in Armenia. Russia is keeping a military base in Armenia.

Source: http://www.russia-ic.com/news/show/6023/[/QUOTE]

PUTIN PROMISES $1,5 BILLION INVESTMENTS

On August 23, Russian and Armenian presidents Vladimir Putin and Robert Kocharian met in Sochi (Russia). Vladimir Putin expressed his content with development of Armenian-Russian bilateral relations: increase in commodity turnover and allied cooperation in political sphere, "Novosti Armenia" agency informed. Russian President V. Putin assured of $1,5 billion Russian investments in the Armenian economy in 2007. In his turn, Robert Kocharian mentioned that Armenian-Russian relations develop in all directions: there is evident increase in investments, commodity turnover, military-technical and political cooperation. There is an evident development process of mutual relations, according to the Armenian president, and the Armenian side expresses its perfect willingness to contribute to that process. It’s worth to mention that this kind of meetings between the Russian and Armenian presidents at the Russian president’s residence "Bocharov Ruchey" in Sochi have become a tradition for the two presidents. As many politicians mention, those meetings aim to regulate bilateral relations of the two states: to give a new impetus and quality to them.

Source: http://www.azgdaily.com/?lang=EN&num=2007082501

[Armenian]

Re: Watch Russia’s presidential inauguration broadcast LIVE!

Russian president lashes out at West

Vladimir Putin called his critics foreign-funded "jackals" and accused the West of meddling in Russian politics in a scathing speech Wednesday meant to drum up support for the main pro-Kremlin party. The thunderous attack came as Russia heads toward Dec. 2 parliamentary elections that have turned into a plebiscite on Putin and whether he should retain power after stepping down as president next year after two consecutive terms. Thousands of flag-waving supporters who packed a Moscow sports arena for the speech joined in chants urging Putin to remain Russia's "national leader."

It isn't clear what formal title he might hold, but he heads the ticket of the dominant United Russia party and has suggested he could become prime minister. Opinion surveys suggest the party will win two-thirds of the votes and a crushing 80 percent of the lower house of parliament's 450 seats. With approval ratings exceeding 70 percent, Putin cast the election as a black-and-white choice between the current economic boom and the poverty and political chaos of the 1990s — doomsday rhetoric clearly aimed at getting his supporters to the polls.

"Nothing is predetermined at all," a grim-faced Putin said. "Stability and peace on our land have not fallen from the skies; they haven't yet become absolutely, automatically secured." Addressing about 5,000 backers at the rally, which blended elements of a Soviet-era Communist Party congress with the raucous enthusiasm of an American political convention, Putin suggested his political opponents are working for Russia's Western adversaries. "Regrettably, there are those inside the country who feed off foreign embassies like jackals and count on support of foreign funds and governments, and not their own people," Putin said. He accused unidentified Russians of planning mass street protests, like those that helped usher in pro-Western governments in the former Soviet republics of Georgia and Ukraine in 2003 and 2004.

"Now, they're going to take to the streets. They have learned from Western experts and have received some training in neighboring (ex-Soviet) republics. And now they are going to stage provocations here," he said. Putin seemed to refer to anti-Kremlin demonstrations planned for this weekend in Moscow and St. Petersburg. Police have used force to break up several marches and demonstrations, beating and detaining dozens of protesters. Putin, whose nearly eight years in power coincided with rising energy prices, has repeatedly charged that the West wants Russia weak and compliant.

"Those who confront us don't want our plan to succeed," he said. "They have different plans for Russia. They need a weak and ill state, they need a disoriented and divided society in order to do their deeds behind its back." Without naming names, Putin railed against his liberal, pro-business and Communist opponents, raising the specter of the economic and political uncertainty that preceded and followed the 1991 collapse of the Soviet Union. "If these gentlemen come back to power, they will again cheat people and fill their pockets," he said. "They want to restore an oligarchic regime, based on corruption and lies."

After his speech, the normally reserved president plunged into the crowd, shaking hands and kissing a woman. The crowd, consisting mainly of young people, responded with chants of "Russia! Putin!" Some blew horns and jumped in excitement. With the election nearing, Putin has made a string of appearances at carefully staged events where speakers have emphasized his indispensability as a leader. The campaign has drawn heavily on imagery from the Soviet and czarist eras, periods that still evoke feelings of pride in Russians despite their history of bloodshed and oppression.

But there is also an effort to appeal to a new generation of Russians with few memories of the country's past struggles. The scenes in the grandstand at Wednesday's rally sometimes resembled those of a rowdy soccer game. Nostalgic Soviet-era bands mixed on stage with young performers, including a girl group in miniskirts who sang "I want someone like Putin." Elderly women wore blue United Russia T-shirts. A young man had "Russia" painted on his shaved head, and a woman sported "Putin" written by lipstick on her cheek. Many had faces painted with bands of white, blue and red — the colors of the national flag and the United Russia party.

The speech seemed intended to transfer some of Putin's popularity to United Russia, which controls parliament but stirs few passions among voters. An overwhelming victory for United Russia, which is all but assured given the Kremlin's tight control over the media and government, would limit the clout of his successor — and possibly lay the groundwork for Putin's return to the presidency in 2012 or sooner. Apart from United Russia, only the Communists seem certain to clear the minimum threshold for getting seats in parliament — 7 percent of the total vote. But the Kremlin is leaving little to chance. Two top liberal parties, Yabloko and the Union of Right Forces, have complained of what they call official intimidation and harassment.

Some Putin supporters have called for rewriting the constitution to allow him to stay on as president. He has promised to step down, but says he will continue to play a role in Russia and has not ruled out a presidential bid in the future. First Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev told foreign reporters Tuesday that Putin wouldn't seek a position not envisaged by the constitution, but said a new parliament could change the law. He said portraying the vote as a referendum on Putin's policy was a campaign tactic, not a maneuver to change the government structure. A parade of speakers preceded Putin to the stage Wednesday. Rifle designer Mikhail Kalashnikov and Olympic figure-skating champion Irina Rodnina both urged voters to back United Russia and showered Putin with praise.

"We athletes call him our senior coach," Rodnina told the rally. "With him, we will always win." Putin's former teacher, Vera Gurevich, said in a taped address that Putin was an "extremely decent" person who would step down as he pledged. "But he must stay in politics to complete the work he started to do," she said from her home in St. Petersburg.

Source: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071121/...u/russia_putin

Putin warns of outside forces that wish to split Russia and take over its natural resources

President Vladimir Putin said Sunday that there are people in the world who wish to split up Russia and take over its vast natural resources, and others who would like to "rule over all mankind," a veiled reference to the United States. Speaking in front of Moscow's iconic St. Basil's Cathedral on Red Square, Putin told a group of military cadets and youth group members that while "an overwhelming majority of people in the world" are friendly toward Russia, there are some who "keep saying to this day that our nation should be split."

"Some believe that we are too lucky to possess so much natural wealth, which they say must be divided," Putin said, speaking on National Unity Day. "These people have lost their mind," he added with a smile. Many Russians fear that their country's rapidly declining population and enormous natural wealth could one day leave it vulnerable to outside predators. But the theme of invasion was central to Sunday's holiday, which Putin created by decree in 2005 to commemorate the defense of Russia from a Polish-Lithuanian incursion in the beginning of the 17th century.

Putin on Sunday referred to the battle as a turning point in Russia's history that united the nation. Not missing a chance to take a shot at the United States, Putin said there are people who "would like to build a unipolar world and rule over all of mankind." He counted them as among the minority in the world who do not maintain a "friendly attitude" toward Russia. He said any attempt to establish a unipolar world was doomed to fail.

"Nothing of this kind has ever occurred in our planet's history, and I don't think it will ever happen," the president said.

Putin has been highly critical of the United States for the invasion of Iraq and opposes its plans to build a limited missile shield in central Europe. Concern about outside forces wanting the division of Russia arose last month during Putin's three-hour nationally televised call-in show. A Siberian worker asked Putin about comments he said were made years ago by former U.S. Secretary of State Madeleine Albright suggesting that Siberia had too many natural resources for one country.

"I know that some politicians play with such ideas in their heads," Putin replied, adding that such talk was "political erotica."

Putin, whose two-term presidency ends next year, said Russia will continue playing an active role in foreign policy and there are many people who look to Russia as a defender of small nations' rights and interests. Intended to invoke patriotism, National United Day has been hijacked by extreme nationalist groups that call for ridding Russia of foreigners and returning the pre-communist monarchy.

Source: http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/...ssia-Putin.php

[Armenian]

Re: Watch Russia’s presidential inauguration broadcast LIVE!

Indonesia – Russia opens the Pacific Front

As Sun Tsu said:

"Whoever occupies the battleground first and awaits the enemy will be at ease; whoever occupies the battleground afterward and must race to the conflict will be fatigued. Thus one who excels at warfare compels men and is not compelled by other men. Thus the highest realization of warfare is to attack the enemy's plans; next is to attack their alliances; next to attack their army; and the lowest is to attack their fortified cities."

Vladimir Putin has the goal of reestablishing Russia as a world power and returning the world to a multi-polar world. Russia's alliance with China and Iran with their global alliances through economic and military alliances presents the strategic basis for control and the elimination of the hegemony of the United States. The alliances span both the Sunni and Shia branches of Islam as exemplified by the relations with Saudi Arabia, the Gulf States, Indonesia and Iran. While the politicians and the press are focused on war in Iraq, scant attention is being directed to the greater geopolitical events occurring worldwide. The battleground is already being occupied by the enemies of freedom and liberty. The Russian deal to supply weapons to Indonesia descended on the APEC summit table like a slammed fist. Russia along with their partners is utilizing alliances in the: political, transportation, military, technology, economic, natural resource and energy sectors to accomplish the goal.

Russia seeks access to the Mediterranean, the Indian Ocean, the Pacific and the Caribbean. In the space of a few years Russia has managed to create a network of relations that, at a diplomatic level, have launched the Kremlin as an irreplaceable reference point for the central-Asiatic republics, for some middle-east countries, the Pacific Basin and the Caribbean. The network of alliances between Russia, Iran, China, India, Venezuela, Cuba and now Indonesia - motivated exclusively by convenience - have produced an acceleration of economic and financial integration projects. Past differences between Russia and the larger Asiatic nations seem now to be overcome due to the will to reach new common objectives. From this point of view, the intention of the Shanghai Pact's members of including Iran amongst the cooperation organizations, Russia and China's UNSC veto and opposition to imposing sanctions in order to discourage Teheran from pursuing the enrichment of uranium, and the profitable Russian-Iranian cooperation in economic and military fields represent the most significant examples of the sharing of political strategies that antagonize the West.

While the leaders who attended the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation summit in Sydney in September 2007 seemed to be united in their call for action on challenging issues such as global warming and economic development, in fact a cauldron of unpredictable discord was simmering just below the surface of smiles and handshakes. While Vladimir Putin arrived at the APEC meetings to open the Russian initiative in the Pacific with the signing of weapons and energy deals with Indonesia, the United States and Japan seemed intent on also creating a new military block in Asia. They have enlisted Australia, India and Singapore as their allies, and the five nations were concluding their first joint military exercises in the Bay of Bengal just as the APEC conference was winding down. In Sydney, the United States, Japan and Australia held separate security talks at which the main topic was how to engage with India. The leading members of this alliance have described their cooperation as focused on their "common interests," and have stressed that it is not aimed against China. Yet there is little evidence to prove this argument. No one knows what scenarios will arise in the future. Is the emerging Asian security paradigm a threat to China?

"The "Malabar CY 07-2" naval exercises in the Bay of Bengal held in the first week of September, 2007 undoubtedly represent a major shift in India's strategic security perceptions. Only the US and Indian navies had been participating in the 12 Malabar series of naval exercises held usually off the west coast of India so far. But Malabar CY 07-2 is different in two ways. First, the size of it; with the participation of nearly 30 warships and 200 aircraft from five nations- Australia, Japan, India, the U.S., and Singapore – makes it the largest ever naval exercise in this part of the world. Second, in a clear departure from the past, qualitatively the exercise is trying out entirely new set of war games in the Bay of Bengal off Andaman."

The Cold War should serve as a mirror in this present situation. The confrontation between the United States and the Soviet Union in the early years of the Cold War resembles in some respects the situation that is emerging today. The South China Sea was the scene of 13 resource-related military clashes in the 1990s, nine of which involved China.

Political Alliances

Russia – Indonesia

During a one-day visit to Indonesia on September 7, 2007 President Vladimir Putin witnessed the signing of a $1 billion arms deal that many analysts see as part of a broader Russian effort to restore diplomatic and military clout in the Asia-Pacific region and make some money, as well. Indonesia, which until 2005 was under a U.S. arms embargo because of human rights abuses, will purchase Russian tanks, military helicopters and submarines. Last month, Russia said it would sell six fighter jets to Indonesia, the world's most populous Muslim nation, as part of the deal.

"The deals signed in Indonesia are part of a Kremlin strategy to expand its influence in Asia and the Middle East," said Alexei Makarkin, an analyst at the Center for Political Technologies in Moscow. "Russia is trying to pursue a multipolar policy in the world and considers itself to be one of its poles." "We agreed to develop our cooperation in energy, mining, aviation and the telecommunications sector," said Putin, who stopped in the Indonesian capital, Jakarta, on his way to the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit in Australia. "There's also a good perspective in defense and military."

For Indonesia, the country's defense minister said, the deal comes with none of the strings that encumber similar purchases from the United States and Western Europe. "Requirements for purchasing arms from Western countries are complicated, with preconditions attached, such as human rights, accountability, not to mention licensing," Juwono Sudarsono told reporters in Jakarta. "In our past experience with Britain, we were not allowed to use Scorpion tanks in Aceh, even though we were facing armed separatists."

Under Putin, Russia has become determined to project its military, diplomatic and energy power into the Pacific, an area it neglected after the fall of the Soviet Union. Besides the arms deal, Russian companies have signed billions of dollars worth of deals in the mining and energy sectors with Indonesian companies, Russian officials said. So it seems that the likes of Indonesia is certainly being subverted into the Moscow-Beijing Axis as the likes of Comrade Czar Vladimir Putin along with Indonesian President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono are signing at least a one billion dollar arms deal. Indonesia is one country in the South Pacific that has one of the largest Muslim populations.

Many Indonesian Muslims are being subverted to be supporting radical "Islamist" leanings through such groups such as the "al-Qaedish" Jemaah Islamiah where it's derived from the "Islamist" Darul Islam (House of Islam), and entrenched itself in the Indonesian Muslim populations since the days of the Indonesian National Revolution, where members of the Soviet-backed Socialist Party of Indonesia attempted to create an "Indonesian Soviet Republic". While the openly "Islamist" movements such as Darul Islam wanted to establish an Islamic theocracy. Even members of the Indonesian Communist Party participated, now banned from Indonesia. But Indonesia in spite of the various governments trying to lean "pro-Western", Indonesia remains a target for recruitment for the Moscow-Beijing Axis. The arms purchase provides that very case.

The Russian – China Alliance

This is exemplified initially in what was known as the Beijing-Moscow Alliance. The first-ever joint Chinese-Russian military exercises took place in Mid-August 2005. The exercises were small in scale — but huge in implication. They indicated a further warming of the "strategic partnership" that Moscow and Beijing struck back in 1996. More importantly, they signal the first real post-Cold War steps, beyond inflammatory rhetoric, by Russia and China to balance — and, ultimately, diminish — U.S. power across Asia. If America doesn't take strategic steps to counter these efforts, it will lose influence to Russia and China in an increasingly important part of the world.

In Russia 2007 will be the Year of China. Beijing buys 90 per cent of its military hardware from Russia and insists on building an oil pipeline between the two countries. The two parties are working together to carve out their spheres of influence in Central Asia. China accounts for 40 per cent of Russia's total military sales. China's military needs Russian technology and the two neighbors have been quietly collaborating on ballistic missile research, nuclear technologies and space exploration. Russia and China are also seeking and obtaining western technology in a multitude of ways.

France and Germany, for example, seemed happy to allow Dubai's ruling family to buy its stake in EADS maker of Airbuses and Eurofighters. The fund will not be seeking board representation. Not that it would be able to get it. Appointing EADS directors is a privilege reserved for the members of the shareholder pact that controls 58 per cent of the shares. Rather, as with Dubai International Capital (DIC's) recent purchase of HSBC stock, the strategy is to take long-term stakes in the world's largest companies. The acquisition of shares of HSBC makes it "one of the leading shareholders" in HSBC, Europe's biggest bank. DIC is the private-equity arm of conglomerate Dubai Holding, founded by Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum, who is prime minister and vice president of the United Arab Emirates and ruler of Dubai.

Political considerations cannot be ruled out though. The 5 per cent stake in EADS held by Russian bank VTB looks to be aimed partly at winning sub-assembly work and hence technology transfer for Russia. There are signs that Qatar and China may also seek a closer relationship too. For Dubai, the inside track on EADS-owned Airbus wouldn't hurt. Airbus is the main supplier of aircraft to the Emirates airline and Dubai is hoping to expand its position as a major aircraft maintenance hub.

Similarly, in the last few months Russia and China have adopted similar positions on several issues in opposition to the United States, and their relationship is taking on greater weight, especially at the regional level. For example, whilst the Washington has threatened Iran with sanctions if it does not give up its nuclear program, Beijing and Moscow have threatened to use their veto power to block them if they come up at the United Nations. On September 10, Russian President Vladimir Putin arrived in the Emirates' capital Abu Dhabi on Monday morning for what is his first official visit there in the 35 year history of Russian-Emirates relations.

"Putin's historic visit to the UAE is part of Russia's stated intention of bolstering ties with Arab and Muslim countries," the main daily English language newspaper Gulf News reported Monday and added that trade exchange between Russia and Emirates is expected to reach a record US$800 million this year. The two sides will "naturally, discuss the military-technical cooperation," Russian presidential aide Prikhodko said without providing details, but suggested that the Emirates might be interested in Russian air defense weapons.

The Russian – China - Iran alliance

The cooperation between Moscow and Teheran in a variety of important sectors is becoming more and more intense but is far from representing an exclusive partnership, Moscow's aim is to develop a network of alliances, China and India, in order to propose a valid alternative to US economical and political hegemony.

A TEHRAN MOSCOW BEIJING AXIS AGAINST THE WEST on GlobalSecurity.org 3September 2001, Volume 4, Number 33 reported: Expediency Council Chairman and former President Ayatollah Ali Akbar Hashemi-Rafsanjani described trilateral cooperation between Moscow, Tehran, and Beijing as "strategic" during a meeting with the new Russian ambassador, Aleksandr Maryasov, according to state television on 13 August. He added that this three-way cooperation could serve as a counterweight against the West and the U.S., and it would alter international conditions, according to IRNA.

On September 4, 2007 Iran's influential Assembly of Experts elected Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani as its chairman in a move that could strengthen the pragmatic former president's position in the political hierarchy. "Legally speaking, Mr. Rafsanjani is now in a higher position than Ayatollah [Ali] Khamenei [the supreme leader] but it is early to say how he will use this position," said Ahmad Zeidabadi, a political analyst.

Source: http://www.enterstageright.com/archi...russiaeast.htm