13 New Messages
Digest #4489
Messages
Thu Sep 13, 2012 5:58 am (PDT) . Posted by:
"Rick Rozoff" rwrozoff
http://english.
Voice of Russia
September 13, 2012
Central Asian alliances vital in regional stability
Boris Volkhonsky
====
[W]hatever objectives it started with, now it has become their objective to continue the conflict. And because of that they will keep on looking for new enemies and new threats. It was Osama bin Laden then, it is Taliban now, it is nukes somewhere else or "rogues" like Iran. You keep on inventing new threats, so that you can say there longer.
====
It seems like the list of “threats” to US national security is an endless one. Which leads experts to wonder what the West’s, the US' in particular, real agenda is in Central Asia. Could these “threats” simply serve as a justifiable distraction from the West’s even larger long-term plans to occupy and exploit Central Asia’s vast natural resources?
And if so, what mechanisms do these countries have to avoid being exploited and level the playing field? Lieutenant General Mohammad Asad Durrani, Former Director-general of the Inter-Services Intelligence and former Director-general of the Pakistan Army’s Military Intelligence, spoke with the Voice of Russia about the US and NATO’s presence in Afghanistan as well as the possibility of this being just a piece of a broader operation to occupy the region altogether.
General Durrani, in your opinion, what was the real aim of the American and NATO operation in Afghanistan? Was it Afghanistan itself, or was it aimed at getting a foothold and dominating a broader region?
Even if it was undertaken for the particular purpose of getting Osama bin Laden, I think finally Americans must have come to the conclusion that "It's a good idea to stay here, because it gives us multiple options. So let’s see how we can stay." And that leads to a broader agenda – Pakistan and Iran, China, Central Asia. It is also quite possible that there are people who have interest in the continuing conflict. This includes certain people in the military, in the CIA, because that provides them great access to matters. Some people believe that if there is war, there is a better economy; if there is war, the defense manufacturers can sell more weapons. All these things combined together lead me to believe: whatever objectives it started with, now it has become their objective to continue the conflict. And because of that they will keep on looking for new enemies and new threats. It was Osama bin Laden then, it is Taliban now, it is nukes somewhere
else or "rogues" like Iran. You keep on inventing new threats, so that you can say there longer.
After 2014, there is a possibility of a new Great Game starting in the region. Do you think this game is going to be of a confrontational kind or one of cooperation? And what alliances can the participants of the game form?
The game has already started. Call it a new “Great Game” if you like. It is a very big one. It is about strategic influence, strategic areas, about natural resources. The alliances that are emerging, in my view, are unexpected alliances. The whole region is coming together – Russia, China, Pakistan, Iran. India also is not very far away. All of them say, "If we do not play together, then no one will be able to play at all."
"These resources will remain unutilized. We need them, Central Asia needs them. The term means you cannot optimally explore it. So this is the broad description of the situation I see now. In the region itself I don't see any major divisions. As for outside forces, it is essentially the United States. I'm not sure if all European allies of the United States are with them on this. Because most of the countries would be quite happy looking east and taking advantage of it. They already are dependent on Russian gas, for example. I don't think they want to burn the bridges.
In your lecture you said that Afghanistan is doomed to be Pakistan’s ally. What do you mean? Is it for centuries to come or is it just a temporary alliance?
It is better to say not that we are "doomed", but both of us, Afghanistan and Pakistan, are destined to remain together, depend on each other. Instability in Afghanistan affects us. If there is mischief in Pakistan, Afghanistan has a problem. Throughout history, both countries, or areas, have always established certain linkages. I think the alliance is to be for all time. We may have problems but this interdependence is our destiny. For example, I am a Durrani. My ancestors came from Afghanistan. Afghans ruled over India for centuries. I think that speaking of the region in strictly political terms would not be very helpful. To understand the region we have to look at history and especially into interdependences in the area, the linkages.
How would you define how Russian interests and Pakistani interests coincide in relation to Afghanistan and more broadly - in regional problems? Are there still contradictions in that position?
I think our interests are converging. Central Asia is certainly one of the converging points. In my understanding, if one is looking at Central Asian countries, it is much better to remain in touch with countries like Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iran. I think that Chinese-Russian connection will also be very important. Because that country also plays a great role in Central Asia. So it is only a natural phenomenon that the whole region is coming together.
There are forces that are not very much interested in stability. One of the axes they are working through is the Baluch question in Pakistan. It’s definitely connected with many issues, one of them being the Gwadar Port and China-Pakistan link. What, in your opinion, is the impact of outside interference in regional issues, apart from the NATO presence in Afghanistan?
Everyone who is interested in the area has their presence there. It’s strategically one of the most important areas in the world. It has resources. It links Afghanistan with the ocean. It is also important because of its closeness to Iran. Our problem is that we have not been able to win the confidence of many Baluchis.
"So that has been exploited by some of the forces which have different interests from ours. But what is the total number of activists involved in the struggle there? If it is more than two thousand, I would be very surprised. But then we also know, sometimes you don't have to have many people. All they have to do is go and kill an old man or blow up a bus. That can happen. Taking care of those people and bringing them back to the mainstream – that is the challenge. And so far we have not done it too well, although some progress has been made. But still, keeping Baluch confidence is our job. Most of them know that in spite of all the grievances Pakistan remains for them the best option. So we should continue to maintain this option, but of course their grievances, their sentiments should be taken care of.
============
Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine:
http://groups.
Stop NATO website and articles:
http://rickrozoff.
To subscribe for individual e-mails or the daily digest, unsubscribe, and otherwise change subscription status:
stopnato-subscribe@
============
Voice of Russia
September 13, 2012
Central Asian alliances vital in regional stability
Boris Volkhonsky
====
[W]hatever objectives it started with, now it has become their objective to continue the conflict. And because of that they will keep on looking for new enemies and new threats. It was Osama bin Laden then, it is Taliban now, it is nukes somewhere else or "rogues" like Iran. You keep on inventing new threats, so that you can say there longer.
====
It seems like the list of “threats” to US national security is an endless one. Which leads experts to wonder what the West’s, the US' in particular, real agenda is in Central Asia. Could these “threats” simply serve as a justifiable distraction from the West’s even larger long-term plans to occupy and exploit Central Asia’s vast natural resources?
And if so, what mechanisms do these countries have to avoid being exploited and level the playing field? Lieutenant General Mohammad Asad Durrani, Former Director-general of the Inter-Services Intelligence and former Director-general of the Pakistan Army’s Military Intelligence, spoke with the Voice of Russia about the US and NATO’s presence in Afghanistan as well as the possibility of this being just a piece of a broader operation to occupy the region altogether.
General Durrani, in your opinion, what was the real aim of the American and NATO operation in Afghanistan? Was it Afghanistan itself, or was it aimed at getting a foothold and dominating a broader region?
Even if it was undertaken for the particular purpose of getting Osama bin Laden, I think finally Americans must have come to the conclusion that "It's a good idea to stay here, because it gives us multiple options. So let’s see how we can stay." And that leads to a broader agenda – Pakistan and Iran, China, Central Asia. It is also quite possible that there are people who have interest in the continuing conflict. This includes certain people in the military, in the CIA, because that provides them great access to matters. Some people believe that if there is war, there is a better economy; if there is war, the defense manufacturers can sell more weapons. All these things combined together lead me to believe: whatever objectives it started with, now it has become their objective to continue the conflict. And because of that they will keep on looking for new enemies and new threats. It was Osama bin Laden then, it is Taliban now, it is nukes somewhere
else or "rogues" like Iran. You keep on inventing new threats, so that you can say there longer.
After 2014, there is a possibility of a new Great Game starting in the region. Do you think this game is going to be of a confrontational kind or one of cooperation? And what alliances can the participants of the game form?
The game has already started. Call it a new “Great Game” if you like. It is a very big one. It is about strategic influence, strategic areas, about natural resources. The alliances that are emerging, in my view, are unexpected alliances. The whole region is coming together – Russia, China, Pakistan, Iran. India also is not very far away. All of them say, "If we do not play together, then no one will be able to play at all."
"These resources will remain unutilized. We need them, Central Asia needs them. The term means you cannot optimally explore it. So this is the broad description of the situation I see now. In the region itself I don't see any major divisions. As for outside forces, it is essentially the United States. I'm not sure if all European allies of the United States are with them on this. Because most of the countries would be quite happy looking east and taking advantage of it. They already are dependent on Russian gas, for example. I don't think they want to burn the bridges.
In your lecture you said that Afghanistan is doomed to be Pakistan’s ally. What do you mean? Is it for centuries to come or is it just a temporary alliance?
It is better to say not that we are "doomed", but both of us, Afghanistan and Pakistan, are destined to remain together, depend on each other. Instability in Afghanistan affects us. If there is mischief in Pakistan, Afghanistan has a problem. Throughout history, both countries, or areas, have always established certain linkages. I think the alliance is to be for all time. We may have problems but this interdependence is our destiny. For example, I am a Durrani. My ancestors came from Afghanistan. Afghans ruled over India for centuries. I think that speaking of the region in strictly political terms would not be very helpful. To understand the region we have to look at history and especially into interdependences in the area, the linkages.
How would you define how Russian interests and Pakistani interests coincide in relation to Afghanistan and more broadly - in regional problems? Are there still contradictions in that position?
I think our interests are converging. Central Asia is certainly one of the converging points. In my understanding, if one is looking at Central Asian countries, it is much better to remain in touch with countries like Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iran. I think that Chinese-Russian connection will also be very important. Because that country also plays a great role in Central Asia. So it is only a natural phenomenon that the whole region is coming together.
There are forces that are not very much interested in stability. One of the axes they are working through is the Baluch question in Pakistan. It’s definitely connected with many issues, one of them being the Gwadar Port and China-Pakistan link. What, in your opinion, is the impact of outside interference in regional issues, apart from the NATO presence in Afghanistan?
Everyone who is interested in the area has their presence there. It’s strategically one of the most important areas in the world. It has resources. It links Afghanistan with the ocean. It is also important because of its closeness to Iran. Our problem is that we have not been able to win the confidence of many Baluchis.
"So that has been exploited by some of the forces which have different interests from ours. But what is the total number of activists involved in the struggle there? If it is more than two thousand, I would be very surprised. But then we also know, sometimes you don't have to have many people. All they have to do is go and kill an old man or blow up a bus. That can happen. Taking care of those people and bringing them back to the mainstream – that is the challenge. And so far we have not done it too well, although some progress has been made. But still, keeping Baluch confidence is our job. Most of them know that in spite of all the grievances Pakistan remains for them the best option. So we should continue to maintain this option, but of course their grievances, their sentiments should be taken care of.
============
Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine:
http://groups.
Stop NATO website and articles:
http://rickrozoff.
To subscribe for individual e-mails or the daily digest, unsubscribe, and otherwise change subscription status:
stopnato-subscribe@
============
Thu Sep 13, 2012 5:59 am (PDT) . Posted by:
"Rick Rozoff" rwrozoff
http://news.
Xinhua News Agency
September 13, 2012
Commentary: Time for U.S. to rethink its Mideast policies after ambassador's tragic death
By Wu Liming
BEIJING: The attacks on U.S. diplomatic missions in Egypt and Libya on Tuesday were hair-raising, and the death of U.S. ambassador to Libya Christopher Stevens was tragic.
On the surface, the attacks stemmed from a U.S.-made film that "defames Islam's Prophet Mohammed." But their causes run deeper than that, highlighting America's flawed strategy in the Middle East and the necessity for Washington to rethink its policies toward the region.
Both Libya and Egypt witnessed drastic political upheavals in the past year, in which the United States played a crucial role. However, many Egyptians and Libyans don't seem grateful to America, and the deadly attacks appear to reveal deep resentment. Why?
First and foremost, the United States has been pursuing hegemony in the Middle East for decades, and people in the region are fed up with the image of "the arrogant American."
Years ago, the United States launched the "war on terror" and turned Iraq into bloody chaos, causing numerous deaths and casualties, with millions of people displaced.
Despite all its rhetoric, the United States failed to bring prosperity to the region and the people there remain mired in dire situations.
For instance, Iraq is still troubled by explosions, sectarian conflicts, a slow reconstruction process and the resurgence of al-Qaida.
Secondly, the attacks dealt a big blow to America's decades-old scheme of trying to set up a coalition in the region to bring down the Mideast governments it dislikes, like Iran and Syria.
To that end, America and its allies have been trying to push for regime change in the name of democratization. But the region is still volatile, and the coalition has been weakened instead of getting stronger.
Not long ago, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton visited the Middle East in an bid to patch up cracks that emerged in the region's relationship with America. But she met with protests. And the latest attacks demonstrated again how unpopular Americans are in the region.
Thirdly, America's partiality for Israel leads to widespread hatred among Arabs, shaking the foundation of America's strategy in the region.
Moreover, the political patterns in many Mideast countries have gradually changed following the rise of religious forces, which is bad news for the United States.
Fourthly, America's inaction in restarting the Mideast peace process has added to local people's revulsion at America.
The world held high hopes for the peace process when U.S. President Barack Obama took office, but over the past four years the Obama administration made no substantial progress in that regard.
Finally, America proves unable to resolve the bigger issue of culture conflict.
Following America's deeds in the Middle East over the decades, the cultural gap between America and the Middle East has actually widened.
According to media reports, apart from being angry with the above-mentioned film, the protesters in Benghazi and Cairo "said they were demonstrating against anti-Islamic attitudes in the United States."
All in all, the attacks serve as a reminder that it is time for Washington to rethink its policies toward the Middle East or it will face a dead end there.
============
Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine:
http://groups.
Stop NATO website and articles:
http://rickrozoff.
To subscribe for individual e-mails or the daily digest, unsubscribe, and otherwise change subscription status:
stopnato-subscribe@
============
Xinhua News Agency
September 13, 2012
Commentary: Time for U.S. to rethink its Mideast policies after ambassador's tragic death
By Wu Liming
BEIJING: The attacks on U.S. diplomatic missions in Egypt and Libya on Tuesday were hair-raising, and the death of U.S. ambassador to Libya Christopher Stevens was tragic.
On the surface, the attacks stemmed from a U.S.-made film that "defames Islam's Prophet Mohammed." But their causes run deeper than that, highlighting America's flawed strategy in the Middle East and the necessity for Washington to rethink its policies toward the region.
Both Libya and Egypt witnessed drastic political upheavals in the past year, in which the United States played a crucial role. However, many Egyptians and Libyans don't seem grateful to America, and the deadly attacks appear to reveal deep resentment. Why?
First and foremost, the United States has been pursuing hegemony in the Middle East for decades, and people in the region are fed up with the image of "the arrogant American."
Years ago, the United States launched the "war on terror" and turned Iraq into bloody chaos, causing numerous deaths and casualties, with millions of people displaced.
Despite all its rhetoric, the United States failed to bring prosperity to the region and the people there remain mired in dire situations.
For instance, Iraq is still troubled by explosions, sectarian conflicts, a slow reconstruction process and the resurgence of al-Qaida.
Secondly, the attacks dealt a big blow to America's decades-old scheme of trying to set up a coalition in the region to bring down the Mideast governments it dislikes, like Iran and Syria.
To that end, America and its allies have been trying to push for regime change in the name of democratization. But the region is still volatile, and the coalition has been weakened instead of getting stronger.
Not long ago, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton visited the Middle East in an bid to patch up cracks that emerged in the region's relationship with America. But she met with protests. And the latest attacks demonstrated again how unpopular Americans are in the region.
Thirdly, America's partiality for Israel leads to widespread hatred among Arabs, shaking the foundation of America's strategy in the region.
Moreover, the political patterns in many Mideast countries have gradually changed following the rise of religious forces, which is bad news for the United States.
Fourthly, America's inaction in restarting the Mideast peace process has added to local people's revulsion at America.
The world held high hopes for the peace process when U.S. President Barack Obama took office, but over the past four years the Obama administration made no substantial progress in that regard.
Finally, America proves unable to resolve the bigger issue of culture conflict.
Following America's deeds in the Middle East over the decades, the cultural gap between America and the Middle East has actually widened.
According to media reports, apart from being angry with the above-mentioned film, the protesters in Benghazi and Cairo "said they were demonstrating against anti-Islamic attitudes in the United States."
All in all, the attacks serve as a reminder that it is time for Washington to rethink its policies toward the Middle East or it will face a dead end there.
============
Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine:
http://groups.
Stop NATO website and articles:
http://rickrozoff.
To subscribe for individual e-mails or the daily digest, unsubscribe, and otherwise change subscription status:
stopnato-subscribe@
============
Thu Sep 13, 2012 6:07 am (PDT) . Posted by:
"Rick Rozoff" rwrozoff
http://news.
Xinhua News Agency
September 13, 2012
Commentary: U.S. politicians need to stop counterproductive meddling
By Liu Chang
BEIJING: Designedly turning a blind eye to Japan's recent reckless and provocative actions of "buying" China's Diaoyu Islands, some U.S. lawmakers brazenly blamed China for the flaring tensions in the region.
Republican Chairwoman Ileana Ros-Lehitinen of the U.S. House Foreign Affairs Committee on Wednesday groundlessly rounded upon China, saying China was a "schoolyard bully" towards its maritime neighbors and aspired to dominate the region.
Such remarks would not only do no good to the worsening ties between Beijing and Tokyo, but also embolden the Japanese government and some other countries in the region that have maritime disputes with China to take even more actions that could undermine stability and peace in the Asia-Pacific.
The Philippines has already attempted to fish in the troubled waters. Manila on Wednesday unilaterally renamed as the "West Philippine Sea" a portion of the South China Sea that includes waters around some Chinese islands, a serious breach of China's sovereign rights.
In fact, it would not be necessary to employ complicated high technology to determine who is both right and reasonable in these territorial disputes in the region. There are plenty of historical texts and records that can effectively prove China's ownership of these islands and waters.
Therefore, the only reason why a handful of U.S. politicians always stand against China's legitimate ownership of these islets is that they purposely choose to do so.
In fact, since the disintegration of the Soviet Union, Washington has been inclined to pin China on its combat chart and take it as a potential challenger to its so-called strategic interests and self-claimed leadership in the Asia-Pacific area.
However, with misgivings about Beijing's rapid emergence onto the world stage, the United States still wants to grab a big share of China's extended and lucrative markets for business profits.
And it would be self-deceiving that China could not see through Washington's calculations, and such a two-pronged policy of containment and engagement towards China could never possibly underpin a stable and constructive China-U.S. relationship.
Moreover, for generations, there have always been some U.S. politicians trying to make political capital out of China-bashing games. They have also helped to boost America's half-hearted China policy.
China has demonstrated to the world that it seeks no regional domination. It is dedicated to developing its economy and improving the Chinese people's livelihood. Therefore, there is no reason for China to undermine the regional stability and thus disrupt its development.
In the meantime, it has been China's steadfast policy and long-term practice to resolve the maritime disputes in the region through bilateral talks.
Nevertheless, that does not mean that China would allow any alien trespasses over its sovereignty. China has the will and ability to safeguard its territorial integrity.
U.S. politicians should refrain from making irresponsible remarks that would serve nothing but to stoke more tensions. Washington needs to heed China's call that it play a constructive role in the Asia-Pacific.
============
Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine:
http://groups.
Stop NATO website and articles:
http://rickrozoff.
To subscribe for individual e-mails or the daily digest, unsubscribe, and otherwise change subscription status:
stopnato-subscribe@
============
Xinhua News Agency
September 13, 2012
Commentary: U.S. politicians need to stop counterproductive meddling
By Liu Chang
BEIJING: Designedly turning a blind eye to Japan's recent reckless and provocative actions of "buying" China's Diaoyu Islands, some U.S. lawmakers brazenly blamed China for the flaring tensions in the region.
Republican Chairwoman Ileana Ros-Lehitinen of the U.S. House Foreign Affairs Committee on Wednesday groundlessly rounded upon China, saying China was a "schoolyard bully" towards its maritime neighbors and aspired to dominate the region.
Such remarks would not only do no good to the worsening ties between Beijing and Tokyo, but also embolden the Japanese government and some other countries in the region that have maritime disputes with China to take even more actions that could undermine stability and peace in the Asia-Pacific.
The Philippines has already attempted to fish in the troubled waters. Manila on Wednesday unilaterally renamed as the "West Philippine Sea" a portion of the South China Sea that includes waters around some Chinese islands, a serious breach of China's sovereign rights.
In fact, it would not be necessary to employ complicated high technology to determine who is both right and reasonable in these territorial disputes in the region. There are plenty of historical texts and records that can effectively prove China's ownership of these islands and waters.
Therefore, the only reason why a handful of U.S. politicians always stand against China's legitimate ownership of these islets is that they purposely choose to do so.
In fact, since the disintegration of the Soviet Union, Washington has been inclined to pin China on its combat chart and take it as a potential challenger to its so-called strategic interests and self-claimed leadership in the Asia-Pacific area.
However, with misgivings about Beijing's rapid emergence onto the world stage, the United States still wants to grab a big share of China's extended and lucrative markets for business profits.
And it would be self-deceiving that China could not see through Washington's calculations, and such a two-pronged policy of containment and engagement towards China could never possibly underpin a stable and constructive China-U.S. relationship.
Moreover, for generations, there have always been some U.S. politicians trying to make political capital out of China-bashing games. They have also helped to boost America's half-hearted China policy.
China has demonstrated to the world that it seeks no regional domination. It is dedicated to developing its economy and improving the Chinese people's livelihood. Therefore, there is no reason for China to undermine the regional stability and thus disrupt its development.
In the meantime, it has been China's steadfast policy and long-term practice to resolve the maritime disputes in the region through bilateral talks.
Nevertheless, that does not mean that China would allow any alien trespasses over its sovereignty. China has the will and ability to safeguard its territorial integrity.
U.S. politicians should refrain from making irresponsible remarks that would serve nothing but to stoke more tensions. Washington needs to heed China's call that it play a constructive role in the Asia-Pacific.
============
Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine:
http://groups.
Stop NATO website and articles:
http://rickrozoff.
To subscribe for individual e-mails or the daily digest, unsubscribe, and otherwise change subscription status:
stopnato-subscribe@
============
Thu Sep 13, 2012 6:21 am (PDT) . Posted by:
"Rick Rozoff" rwrozoff
http://www.b92.
B92, RTS, Tanjug
September 13, 2012
Worker killed in cluster bomb explosion
MT. KOPAONIK: A man engaged in a mine clearing operation on Mt. Kopaonik, central Serbia, died on Thursday in an explosion of a cluster bomb.
The device exploded near a military base on Pančić's Peak, Tanjug is reporting.
According to the public broadcaster RTS, which is quoting sources from the Serbian police (MUP), the deadly accident happened at 10:30 CET.
The 49-year-old victim, who has not been named, was working for a private company contracted to clear the area of mines and explosive devices.
B92 has learned that he died in an area "that is not a military facility".
The explosion also started a fire that firefighters are now working to put under control. The scene will be investigated once the blaze has been put out.
The MUP have confirmed that the fire had spread to 20 to 40 square kilometers of land contaminated with mines, and that two police helicopters and a Russian waterbomber from Niš have been called in to help contain it.
On August 1, two Serbian Army (VS) NCOs died in a cluster bomb explosion near the same peak on Mt. Kopaonik. The device was a leftover from NATO's 1999 war against Serbia.
============
Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine:
http://groups.
Stop NATO website and articles:
http://rickrozoff.
To subscribe for individual e-mails or the daily digest, unsubscribe, and otherwise change subscription status:
stopnato-subscribe@
============
B92, RTS, Tanjug
September 13, 2012
Worker killed in cluster bomb explosion
MT. KOPAONIK: A man engaged in a mine clearing operation on Mt. Kopaonik, central Serbia, died on Thursday in an explosion of a cluster bomb.
The device exploded near a military base on Pančić's Peak, Tanjug is reporting.
According to the public broadcaster RTS, which is quoting sources from the Serbian police (MUP), the deadly accident happened at 10:30 CET.
The 49-year-old victim, who has not been named, was working for a private company contracted to clear the area of mines and explosive devices.
B92 has learned that he died in an area "that is not a military facility".
The explosion also started a fire that firefighters are now working to put under control. The scene will be investigated once the blaze has been put out.
The MUP have confirmed that the fire had spread to 20 to 40 square kilometers of land contaminated with mines, and that two police helicopters and a Russian waterbomber from Niš have been called in to help contain it.
On August 1, two Serbian Army (VS) NCOs died in a cluster bomb explosion near the same peak on Mt. Kopaonik. The device was a leftover from NATO's 1999 war against Serbia.
============
Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine:
http://groups.
Stop NATO website and articles:
http://rickrozoff.
To subscribe for individual e-mails or the daily digest, unsubscribe, and otherwise change subscription status:
stopnato-subscribe@
============
Thu Sep 13, 2012 8:40 am (PDT) . Posted by:
"Rick Rozoff" rwrozoff
http://rt.com/
RT
September 13, 2012
Russia warns US on consequences of regime change
====
[T]he so-called Arab Spring has come full circle: newly liberated Libya, which just passed through a brutal civil war that pitted pro-Gaddafi forces against a Western-backed opposition, is responsible for the death of an envoy whose country contributed to the Libyan ‘liberation.’
Putin stressed...that the violence that we are now witnessing has its roots back in 1979 when the United States trained rebels to fight against Soviet troops in Afghanistan. Those fighters, under the leadership of Osama bin Laden, went on to become al-Qaeda, the terrorist organization that Russia warned made up part of the Libyan opposition.
“By now it is obvious that terrorist activity has drastically increased after the Gaddafi regime was removed by terrorist groups.”
====
Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has addressed a message to US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton condemning the death of the US Ambassador to Libya Chris Stevens. He also called for a change of tact in the fight against terrorism.
"I am shocked by the tragic death of Ambassador Chris Stevens and his colleagues,” the message began. “Please convey our words of sincere sympathy to the families and friends of the deceased."
He also took the opportunity to appeal for better coordinated anti-terrorism efforts between the two countries.
"We strongly condemn this crime that once again confirms the need for the joint efforts of our countries, as well as the global community in combating the evil of terrorism in all its manifestations,
Violent protests erupted on Tuesday in the Libyan city of Benghazi following the release of a US film entitled “Innocence of Muslims,” which many Muslim groups condemned as blasphemous.
The US Embassy became the rallying point of a highly charged protest that eventually saw militant Islamists targeting the American complex with rocket fire. Ambassador Chris Stevens, press officer Sean Smith and two marines accompanying the ambassador were killed in the attack.
Thus, the so-called Arab Spring has come full circle: newly liberated Libya, which just passed through a brutal civil war that pitted pro-Gaddafi forces against a Western-backed opposition, is responsible for the death of an envoy whose country contributed to the Libyan ‘liberation.’
In a recent interview with RT, President Vladimir Putin touched upon the issue of America’s tendency to interfere militarily in countries that are experiencing internal strife and the consequences such a strategy may have.
Mentioning the upheaval gripping the Arab world and the West’s determination to intervene in the internal strife, Putin asked: “Would you say that order and prosperity has been ensured in these countries?”
Concerning the situation in Libya, Putin was even less sanguine.
“In Libya, there are armed clashes raging between the various tribes, and I won’t even mention how this country experienced regime change,” the Russian leader said.
Putin stressed, however, that the violence that we are now witnessing has its roots back in 1979 when the United States trained rebels to fight against Soviet troops in Afghanistan. Those fighters, under the leadership of Osama bin Laden, went on to become al-Qaeda, the terrorist organization that Russia warned made up part of the Libyan opposition.
Ekaterina Kuznetsova, from the Center for Post-Industrial Studies, told RT that the violence in Libya and elsewhere is a sign that the Americans failed to fully consider the “the consequences, of what would follow from their intervention (in Libya)."
“By now it is obvious that terrorist activity has drastically increased after the Gaddafi regime was removed by terrorist groups,” Kuznetsova said. “This is often the case with totalitarian regimes and the vacuum that remains after they’ve been eliminated.”
The killing of the US diplomats basically shows two things: that there are profound problems with security and state order in Libya, and that the US position there is not as strong as they may have thought it was, she added.
According to Vyacheslav Naumkin, Director of the Russian Academy of Sciences' Institute of Oriental Studies, radical Islamists are strengthening their positions, which means the United States failed to achieve its goals by intervening in the Arab Spring.
"The current developments strengthen the position of radical Islamists in the Middle East,” Naumkin said. “There will be no universal war against the US, but it is a crisis, and there will be a lot more such crises in the future.”
Naumkin blames US foreign policy in Afghanistan, as well as the unsettled Arab-Israeli conflict, for much of Washington’s current problems.
“Obviously, the US failed to take control of relations with the Islamic world and to bring them to a new level," he said. “The unsettled Arab-Israeli conflict and US actions in Afghanistan promote the growth of anti-American feelings.”
============
Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine:
http://groups.
Stop NATO website and articles:
http://rickrozoff.
To subscribe for individual e-mails or the daily digest, unsubscribe, and otherwise change subscription status:
stopnato-subscribe@
============
RT
September 13, 2012
Russia warns US on consequences of regime change
====
[T]he so-called Arab Spring has come full circle: newly liberated Libya, which just passed through a brutal civil war that pitted pro-Gaddafi forces against a Western-backed opposition, is responsible for the death of an envoy whose country contributed to the Libyan ‘liberation.’
Putin stressed...that the violence that we are now witnessing has its roots back in 1979 when the United States trained rebels to fight against Soviet troops in Afghanistan. Those fighters, under the leadership of Osama bin Laden, went on to become al-Qaeda, the terrorist organization that Russia warned made up part of the Libyan opposition.
“By now it is obvious that terrorist activity has drastically increased after the Gaddafi regime was removed by terrorist groups.”
====
Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has addressed a message to US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton condemning the death of the US Ambassador to Libya Chris Stevens. He also called for a change of tact in the fight against terrorism.
"I am shocked by the tragic death of Ambassador Chris Stevens and his colleagues,” the message began. “Please convey our words of sincere sympathy to the families and friends of the deceased."
He also took the opportunity to appeal for better coordinated anti-terrorism efforts between the two countries.
"We strongly condemn this crime that once again confirms the need for the joint efforts of our countries, as well as the global community in combating the evil of terrorism in all its manifestations,
Violent protests erupted on Tuesday in the Libyan city of Benghazi following the release of a US film entitled “Innocence of Muslims,” which many Muslim groups condemned as blasphemous.
The US Embassy became the rallying point of a highly charged protest that eventually saw militant Islamists targeting the American complex with rocket fire. Ambassador Chris Stevens, press officer Sean Smith and two marines accompanying the ambassador were killed in the attack.
Thus, the so-called Arab Spring has come full circle: newly liberated Libya, which just passed through a brutal civil war that pitted pro-Gaddafi forces against a Western-backed opposition, is responsible for the death of an envoy whose country contributed to the Libyan ‘liberation.’
In a recent interview with RT, President Vladimir Putin touched upon the issue of America’s tendency to interfere militarily in countries that are experiencing internal strife and the consequences such a strategy may have.
Mentioning the upheaval gripping the Arab world and the West’s determination to intervene in the internal strife, Putin asked: “Would you say that order and prosperity has been ensured in these countries?”
Concerning the situation in Libya, Putin was even less sanguine.
“In Libya, there are armed clashes raging between the various tribes, and I won’t even mention how this country experienced regime change,” the Russian leader said.
Putin stressed, however, that the violence that we are now witnessing has its roots back in 1979 when the United States trained rebels to fight against Soviet troops in Afghanistan. Those fighters, under the leadership of Osama bin Laden, went on to become al-Qaeda, the terrorist organization that Russia warned made up part of the Libyan opposition.
Ekaterina Kuznetsova, from the Center for Post-Industrial Studies, told RT that the violence in Libya and elsewhere is a sign that the Americans failed to fully consider the “the consequences, of what would follow from their intervention (in Libya)."
“By now it is obvious that terrorist activity has drastically increased after the Gaddafi regime was removed by terrorist groups,” Kuznetsova said. “This is often the case with totalitarian regimes and the vacuum that remains after they’ve been eliminated.”
The killing of the US diplomats basically shows two things: that there are profound problems with security and state order in Libya, and that the US position there is not as strong as they may have thought it was, she added.
According to Vyacheslav Naumkin, Director of the Russian Academy of Sciences' Institute of Oriental Studies, radical Islamists are strengthening their positions, which means the United States failed to achieve its goals by intervening in the Arab Spring.
"The current developments strengthen the position of radical Islamists in the Middle East,” Naumkin said. “There will be no universal war against the US, but it is a crisis, and there will be a lot more such crises in the future.”
Naumkin blames US foreign policy in Afghanistan, as well as the unsettled Arab-Israeli conflict, for much of Washington’s current problems.
“Obviously, the US failed to take control of relations with the Islamic world and to bring them to a new level," he said. “The unsettled Arab-Israeli conflict and US actions in Afghanistan promote the growth of anti-American feelings.”
============
Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine:
http://groups.
Stop NATO website and articles:
http://rickrozoff.
To subscribe for individual e-mails or the daily digest, unsubscribe, and otherwise change subscription status:
stopnato-subscribe@
============
Thu Sep 13, 2012 8:40 am (PDT) . Posted by:
"Rick Rozoff" rwrozoff
http://www.globalti
Global Times
September 13, 2012
New measures over Diaoyu just start
By Xing Guangmei*
====
What we should do is to give Japan a dose of its own medicine. If Japan doesn't get its policy back on the rails, China need not exercise restraint on countermeasures such as dispatching officials to land on the islands, patrolling within 12 nautical miles of the islands, renting the islands to individuals or moving registered permanent residences to the Diaoyu Islands.
====
The Chinese government announced on Monday the official baseline for the territorial waters of the Diaoyu Islands and then covered the Diaoyu Islands in domestic weather forecasts Tuesday. These moves were a response to Japan's aim of "nationalizing" the Diaoyu Islands. This indicates that the dispute has reached the stage of official confrontation.
Announcing the baseline of territorial waters is the prerequisite to determine sea areas under national jurisdiction. In this way, we can make sure that 12 nautical miles outside the baseline of the territorial waters are considered our peripheral areas under China's sovereignty.
In accordance with China's laws, we can deny access to any foreign aircraft, warships and individuals except innocuous foreign civilian vessels in these waters. Otherwise, it is an infringement of our territory, and we are entitled to resort to our domestic law for adjudication.
In addition, we can set an exclusive economic zone within 200 nautical miles of the baseline and continental shelf for no more than 350 nautical miles according to the Law on the Exclusive Economic Zone and the Continental Shelf. In these waters, foreign countries are forbidden to fish, develop oil and gas resources, carry out scientific exploration or build artificial facilities without our permission. As for the waters that overlap with our neighbors, we can determine the maritime boundary of the two sides through negotiations and consultations.
In fact, for disputed islands like the Diaoyu Islands, we need to consider both political and diplomatic factors as well as legal ones. If the territory is linked with no disputes, the country can freely exercise sovereignty, such as legislation, immigration, and construction of various facilities and even garrison. However, it could escalate to war if the above actions were taken over a disputed territory. Therefore, the two conflicting parties must remain restrained on this issue.
The reason why the situation of the Diaoyu Islands has come to this point is that Japan always denies the dispute over the Diaoyu Islands. It exercises its "sovereignty" over the Diaoyu Islands without restriction. For instance, Japan has built a helipad on the islands, some Japanese officials have landed on the islands, and they now want to "nationalize" the Diaoyu Islands. In fact, China can also take actions like these. However, if China did the same, it would trigger a serious confrontation. Both sides should keep themselves 12 nautical miles away from the Diaoyu Islands and jointly develop the islands to work toward peace instead of crisis. Peace and stability will benefit people from both sides.
Based on the goal of maintaining regional stability, China deals with the Diaoyu Islands issue on the premise that the Diaoyu Islands are disputed areas. China maintains a restrained attitude to avoid possible escalation. However, Japan has betrayed China's trust. It mistakes it for weakness. It uses China's tolerance to enforce its de facto control of the Diaoyu Islands.
The Chinese people love peace. However, it is not one side's responsibility alone to maintain regional stability. China has really shown the utmost tolerance and patience toward Japan.
China's firm determination to safeguard its sovereignty and territorial integrity has never changed. An indomitable spirit is the will power of the nation. What we should do is to give Japan a dose of its own medicine. If Japan doesn't get its policy back on the rails, China need not exercise restraint on countermeasures such as dispatching officials to land on the islands, patrolling within 12 nautical miles of the islands, renting the islands to individuals or moving registered permanent residences to the Diaoyu Islands.
*The author is a research fellow at the Chinese Naval Research Institute.
============
Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine:
http://groups.
Stop NATO website and articles:
http://rickrozoff.
To subscribe for individual e-mails or the daily digest, unsubscribe, and otherwise change subscription status:
stopnato-subscribe@
============
Global Times
September 13, 2012
New measures over Diaoyu just start
By Xing Guangmei*
====
What we should do is to give Japan a dose of its own medicine. If Japan doesn't get its policy back on the rails, China need not exercise restraint on countermeasures such as dispatching officials to land on the islands, patrolling within 12 nautical miles of the islands, renting the islands to individuals or moving registered permanent residences to the Diaoyu Islands.
====
The Chinese government announced on Monday the official baseline for the territorial waters of the Diaoyu Islands and then covered the Diaoyu Islands in domestic weather forecasts Tuesday. These moves were a response to Japan's aim of "nationalizing" the Diaoyu Islands. This indicates that the dispute has reached the stage of official confrontation.
Announcing the baseline of territorial waters is the prerequisite to determine sea areas under national jurisdiction. In this way, we can make sure that 12 nautical miles outside the baseline of the territorial waters are considered our peripheral areas under China's sovereignty.
In accordance with China's laws, we can deny access to any foreign aircraft, warships and individuals except innocuous foreign civilian vessels in these waters. Otherwise, it is an infringement of our territory, and we are entitled to resort to our domestic law for adjudication.
In addition, we can set an exclusive economic zone within 200 nautical miles of the baseline and continental shelf for no more than 350 nautical miles according to the Law on the Exclusive Economic Zone and the Continental Shelf. In these waters, foreign countries are forbidden to fish, develop oil and gas resources, carry out scientific exploration or build artificial facilities without our permission. As for the waters that overlap with our neighbors, we can determine the maritime boundary of the two sides through negotiations and consultations.
In fact, for disputed islands like the Diaoyu Islands, we need to consider both political and diplomatic factors as well as legal ones. If the territory is linked with no disputes, the country can freely exercise sovereignty, such as legislation, immigration, and construction of various facilities and even garrison. However, it could escalate to war if the above actions were taken over a disputed territory. Therefore, the two conflicting parties must remain restrained on this issue.
The reason why the situation of the Diaoyu Islands has come to this point is that Japan always denies the dispute over the Diaoyu Islands. It exercises its "sovereignty" over the Diaoyu Islands without restriction. For instance, Japan has built a helipad on the islands, some Japanese officials have landed on the islands, and they now want to "nationalize" the Diaoyu Islands. In fact, China can also take actions like these. However, if China did the same, it would trigger a serious confrontation. Both sides should keep themselves 12 nautical miles away from the Diaoyu Islands and jointly develop the islands to work toward peace instead of crisis. Peace and stability will benefit people from both sides.
Based on the goal of maintaining regional stability, China deals with the Diaoyu Islands issue on the premise that the Diaoyu Islands are disputed areas. China maintains a restrained attitude to avoid possible escalation. However, Japan has betrayed China's trust. It mistakes it for weakness. It uses China's tolerance to enforce its de facto control of the Diaoyu Islands.
The Chinese people love peace. However, it is not one side's responsibility alone to maintain regional stability. China has really shown the utmost tolerance and patience toward Japan.
China's firm determination to safeguard its sovereignty and territorial integrity has never changed. An indomitable spirit is the will power of the nation. What we should do is to give Japan a dose of its own medicine. If Japan doesn't get its policy back on the rails, China need not exercise restraint on countermeasures such as dispatching officials to land on the islands, patrolling within 12 nautical miles of the islands, renting the islands to individuals or moving registered permanent residences to the Diaoyu Islands.
*The author is a research fellow at the Chinese Naval Research Institute.
============
Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine:
http://groups.
Stop NATO website and articles:
http://rickrozoff.
To subscribe for individual e-mails or the daily digest, unsubscribe, and otherwise change subscription status:
stopnato-subscribe@
============
Thu Sep 13, 2012 3:32 pm (PDT) . Posted by:
"Rick Rozoff" rwrozoff
http://news.
Xinhua News Agency
September 13, 2012
Japan's 'purchase' challenges post-WWII order in Asia
====
Today, the Japanese government's move in regards to the Diaoyu Islands issue is a clear violation of what it had accepted and should alarm all those who suffered in the anti-fascist war.
The "nationalization" of the Diaoyu Islands, as well as territorial disputes between Japan and its other neighbors, have indicated that Japan has not shown any sincere regret for past invasions, but is, instead, attempting to recover its pre-defeat prestige.
====
BEIJING: The Japanese government's move to "purchase" the Diaoyu Islands not only hurts the feelings of the Chinese people, but also challenges the post-WWII order in the Asia-Pacific region set by documents such as the Cairo Declaration and the Potsdam Proclamation.
Diaoyu Island and its affiliated islands have been China's sacred territory since ancient times. This is supported by historical facts and jurisprudential evidence.
In 1895, as the Qing government's defeat in the First Sino-Japanese War was all but certain, Japan illegally occupied Diaoyu Island and its affiliated islands. After that, Japan forced the Qing government to sign the unequal Treaty of Shimonoseki and cede to Japan "the island of Formosa (Taiwan), together with all islands appertaining or belonging to the said island of Formosa."
After the end of the Second World War, China recovered the territories invaded and occupied by Japan, such as Taiwan and the Penghu Islands, in accordance with the Cairo Declaration and the Potsdam Proclamation, which was accepted by Japan at its surrender.
According to international laws, the Diaoyu Islands have already been returned to China.
Today, the Japanese government's move in regards to the Diaoyu Islands issue is a clear violation of what it had accepted and should alarm all those who suffered in the anti-fascist war.
The Cairo Declaration issued in 1943 and the Potsdam Proclamation in 1945 laid the legal foundation for international order in the Asia-Pacific region in the post-World War II era, and the two treaties upheld the victory of international efforts against fascism that cost many people their lives.
Over the past six decades, the Asia-Pacific region has been one of the most energetic economies in the world. Japan itself has greatly benefited from decades of regional peace and stability since World War II, as it was during this period that the country rose as an economic giant and major player in international affairs.
There will be great danger if this legal foundation is shaken.
The "nationalization" of the Diaoyu Islands, as well as territorial disputes between Japan and its other neighbors, have indicated that Japan has not shown any sincere regret for past invasions, but is, instead, attempting to recover its pre-defeat prestige.
The Japanese government's "purchase" of the Diaoyu Islands has also harmed the "important understanding and common ground" reached between the two nations. Therefore, China will by no means remain silent and abstain from action.
The normalization of Sino-Japanese relations over the past 40 years has been the result of the hard work and wisdom of several generations and is an outcome worth cherishing.
The Japanese government should be held responsible for the current situation for conspiring with, instead of restricting, the country's right-wing forces.
For the sake of the region and the country itself, Japan should back up and return to the right track of negotiating a settlement on the dispute with China.
============
Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine:
http://groups.
Stop NATO website and articles:
http://rickrozoff.
To subscribe for individual e-mails or the daily digest, unsubscribe, and otherwise change subscription status:
stopnato-subscribe@
============
Xinhua News Agency
September 13, 2012
Japan's 'purchase' challenges post-WWII order in Asia
====
Today, the Japanese government's move in regards to the Diaoyu Islands issue is a clear violation of what it had accepted and should alarm all those who suffered in the anti-fascist war.
The "nationalization" of the Diaoyu Islands, as well as territorial disputes between Japan and its other neighbors, have indicated that Japan has not shown any sincere regret for past invasions, but is, instead, attempting to recover its pre-defeat prestige.
====
BEIJING: The Japanese government's move to "purchase" the Diaoyu Islands not only hurts the feelings of the Chinese people, but also challenges the post-WWII order in the Asia-Pacific region set by documents such as the Cairo Declaration and the Potsdam Proclamation.
Diaoyu Island and its affiliated islands have been China's sacred territory since ancient times. This is supported by historical facts and jurisprudential evidence.
In 1895, as the Qing government's defeat in the First Sino-Japanese War was all but certain, Japan illegally occupied Diaoyu Island and its affiliated islands. After that, Japan forced the Qing government to sign the unequal Treaty of Shimonoseki and cede to Japan "the island of Formosa (Taiwan), together with all islands appertaining or belonging to the said island of Formosa."
After the end of the Second World War, China recovered the territories invaded and occupied by Japan, such as Taiwan and the Penghu Islands, in accordance with the Cairo Declaration and the Potsdam Proclamation, which was accepted by Japan at its surrender.
According to international laws, the Diaoyu Islands have already been returned to China.
Today, the Japanese government's move in regards to the Diaoyu Islands issue is a clear violation of what it had accepted and should alarm all those who suffered in the anti-fascist war.
The Cairo Declaration issued in 1943 and the Potsdam Proclamation in 1945 laid the legal foundation for international order in the Asia-Pacific region in the post-World War II era, and the two treaties upheld the victory of international efforts against fascism that cost many people their lives.
Over the past six decades, the Asia-Pacific region has been one of the most energetic economies in the world. Japan itself has greatly benefited from decades of regional peace and stability since World War II, as it was during this period that the country rose as an economic giant and major player in international affairs.
There will be great danger if this legal foundation is shaken.
The "nationalization" of the Diaoyu Islands, as well as territorial disputes between Japan and its other neighbors, have indicated that Japan has not shown any sincere regret for past invasions, but is, instead, attempting to recover its pre-defeat prestige.
The Japanese government's "purchase" of the Diaoyu Islands has also harmed the "important understanding and common ground" reached between the two nations. Therefore, China will by no means remain silent and abstain from action.
The normalization of Sino-Japanese relations over the past 40 years has been the result of the hard work and wisdom of several generations and is an outcome worth cherishing.
The Japanese government should be held responsible for the current situation for conspiring with, instead of restricting, the country's right-wing forces.
For the sake of the region and the country itself, Japan should back up and return to the right track of negotiating a settlement on the dispute with China.
============
Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine:
http://groups.
Stop NATO website and articles:
http://rickrozoff.
To subscribe for individual e-mails or the daily digest, unsubscribe, and otherwise change subscription status:
stopnato-subscribe@
============
Thu Sep 13, 2012 3:32 pm (PDT) . Posted by:
"Rick Rozoff" rwrozoff
http://english.
Voice of Russia
September 13, 2012
US to help Georgia modernize air defence system
Artyom Kobzev
====
The situation around Iran is becoming tenser. Georgia is presenting itself as a reliable U.S. ally. To confirm this, it has sent it forces to Afghanistan. In fact, at a time when America’s NATO partners are gradually pulling out their forces from that country, Georgia is strengthening its contingent. Most likely, Tbilisi wants to take part in the anti-Iranian campaign.
====
A group of American military experts has arrived in Georgia to study the state of affairs of the republic’s air defence system. After gathering information, the experts will work out a relevant doctrine, and on its basis Georgia’s air defence system will be upgraded.
MAN: According to Georgian Defence Minister Dmitry Shashkin, his country hopes to get American assistance not only in upgrading its air defence system but also updating Georgia’s obsolete military helicopters. At present, American experts have started analyzing the capabilities and demands of the Georgian air defence system. Georgian authorities have made it clear that there is a need to strengthen air defences because the country is bordering with a potentially aggressive neighbour. However, this anti-Russian phobia has nothing to do with reality, says editor-in-chief of the “Independent Military Review” magazine Victor Litovkin.
“If Russia wanted to launch a serious attack on Georgia, Russian forces could have easily captured Tbilisi and formed a new government in August 2008. We had no plans to do so. Russia only liberated the territory of South Ossetia captured by Georgian forces,” Victor Litovkin said.
Meanwhile, each side of the American-Georgian strategic partnership agreement concluded three years ago is receiving dividends. Concerning the U.S., according to Victor Litovkin, the American military industry is interested in upgrading the Georgian air defence system. Understandably, this will be done using equipment produced in the U.S. As for Georgia, in this case, Mikhail Saakashvili will gain an advantage. Georgia will hold parliamentary elections in two weeks, and information about the strengthening of the country’s defence capability will help the ruling party and President Saakashvili to win additional votes, says president of the Society of Scholars in Caucasus Studies Alexander Krylov.
“Saakashvili will try to exploit the situation by saying that Georgia could be subjected to aggression and play on the sentiment of voters who usually unite in support of the government in such a situation,” Alexander Krylov said.
There is another reason for upgrading the Georgian air defence system. The situation around Iran is becoming tenser. Georgia is presenting itself as a reliable U.S. ally. To confirm this, it has sent it forces to Afghanistan. In fact, at a time when America’s NATO partners are gradually pulling out their forces from that country, Georgia is strengthening its contingent. Most likely, Tbilisi wants to take part in the anti-Iranian campaign. Teheran has already announced that Iran will launch attacks on the allies of the U.S. and Israel. In this case, the upgrading of the air defence system is crucial for Georgia.
============
Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine:
http://groups.
Stop NATO website and articles:
http://rickrozoff.
To subscribe for individual e-mails or the daily digest, unsubscribe, and otherwise change subscription status:
stopnato-subscribe@
============
Voice of Russia
September 13, 2012
US to help Georgia modernize air defence system
Artyom Kobzev
====
The situation around Iran is becoming tenser. Georgia is presenting itself as a reliable U.S. ally. To confirm this, it has sent it forces to Afghanistan. In fact, at a time when America’s NATO partners are gradually pulling out their forces from that country, Georgia is strengthening its contingent. Most likely, Tbilisi wants to take part in the anti-Iranian campaign.
====
A group of American military experts has arrived in Georgia to study the state of affairs of the republic’s air defence system. After gathering information, the experts will work out a relevant doctrine, and on its basis Georgia’s air defence system will be upgraded.
MAN: According to Georgian Defence Minister Dmitry Shashkin, his country hopes to get American assistance not only in upgrading its air defence system but also updating Georgia’s obsolete military helicopters. At present, American experts have started analyzing the capabilities and demands of the Georgian air defence system. Georgian authorities have made it clear that there is a need to strengthen air defences because the country is bordering with a potentially aggressive neighbour. However, this anti-Russian phobia has nothing to do with reality, says editor-in-chief of the “Independent Military Review” magazine Victor Litovkin.
“If Russia wanted to launch a serious attack on Georgia, Russian forces could have easily captured Tbilisi and formed a new government in August 2008. We had no plans to do so. Russia only liberated the territory of South Ossetia captured by Georgian forces,” Victor Litovkin said.
Meanwhile, each side of the American-Georgian strategic partnership agreement concluded three years ago is receiving dividends. Concerning the U.S., according to Victor Litovkin, the American military industry is interested in upgrading the Georgian air defence system. Understandably, this will be done using equipment produced in the U.S. As for Georgia, in this case, Mikhail Saakashvili will gain an advantage. Georgia will hold parliamentary elections in two weeks, and information about the strengthening of the country’s defence capability will help the ruling party and President Saakashvili to win additional votes, says president of the Society of Scholars in Caucasus Studies Alexander Krylov.
“Saakashvili will try to exploit the situation by saying that Georgia could be subjected to aggression and play on the sentiment of voters who usually unite in support of the government in such a situation,” Alexander Krylov said.
There is another reason for upgrading the Georgian air defence system. The situation around Iran is becoming tenser. Georgia is presenting itself as a reliable U.S. ally. To confirm this, it has sent it forces to Afghanistan. In fact, at a time when America’s NATO partners are gradually pulling out their forces from that country, Georgia is strengthening its contingent. Most likely, Tbilisi wants to take part in the anti-Iranian campaign. Teheran has already announced that Iran will launch attacks on the allies of the U.S. and Israel. In this case, the upgrading of the air defence system is crucial for Georgia.
============
Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine:
http://groups.
Stop NATO website and articles:
http://rickrozoff.
To subscribe for individual e-mails or the daily digest, unsubscribe, and otherwise change subscription status:
stopnato-subscribe@
============
Thu Sep 13, 2012 3:32 pm (PDT) . Posted by:
"Rick Rozoff" rwrozoff
http://www.nato.
North Atlantic Treaty Organization
September 13, 2012
NATO Military Committee Conference
Bucharest: NATO’s Military Committee, the highest military decision-making forum, will meet in Chiefs of Defence (CHODs) session from 14-16 September, in Sibiu. The meeting of the 28 CHODs will be hosted by Lieutenant General Ştefan Dănilă, Romanian CHOD, to discuss ongoing NATO operations and other key issues on NATO’s agenda.
This is the first Chiefs of Defence Staff meeting since the NATO Summit in Chicago, and the first time it is held in Romania.
The meeting will be chaired by NATO’s Military Committee Chairman, General Knud Bartels, and attendees will include Admiral James Stavridis (Supreme Allied Commander Operations), General Stéphane Abrial, the current Supreme Allied Commander Transformation, and also General Jean-Paul Paloméros, his successor. Also attending is General John Allen, Commander of NATO’s International Security Assistance Force (ISAF), who will update participants with the latest information from Afghanistan. Special guests invited by NATO’s Military Committee Chairman are Ambassador Stephen Evans, NATO’s Assistant Secretary General for Operations, and Lieutenant General Arne Bård Dalhaug, Commandant of NATO’s Defense College in Rome.
The Conference will concentrate on challenges in the wider security environment, as well as ongoing Allied operations in Afghanistan and in the Western Balkans. Discussions will also focus on NATO’s transformation stages, including the structural revision of the International Military Staff (IMS), the Military Committee’s executive body. The Conference ends with the election of the new Director General, IMS.
============
Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine:
http://groups.
Stop NATO website and articles:
http://rickrozoff.
To subscribe for individual e-mails or the daily digest, unsubscribe, and otherwise change subscription status:
stopnato-subscribe@
============
North Atlantic Treaty Organization
September 13, 2012
NATO Military Committee Conference
Bucharest: NATO’s Military Committee, the highest military decision-making forum, will meet in Chiefs of Defence (CHODs) session from 14-16 September, in Sibiu. The meeting of the 28 CHODs will be hosted by Lieutenant General Ştefan Dănilă, Romanian CHOD, to discuss ongoing NATO operations and other key issues on NATO’s agenda.
This is the first Chiefs of Defence Staff meeting since the NATO Summit in Chicago, and the first time it is held in Romania.
The meeting will be chaired by NATO’s Military Committee Chairman, General Knud Bartels, and attendees will include Admiral James Stavridis (Supreme Allied Commander Operations), General Stéphane Abrial, the current Supreme Allied Commander Transformation, and also General Jean-Paul Paloméros, his successor. Also attending is General John Allen, Commander of NATO’s International Security Assistance Force (ISAF), who will update participants with the latest information from Afghanistan. Special guests invited by NATO’s Military Committee Chairman are Ambassador Stephen Evans, NATO’s Assistant Secretary General for Operations, and Lieutenant General Arne Bård Dalhaug, Commandant of NATO’s Defense College in Rome.
The Conference will concentrate on challenges in the wider security environment, as well as ongoing Allied operations in Afghanistan and in the Western Balkans. Discussions will also focus on NATO’s transformation stages, including the structural revision of the International Military Staff (IMS), the Military Committee’s executive body. The Conference ends with the election of the new Director General, IMS.
============
Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine:
http://groups.
Stop NATO website and articles:
http://rickrozoff.
To subscribe for individual e-mails or the daily digest, unsubscribe, and otherwise change subscription status:
stopnato-subscribe@
============
Thu Sep 13, 2012 8:02 pm (PDT) . Posted by:
"Rick Rozoff" rwrozoff
http://news.
Xinhua News Agency
September 14, 2012
Upgraded Leopard tanks arrive in Canada
OTTAWA: Canadian Defense Minister Peter MacKay officially announced on Thursday the arrival in Canada of surplus Leopard 2A4 tanks from the Royal Netherlands Army purchased five years ago as part of Canada's 650-million-
A total of 42 Leopard 2A4s Canadian tanks, which were upgraded from their earlier Dutch version, will be delivered to the Canadian Army by the end of next year. Five are already being used for training at Canadian Forces Base Gagetown in the eastern province of New Brunswick.
"Our government's procurement of this impressive platform will ensure the Canadian Forces have the capability they need to support future operations," said MacKay.
============
Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine:
http://groups.
Stop NATO website and articles:
http://rickrozoff.
To subscribe for individual e-mails or the daily digest, unsubscribe, and otherwise change subscription status:
stopnato-subscribe@
============
Xinhua News Agency
September 14, 2012
Upgraded Leopard tanks arrive in Canada
OTTAWA: Canadian Defense Minister Peter MacKay officially announced on Thursday the arrival in Canada of surplus Leopard 2A4 tanks from the Royal Netherlands Army purchased five years ago as part of Canada's 650-million-
A total of 42 Leopard 2A4s Canadian tanks, which were upgraded from their earlier Dutch version, will be delivered to the Canadian Army by the end of next year. Five are already being used for training at Canadian Forces Base Gagetown in the eastern province of New Brunswick.
"Our government's procurement of this impressive platform will ensure the Canadian Forces have the capability they need to support future operations," said MacKay.
============
Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine:
http://groups.
Stop NATO website and articles:
http://rickrozoff.
To subscribe for individual e-mails or the daily digest, unsubscribe, and otherwise change subscription status:
stopnato-subscribe@
============
Thu Sep 13, 2012 8:02 pm (PDT) . Posted by:
"Rick Rozoff" rwrozoff
http://news.
Xinhua News Agency
September 14, 2012
1 NATO soldier killed in insurgent attack in E. Afghanistan
KABUL: A NATO soldier was killed in an insurgent attack in restive eastern Afghanistan on Thursday, the coalition forces confirmed in a statement.
"An International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) service member died following an insurgent attack in eastern Afghanistan today," the NATO-led coalition or ISAF said in the statement.
The brief statement did not disclose the nationality of the victim under the ISAF policy.
Troops mostly from the United States have been serving in eastern Afghan provinces within the framework of ISAF.
A total of 326 foreign troops have been killed in Afghanistan since the beginning of this year.
============
Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine:
http://groups.
Stop NATO website and articles:
http://rickrozoff.
To subscribe for individual e-mails or the daily digest, unsubscribe, and otherwise change subscription status:
stopnato-subscribe@
============
Xinhua News Agency
September 14, 2012
1 NATO soldier killed in insurgent attack in E. Afghanistan
KABUL: A NATO soldier was killed in an insurgent attack in restive eastern Afghanistan on Thursday, the coalition forces confirmed in a statement.
"An International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) service member died following an insurgent attack in eastern Afghanistan today," the NATO-led coalition or ISAF said in the statement.
The brief statement did not disclose the nationality of the victim under the ISAF policy.
Troops mostly from the United States have been serving in eastern Afghan provinces within the framework of ISAF.
A total of 326 foreign troops have been killed in Afghanistan since the beginning of this year.
============
Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine:
http://groups.
Stop NATO website and articles:
http://rickrozoff.
To subscribe for individual e-mails or the daily digest, unsubscribe, and otherwise change subscription status:
stopnato-subscribe@
============
Thu Sep 13, 2012 8:02 pm (PDT) . Posted by:
"Rick Rozoff" rwrozoff
http://rt.com/
RT
September 14, 2012
Chinese ships breach Japan’s naval border
Four Chinese ships have entered Japanese waters near a group of disputed islets claimed by both Beijing and Tokyo, refusing to follow the Japanese coast guard's orders to vacate its territorial waters.
Currently, four Chinese ships are stationed in the area, which Japan considers its territorial waters.Another four ships are stationed outside the disputed area.
So far, Japanese border patrol ships have not taken any active measures against the Chinese vessels.
Japan has created a crisis headquarters in response to the incident. The Chinese Ambassador to Japan has been urgently summoned to a meeting with the Japanese Foreign Ministry.
This is the latest in a series of diplomatic rows between China and Japan centered on control of the Senkaku, or Diaoyu in Mandarin, islands.
The ships were dispatched “to assert the country’s sovereignty” to the tiny archipelago in the South China Sea, which on Tuesday Japan had purchased from a private owner, ignoring Chinese territorial claims.
------------
http://news.
Xinhua News Agency
September 14, 2012
Chinese surveillance ships start patrol around Diaoyu Islands
BEIJING: Two Chinese surveillance ship fleets have arrived at waters around Diaoyu Islands and its affiliated islets Friday morning and started patrol and law enforcement there.
It is the first time for Chinese surveillance ships to patrol there after the Chinese government announced on Monday the base points and baselines of the territorial waters of the Diaoyu Islands and their affiliated islets, as well as the names and coordinates of 17 base points.
These law enforcement and patrol activities are aimed to demonstrate China's jurisdiction over the Diaoyu Islands and its affiliated islets and ensure the country's maritime interests, according to a government statement.
------------
http://japandailypr
Channel News Asia
September 13, 2012
Now Taiwanese ships are headed for Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands too
By Adam Westlake
On Thursday, two ships from the Taiwanese coast guard departed for the surrounding waters of the disputed Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands in the East China Sea. As the rapidly escalating standoff between Japan and China continues, the Taiwanese coast guard has said it is sending the ships to the islands, called Tiaoyutai in Taiwan, in order to offer protection for the nation’s fishermen. It’s not really clear what would possess fishermen of any country to want to go near the diplomatic mess of a territory, but Taiwan’s ships will surely be encountering the two Chinese patrol ships that arrived earlier this week.
Japan, China, and Taiwan all lay claim to the uninhabited islands, however Taiwan has been the least vocal in the dispute over the last few months. While China continues to warn of their taking action against Japan’s purchase of the disputed territory for 2.05 billion yen (approx. $26 million), Taiwan recalled its ambassador to Japan this week as well. The Japan-China tensions are peaking at this point, stirred up by a visit from 14 Hong Kong activists to one of the islands last month. The group was quickly arrested by Japanese authorities due to immigration violations, but they were then deported amid protests from both China and Taiwan.
The group of five islands are located roughly 160 kilometers (99 miles) from Okinawa, Japan’s southern island, and 200 kilometers (124) from Taiwan. While nationalism is seen as the largest driving factor behind the disputing nations, the territory is also located in important shipping lanes. In recent years it has also been believed that there are valuable resources nearby, such as natural gas and rare minerals, in addition to the important fishing waters in the region.
============
Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine:
http://groups.
Stop NATO website and articles:
http://rickrozoff.
To subscribe for individual e-mails or the daily digest, unsubscribe, and otherwise change subscription status:
stopnato-subscribe@
============
RT
September 14, 2012
Chinese ships breach Japan’s naval border
Four Chinese ships have entered Japanese waters near a group of disputed islets claimed by both Beijing and Tokyo, refusing to follow the Japanese coast guard's orders to vacate its territorial waters.
Currently, four Chinese ships are stationed in the area, which Japan considers its territorial waters.Another four ships are stationed outside the disputed area.
So far, Japanese border patrol ships have not taken any active measures against the Chinese vessels.
Japan has created a crisis headquarters in response to the incident. The Chinese Ambassador to Japan has been urgently summoned to a meeting with the Japanese Foreign Ministry.
This is the latest in a series of diplomatic rows between China and Japan centered on control of the Senkaku, or Diaoyu in Mandarin, islands.
The ships were dispatched “to assert the country’s sovereignty” to the tiny archipelago in the South China Sea, which on Tuesday Japan had purchased from a private owner, ignoring Chinese territorial claims.
------------
http://news.
Xinhua News Agency
September 14, 2012
Chinese surveillance ships start patrol around Diaoyu Islands
BEIJING: Two Chinese surveillance ship fleets have arrived at waters around Diaoyu Islands and its affiliated islets Friday morning and started patrol and law enforcement there.
It is the first time for Chinese surveillance ships to patrol there after the Chinese government announced on Monday the base points and baselines of the territorial waters of the Diaoyu Islands and their affiliated islets, as well as the names and coordinates of 17 base points.
These law enforcement and patrol activities are aimed to demonstrate China's jurisdiction over the Diaoyu Islands and its affiliated islets and ensure the country's maritime interests, according to a government statement.
------------
http://japandailypr
Channel News Asia
September 13, 2012
Now Taiwanese ships are headed for Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands too
By Adam Westlake
On Thursday, two ships from the Taiwanese coast guard departed for the surrounding waters of the disputed Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands in the East China Sea. As the rapidly escalating standoff between Japan and China continues, the Taiwanese coast guard has said it is sending the ships to the islands, called Tiaoyutai in Taiwan, in order to offer protection for the nation’s fishermen. It’s not really clear what would possess fishermen of any country to want to go near the diplomatic mess of a territory, but Taiwan’s ships will surely be encountering the two Chinese patrol ships that arrived earlier this week.
Japan, China, and Taiwan all lay claim to the uninhabited islands, however Taiwan has been the least vocal in the dispute over the last few months. While China continues to warn of their taking action against Japan’s purchase of the disputed territory for 2.05 billion yen (approx. $26 million), Taiwan recalled its ambassador to Japan this week as well. The Japan-China tensions are peaking at this point, stirred up by a visit from 14 Hong Kong activists to one of the islands last month. The group was quickly arrested by Japanese authorities due to immigration violations, but they were then deported amid protests from both China and Taiwan.
The group of five islands are located roughly 160 kilometers (99 miles) from Okinawa, Japan’s southern island, and 200 kilometers (124) from Taiwan. While nationalism is seen as the largest driving factor behind the disputing nations, the territory is also located in important shipping lanes. In recent years it has also been believed that there are valuable resources nearby, such as natural gas and rare minerals, in addition to the important fishing waters in the region.
============
Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine:
http://groups.
Stop NATO website and articles:
http://rickrozoff.
To subscribe for individual e-mails or the daily digest, unsubscribe, and otherwise change subscription status:
stopnato-subscribe@
============
Thu Sep 13, 2012 8:02 pm (PDT) . Posted by:
"Rick Rozoff" rwrozoff
http://indrus.
Russia & India Report
September 13, 2012
U.S. Anti-missile plans for the Asia-Pacific
Olga Gritsenko
First published in Russia in Vzglyad
http://vz.ru/
====
Washington announced plans last spring to expand its missile defence shield and install its components not only in Europe, but also in Asia and the Middle East. US Assistant Secretary of Defence for Global Strategic Issues Madelyn Creedon said at the time that locations in Australia, Japan, and South Korea could be selected. It was also reported in August that missile defence components – early warning radars – would appear in Japan and the Philippines.
Observers haven’t ruled out the possibility that Russia and China could join efforts to resolve the American missile defence problem. “China has significantly intensified cooperation with Russia in terms of resisting the deployment of the American missile defence system. The deployment of missile defences in the region will be met with rather stiff resistance from China, which will be expressed in diplomatic demarches and will also take some kind of practical form,” Captain Konstantin Sivkov, Vice President of the Academy of Geopolitical Problems.
====
America’s plans to deploy missile defences in the Asia-Pacific region and the way Washington is implementing START are causes of concern in Moscow.
Russia is keeping a close eye on U.S. plans to deploy missile defences in the Asia-Pacific region, Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov said recently, adding that Moscow reserves the right to undertake certain measures in response to America’s growing potential.
“The continuing growth of the U.S. potential in what we call the Far East – the Asia-Pacific region – has not gone unnoticed in Russia. We are closely following what is happening between the U.S. and its allies in Asia. Important events are unfolding there and a lot has already been achieved,” Russian Deputy Foreign Minister, Sergei Ryabkov, told a nonproliferation conference in Moscow on September 7.
Washington announced plans last spring to expand its missile defence shield and install its components not only in Europe, but also in Asia and the Middle East. US Assistant Secretary of Defence for Global Strategic Issues Madelyn Creedon said at the time that locations in Australia, Japan, and South Korea could be selected. It was also reported in August that missile defence components – early warning radars – would appear in Japan and the Philippines.
Earlier, the U.S. had announced plans to establish a military base in Australia. The White House has made no secret of the fact that it sees China as the main regional threat. As the American leader Barack Obama put it back then, the United States and small Asian countries had long been concerned about Beijing’s territorial claims to islands in the South China Sea. Washington considers this region to be of great strategic importance, because up to US$ 1.2 billion in commercial shipping passes through it annually it on the way to American shores.
Observers haven’t ruled out the possibility that Russia and China could join efforts to resolve the American missile defence problem. “China has significantly intensified cooperation with Russia in terms of resisting the deployment of the American missile defence system. The deployment of missile defences in the region will be met with rather stiff resistance from China, which will be expressed in diplomatic demarches and will also take some kind of practical form,” Captain Konstantin Sivkov, Vice President of the Academy of Geopolitical Problems.
However, Moscow still hopes to continue negotiations with Washington on this subject. “We must work with America to achieve something meaningful. Failing that, we have a number of measures – measures that the Russian President has mentioned,” Ryabkov said.
New Start treaty
Signed in Prague on April 8, 2010, the New START treaty is a nuclear arms reduction treaty between the United States and Russia that went into force on February 5, 2011 for a period of ten years. Under the treaty, the parties should provide each other with information on their strategic offensive arms, including the geographic coordinates of underground Intercontinental Ballistic Missile Launchers (with up to one geophysical minute precision). The parties exchange data on the status of their strategic offensive weapons on March 1 and September 1 of each year.
Commenting on the missile defence programme in his first interview since the inauguration, Russian president Vladimir Putin noted that his American counterpart would like to solve this problem. “Is it possible to find a solution to the problem if president Obama is re-elected for a second term? In principle, yes, it is. But this isn’t just about President Obama. I believe that he genuinely wants to work out a solution to the problem,” the Russian President said.
He believes that both the military lobby and the Department of State, “with its quite conservative machinery,” have been hindering the search for a solution to this problem. “In order to solve the missile defence issue, we both need to accept the fact that we are reliable partners and allies,” he explained.
Moscow unhappy with U.S. implementation of START
Meanwhile, yet another problem could be emerging in Russian-American relations. It became known on Friday that Moscow was not happy with how Washington is carrying out its obligations under the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START). “On balance, our assessment (based on inspection results) is positive, but we also have some observations, and those observations are not fit for public discussion. They need to be discussed in the format of a bilateral advisory committee set up under the treaty, and the next session of this bilateral advisory committee will take place in Geneva before the end of September,” Ryabkov told Interfax.
“We have a list of questions we would like to ask the American side, and I suspect that they are also eager to share their opinions with us about what they believe is necessary based on the experience of the inspections exchange. There is nothing there than cannot be discussed, there are no concerns that cannot be overcome through normal, systematic, and responsible work by the delegations,” the Foreign Ministry’s representative added.
Russia & India Report
September 13, 2012
U.S. Anti-missile plans for the Asia-Pacific
Olga Gritsenko
First published in Russia in Vzglyad
http://vz.ru/
====
Washington announced plans last spring to expand its missile defence shield and install its components not only in Europe, but also in Asia and the Middle East. US Assistant Secretary of Defence for Global Strategic Issues Madelyn Creedon said at the time that locations in Australia, Japan, and South Korea could be selected. It was also reported in August that missile defence components – early warning radars – would appear in Japan and the Philippines.
Observers haven’t ruled out the possibility that Russia and China could join efforts to resolve the American missile defence problem. “China has significantly intensified cooperation with Russia in terms of resisting the deployment of the American missile defence system. The deployment of missile defences in the region will be met with rather stiff resistance from China, which will be expressed in diplomatic demarches and will also take some kind of practical form,” Captain Konstantin Sivkov, Vice President of the Academy of Geopolitical Problems.
====
America’s plans to deploy missile defences in the Asia-Pacific region and the way Washington is implementing START are causes of concern in Moscow.
Russia is keeping a close eye on U.S. plans to deploy missile defences in the Asia-Pacific region, Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov said recently, adding that Moscow reserves the right to undertake certain measures in response to America’s growing potential.
“The continuing growth of the U.S. potential in what we call the Far East – the Asia-Pacific region – has not gone unnoticed in Russia. We are closely following what is happening between the U.S. and its allies in Asia. Important events are unfolding there and a lot has already been achieved,” Russian Deputy Foreign Minister, Sergei Ryabkov, told a nonproliferation conference in Moscow on September 7.
Washington announced plans last spring to expand its missile defence shield and install its components not only in Europe, but also in Asia and the Middle East. US Assistant Secretary of Defence for Global Strategic Issues Madelyn Creedon said at the time that locations in Australia, Japan, and South Korea could be selected. It was also reported in August that missile defence components – early warning radars – would appear in Japan and the Philippines.
Earlier, the U.S. had announced plans to establish a military base in Australia. The White House has made no secret of the fact that it sees China as the main regional threat. As the American leader Barack Obama put it back then, the United States and small Asian countries had long been concerned about Beijing’s territorial claims to islands in the South China Sea. Washington considers this region to be of great strategic importance, because up to US$ 1.2 billion in commercial shipping passes through it annually it on the way to American shores.
Observers haven’t ruled out the possibility that Russia and China could join efforts to resolve the American missile defence problem. “China has significantly intensified cooperation with Russia in terms of resisting the deployment of the American missile defence system. The deployment of missile defences in the region will be met with rather stiff resistance from China, which will be expressed in diplomatic demarches and will also take some kind of practical form,” Captain Konstantin Sivkov, Vice President of the Academy of Geopolitical Problems.
However, Moscow still hopes to continue negotiations with Washington on this subject. “We must work with America to achieve something meaningful. Failing that, we have a number of measures – measures that the Russian President has mentioned,” Ryabkov said.
New Start treaty
Signed in Prague on April 8, 2010, the New START treaty is a nuclear arms reduction treaty between the United States and Russia that went into force on February 5, 2011 for a period of ten years. Under the treaty, the parties should provide each other with information on their strategic offensive arms, including the geographic coordinates of underground Intercontinental Ballistic Missile Launchers (with up to one geophysical minute precision). The parties exchange data on the status of their strategic offensive weapons on March 1 and September 1 of each year.
Commenting on the missile defence programme in his first interview since the inauguration, Russian president Vladimir Putin noted that his American counterpart would like to solve this problem. “Is it possible to find a solution to the problem if president Obama is re-elected for a second term? In principle, yes, it is. But this isn’t just about President Obama. I believe that he genuinely wants to work out a solution to the problem,” the Russian President said.
He believes that both the military lobby and the Department of State, “with its quite conservative machinery,” have been hindering the search for a solution to this problem. “In order to solve the missile defence issue, we both need to accept the fact that we are reliable partners and allies,” he explained.
Moscow unhappy with U.S. implementation of START
Meanwhile, yet another problem could be emerging in Russian-American relations. It became known on Friday that Moscow was not happy with how Washington is carrying out its obligations under the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START). “On balance, our assessment (based on inspection results) is positive, but we also have some observations, and those observations are not fit for public discussion. They need to be discussed in the format of a bilateral advisory committee set up under the treaty, and the next session of this bilateral advisory committee will take place in Geneva before the end of September,” Ryabkov told Interfax.
“We have a list of questions we would like to ask the American side, and I suspect that they are also eager to share their opinions with us about what they believe is necessary based on the experience of the inspections exchange. There is nothing there than cannot be discussed, there are no concerns that cannot be overcome through normal, systematic, and responsible work by the delegations,” the Foreign Ministry’s representative added.
