Bharat Rakshak Forum Announcement

Hello Everyone,

A warm welcome back to the Bharat Rakshak Forum.

Important Notice: Due to a corruption in the BR forum database we regret to announce that data records relating to some of our registered users have been lost. We estimate approx. 500 user details are deleted.

To ease the process of recreating the user IDs we request members that have previously posted on the BR forums to recognise and identify their posts, once the posts are identified please contact the BRF moderator team by emailing BRF Mod Team with your post details.

The mod team will be able to update your username, email etc. so that the user history can be maintained.

Unfortunately for members that have never posted or have had all their posts deleted i.e. users that have 0 posts, we will be unable to recreate your account hence we request that you re-register again.

We apologise for any inconvenience caused and thank you for your understanding.

Regards,
Seetal

Caucasus Crisis

renukb
BRFite
Posts: 675
Joined: 18 Aug 2008 12:18

Re: Caucasus Crisis

Postby renukb » 11 Oct 2008 15:31

NATO Rules Out Supplying Weapons For Georgia
http://www.voanews.com/english/2008-10-10-voa56.cfm

By Stefan Bos Budapest
10 October 2008

United States Defense Secretary Robert Gates says it appears Russian troops are withdrawing from key positions in the former Soviet republic of Georgia, nearly two months after a brief war ended between Russian and Georgian troops. He made the comments on the sidelines of a NATO summit in Budapest, where defense ministers pledged political and practical support for Georgia, but ruled out delivering weapons to the country. Stefan Bos reports from Budapest.

The two-day NATO summit in Budapest concluded with the first ever ministerial meeting of the NATO-Georgia Commission, which was set up to solidify ties between the Western military alliance, and the former Soviet nation.

They gathered Friday, as a deadline expired for Russia to withdraw troops from buffer zones near Georgia's breakaway regions of Abkhazia and South Ossetia.


Robert Gates looks across the room during a meeting of NATO defense ministers in Budapest, Hungary, 10 Oct 2008
Ahead of the meeting, U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates told reporters there were indications that Russian troops are withdrawing under a European Union brokered ceasefire agreement.

But he also criticized Russia's military actions in Georgia. "Unfortunately their behavior has undermined security in the region," said Gates. "I am pleased that Russia appears to be fulfilling its obligations under the ceasefire to withdraw in compliance with tomorrow's deadline."

Yet, Russia has made clear it will keep nearly 8,000 troops in Abkhazia and South Ossetia. Moscow recognized the two areas as independent states, following a brief war between Russian and Georgian forces in August.


NATO has condemned the move and NATO Secretary General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer said the alliance would continue to support Georgia's territorial integrity. However, he ruled out NATO's military involvement in the area.

"The Georgian Defense minister of course heard firm support for Georgia's territorial integrity," said de Hoop Scheffer. "We discussed NATO's stepped-up support for Georgia's defense reform. To avoid any misunderstandings NATO will not supply any weapons to Georgia. But we can and do provide guidance and expert advise to Georgia as it sets it own priorities."

He added that NATO will help Georgia to recover from its recent conflict by providing, as an example, capabilities to get a better air picture of the situation on the ground.

De Hoop Scheffer stressed, however, the Budapest meeting was not used to assess Georgia's readiness to join the alliance. He said the first assessment will be made by NATO foreign ministers in December in Brussels.

Georgian Defense Minister David Kezerashvili said his government wants to join NATO soon, despite Russian opposition. "We hope that our continued good performance and alliance performance based policy will enable us to make swiftly the next step on our direct way to NATO membership," he said.

Earlier Friday, NATO defense ministers focused their attention on Afghanistan. They authorized their troops in Afghanistan to attack drug runners who are blamed for pumping up to $100 million a year into the coffers of Taliban militants.

However, soldiers will only be able to attack drug facilities if authorized by their own governments, and only drug producers deemed to be supporting the insurgency will be targeted, till Afghan forces are able to take on the task.

NATO defense ministers will review the mission when they meet again in February in Poland.

De Hoop Scheffer said he was less satisfied with other military commitments to the mission in Afghanistan, including his call for more retooled helicopters to reduce the time injured soldiers have to wait on the battle field before receiving medical assistance and to improve overall security.

The military alliance also looked at other security threats in the world, including Somalia, where it agreed to send a seven-ship force to protect ships of the United Nations Food Program against piracy. Pirates have attacked dozens of vessels and are still holding ships, including a Ukrainian cargo ship seized laden with heavy weapons.

renukb
BRFite
Posts: 675
Joined: 18 Aug 2008 12:18

Re: Caucasus Crisis

Postby renukb » 12 Oct 2008 09:36

KUHNER: Will Russia-Ukraine be Europe's next war?
http://washingtontimes.com/news/2008/oc ... -next-war/

COMMENTARY:

Europe faces the risk of another major war. In 1939, Nazi Germany's invasion of Poland triggered the Second World War. Today the possible trip wire is not Poland, but Ukraine. And the aggressor will not be Adolf Hitler, but Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin.

Under his iron-fisted grip, Russia has been transformed into a gangster state. Democracy has been dismantled, corruption is rampant, journalists are murdered, dissidents are imprisoned and the media is controlled by the regime. Flush with petrodollars, Moscow is seeking to restore the Great Russian Empire. It poses a strategic threat to its neighbors and to the West.

Mr. Putin is a former KGB apparatchik, who has called the Soviet Union's collapse the "greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the 20th century." The comment reveals his bloodlust and moral depravity. Soviet communism was the greatest system of mass murder in history. It was responsible for the deaths of more than 60 million people. The Soviet Union's disintegration in 1991 was not a catastrophe but the very opposite: a victory for democracy, national self-determination and civilization.

Out of the rubble emerged an independent Ukraine. "No other people suffered under Moscow's rule as much as the Ukrainians," says Gerry Kelebay, a professor at McGill University in Montreal, Canada, and a leading Ukraine expert.

In 1932-1933, Soviet dictator Josef Stalin imposed a terror famine in Ukraine. More than 10 million Ukrainians were systematically starved to death. "If any country has earned the right to national statehood, it is Ukraine," Mr. Kelebay said.

He is right: Kiev's hard-won sovereignty and burgeoning democracy has come at tremendous cost. Unfortunately, Ukraine faces Russian aggression once again. Only this time, it comes not from Marxist-Leninists, but from messianic nationalists.

Moscow is on the march. After invading Georgia and establishing Russia's dominance over the secessionist regions of South Ossetia and Abkhazia, Mr. Putin is now bent on dismembering Ukraine. The Russian strongman has made no secret of his contempt for Kiev's independence. At a NATO summit in April, he told President Bush that Ukraine is "not even a real state," and that much of its territory was "given away" by Russia. Mr. Putin warned that Ukraine would "cease to exist as a state" if it dared to join NATO.

Ukraine, like Georgia, is despised by the Kremlin's xenophobic elite for one simple reason - it seeks to break away from Moscow's authoritarian grip. In response, Russia is trying to destabilize Ukraine.

Moscow's main aim is to wrest the Crimean Peninsula from Kiev's control. A majority of the Crimea's inhabitants are ethnic Russians. More importantly, the Russian Black Sea Fleet is based in Sevastopol. Under a 1997 agreement between the two countries, the Russian navy is scheduled to leave by 2017. Ukrainian President Viktor Yushchenko refuses to extend the lease - rightly fearing Moscow plans to stay on indefinitely and eventually annex the entire Crimea. Russian officials have already said they will not abandon the base at Sevastopol and that Kiev's maritime laws do not apply to them.

Moreover, Russia has been distributing thousands of Russian passports to supporters in the Crimea. The plan is to replicate what was done in South Ossetia and Abkhazia: Create a pretext to send in Russian "peacekeepers" to protect supposedly endangered Russian "citizens."

But Ukraine is not Georgia; it is a large, militarily powerful country with long memories of Russian domination. Any attempt at partition by Moscow would be met by fierce resistance. It would spark a bloody Russo-Ukrainian war. This would inevitably drag in Poland and the Baltic States - all of which are members of NATO. Mr. Putin's bellicose nationalism threatens to ignite a European conflagration.

The battle over Ukraine is more than a regional test of wills. It is a clash over the future of Europe - and of Russia's role in it. Orthodox Slavophiles, such as Mr. Putin, dream of a "Slavic Union" composed of Russia, Belarus and Ukraine. They favor a resurgent Russian imperialism, which seeks to dominate its neighbors, assert its sphere of influence in Eastern Europe and the Balkans and undermine American power abroad. It explains Moscow's support for rogue regimes like Slobodan Milosevic's Serbia, Saddam Hussein's Iraq and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's Iran.

However, a democratic, unified Ukraine stands in the way of Mr. Putin's goal. Ukraine is the strategic bulwark against Russian expansionism - the eastern ramparts of Western civilization. Kiev is not some regional capital of a Greater Russia, but a fundamental part of the European mainland. This is why Ukraine seeks to embrace NATO and the European Union.

And it is also why Moscow desperately wants to derail Ukraine's integration into the Euro-Atlantic alliance. A prosperous and pluralist Orthodox Slavic state on Russia's borders would provide an attractive alternative to the Kremlin's brutal dictatorship. A successful Ukraine would pave the way for liberal democracy to triumph in Russia. And Mr. Putin is willing to do anything to stop this from happening - including possibly plunging Europe into another disastrous bloodbath. We are all Ukrainians now.

Jeffrey T. Kuhner is a columnist at The Washington Times.

prabir
BRFite
Posts: 150
Joined: 27 Aug 2008 03:22

Re: Caucasus Crisis

Postby prabir » 12 Oct 2008 18:26

This article represents perverted mindset. I am surprised by "objectivity" of western media.

Suppiah
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2569
Joined: 03 Oct 2002 11:31
Location: -
Contact:

Re: Caucasus Crisis

Postby Suppiah » 12 Oct 2008 18:59

The game played by Russia is obvious. It will work in two kinds of nations - one where Russians are in enough number to create trouble using real or perceived grievances, second in states ruled by thugs and despots and outcasts such as Venezuela, Syria, Iran etc.

If you look at the current (rather small) list of close Russian Al-lies, you will find they fall into these categories.

Pity both China and Russia both try to challenge US hegemonism but cannot go beyond enlisting dubious regimes, despots and failed states and become nuisance makers instead of real challengers of status quo. If China has its TSP, NK etc., Uncle Putin has Venezuela, Ossetia, Belarus...

Hope India stays away until the company gets a little less embarrassing to keep.

prabir
BRFite
Posts: 150
Joined: 27 Aug 2008 03:22

Re: Caucasus Crisis

Postby prabir » 12 Oct 2008 19:42

Does this mean that US keeps always good company ? What about Latin American despots, Middle East Despots, TSP that US has kept company with ? All civilized US allies with the exception of UK kept aloof from the US backed misadventure in the Caucausus.

renukb
BRFite
Posts: 675
Joined: 18 Aug 2008 12:18

Re: Caucasus Crisis

Postby renukb » 12 Oct 2008 19:55

Hope India stays away until the company gets a little less embarrassing to keep.

Which standard is this? US or western standards? We should give $hit to what US or its allies think of others. US and UK are the biggest terrorists on this earth.

renukb
BRFite
Posts: 675
Joined: 18 Aug 2008 12:18

Re: Caucasus Crisis

Postby renukb » 12 Oct 2008 20:18

Our prediction that Putin is restoring new face of soviet union, comes true
http://www.ireport.com/docs/DOC-112305

Expect the WW III within the next decade or so...

vavinash
BRFite
Posts: 556
Joined: 27 Sep 2008 22:06

Re: Caucasus Crisis

Postby vavinash » 12 Oct 2008 21:27

Suppiah wrote:The game played by Russia is obvious. It will work in two kinds of nations - one where Russians are in enough number to create trouble using real or perceived grievances, second in states ruled by thugs and despots and outcasts such as Venezuela, Syria, Iran etc.

If you look at the current (rather small) list of close Russian Al-lies, you will find they fall into these categories.

Pity both China and Russia both try to challenge US hegemonism but cannot go beyond enlisting dubious regimes, despots and failed states and become nuisance makers instead of real challengers of status quo. If China has its TSP, NK etc., Uncle Putin has Venezuela, Ossetia, Belarus...

Hope India stays away until the company gets a little less embarrassing to keep.


Stop dreaming. If US will survive as a medium power in this century is currently doubtful. With wonderful allies like pakistan its no wonder US is in trouble.

Suppiah
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2569
Joined: 03 Oct 2002 11:31
Location: -
Contact:

Re: Caucasus Crisis

Postby Suppiah » 13 Oct 2008 06:53

TSP is not an al-lie of US, it is an al-lie of China. It is simply a toilet paper for US because it does not want its hands to touch certain $hit, it uses TSP as an intermediary. That has also been TSP's biggest complaint and the Islamists for once are absolutely right when they realise it and say so.

It is not true to say that only UK supported Russia on Georgia (anyway my point was not just about Caucusus, in general, China and Russia could not enlist allies beyond the rogues gallery) - France and many others have been quite strongly supportive. Some are advising caution that is about it.

renukb
BRFite
Posts: 675
Joined: 18 Aug 2008 12:18

Re: Caucasus Crisis

Postby renukb » 13 Oct 2008 12:32

Russia plans to build new army bases in the Caucasus
The military will finish their construction by the end of next year
Yevgeniy Belikov — 13.10.2008


http://vologda.kp.ru/daily/24179.5/389259/

renukb
BRFite
Posts: 675
Joined: 18 Aug 2008 12:18

Re: Caucasus Crisis

Postby renukb » 13 Oct 2008 12:52

The standing of the United States in Central Asia is plunging as new geopolitical realities play out following the Georgia-Russia conflict. US efforts to court countries in the key oil pipeline region have been bluntly snubbed as resurgent Russia is seen instead as the key energy ally. Moscow's financial bailout of distant Iceland also sends a message to the steppes. - M K Bhadrakumar


US standing in Caspian drips away

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Central_Asia/JJ11Ag01.html

But there was another reason for Rice's trepidation as her jet descended to Astana - US influence and prestige in Central Asia and the Caspian region has again plummeted. Rice realizes there is hardly any time left to retrieve lost ground, and the Bill Clinton administration's legacy in the Caspian and Central Asia has largely dissipated. Central to this has been the failure of the Bush administration to handle relations with Russia. The stocktaking has already begun.

Writing in The Washington Post on Wednesday, former secretaries of state Henry Kissinger and George Shultz rebuked the Bush administration for its "drift towards confrontation with Russia" and pointed out that "isolating Russia is not a sustainable long-range policy". They said much of Europe is "uneasy". Their target was Rice, a self-styled "Sovietologist", and her inexcusably vitriolic attack on the Kremlin in a speech at the Marshall Fund of Germany in Washington on September 18.

renukb
BRFite
Posts: 675
Joined: 18 Aug 2008 12:18

Re: Caucasus Crisis

Postby renukb » 13 Oct 2008 16:05

EDITORIAL: Russia rules
http://washingtontimes.com/news/2008/oc ... sia-rules/

Originally published 04:45 a.m., October 13, 2008, updated 11:28 p.m., October 12, 2008

Russian President Dmitry Medvedev stands aboard the cruiser Admiral Kuznetsov in the Barents Sea, northern Russia, on Saturday. Associated Press

Intimidation works.

This is the lesson the Russian government has derived from its August military action against Georgia. President Dmitry Medvedev and Prime Minister Vladimir Putin have made it clear that neighboring states will remain in Russia's sphere of influence rather than that of the West.

Russia recently recognized South Ossetia and Abkhazia as independent nations and intends to keep 7,600 troops in the region. Georgia is fractured, yet the international community is by and large appeasing the Russian bear. Moscow vehemently objected to the American-backed plan for Georgia and Ukraine to join NATO - and it appears the Russian government won the showdown.

Last week, during a visit to St. Petersburg, German Chancellor Angela Merkel unilaterally stated that Georgia and Ukraine will not be given a road map to NATO membership later this year. At the Bucharest summit in April, both France and Germany thwarted the bid of the two former Soviet republics to enter NATO but agreed to revisit the issue in December. Yet Mrs. Merkel, without consulting other NATO members, is blocking the expansion of the alliance. During her visit, she also signed another bilateral gas deal with Russia, rendering Germany even more economically dependent on Russian energy. The German government has thereby undermined NATO, proceeded contrary to American wishes, ignored the concerns of Georgia and Ukraine and rewarded an aggressor.

Russia's neighbors have also learned a lesson: Western goodwill is empty.

In April, Mr. Putin told President Bush that Ukraine is not a real state - sparking fears that Russia may next attempt to seize Ukrainian territory; Mr. Putin warned that Moscow may consider incorporating the eastern part of Ukraine and the Crimea into Russia proper. Moscow has long sought to undermine Ukraine's pro-Western coalition government led by President Viktor Yushchenko. Shortly after the invasion of Georgia, Mr. Yushchenko's coalition crumbled; a third parliamentary election within three years will be held in December. Ukraine too is now trying a little appeasement. Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko (who takes a softer position on Russia) recently signed a natural-gas deal with Moscow and also said she supports Russia's ascension to the World Trade Organization.

Mr. Putin and Mr. Medvedev have demonstrated that the West is powerless to protect Russia's neighbors. Mrs. Merkel stated that the plan to include Georgia and Ukraine in NATO provoked Russian aggression in August. Instead, the German leader should ponder whether the provocation emanated from her decision in April to kowtow to Russian demands - behavior which emboldened Moscow to act against Georgia. If Mrs. Merkel's logic is sound, then, in light of her rejection of the NATO bid, Russian troops should withdraw completely from South Ossetia and Abkhazia. Yet it is more likely that recent Western weakness will serve to only further whet Russia's appetite for dominating its neighbors.

prabir
BRFite
Posts: 150
Joined: 27 Aug 2008 03:22

Re: Caucasus Crisis

Postby prabir » 14 Oct 2008 20:16

What about the lesson US drew after 1991 as if they had won the cold war, threw out every understanding reached with Gorby and assumed everything to be their play ground ?
What is wrong if others also tend to draw the same conclusions ?

renukb
BRFite
Posts: 675
Joined: 18 Aug 2008 12:18

Re: Caucasus Crisis

Postby renukb » 15 Oct 2008 13:39

The West must not push Russia away – again
After so many broken promises, integration is key.


http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/1015/p09s01-coop.html

Moscow - It's a truism that stable and friendly relations between two countries require each to look at a situation from the other's point of view. The recent tussle between Russia and the West over Georgia is a stark reminder of how the United States has fundamentally never understood Russia's point of view.

The conventional view is that Russia in recent years has been pushing away from the West. But the reverse is more accurate. The Russia-Georgia conflict is a consequence of the West's "pushing away" of Russia.

Russia needed a good friend to stand by her side the past 15 years, to counsel her on becoming an open, democratic country tightly bound to the West. Russia thought it had found a friend in America. Unfortunately, despite the desire of Russia's newly formed leadership to move closer to the West, to be integrated to Western institutions, there was no move to meet Russia partway. All issues of integration were talked away during the many years of negotiations, and all questions of economic aid ended up as miserly loans from the World Bank.

Having worked in Boris Yeltsin's government as a deputy prime minister, I know how the West tried to persuade Russia to take on the entire foreign debt of the former USSR. Russia agreed to take this very difficult step in the hope that the West would appreciate its sacrifice and begin seeing the world through its eyes. Unfortunately that did not happen. Yeltsin's government ended up with almost no allies or supporters in Russia. He was perceived as a puppet of the West, his policies dictated by the US. It should come as no surprise, then, that Vladimir Putin came to power as he did in 1999.

Now, the West considers Prime Minister Putin a foe of democracy. But he was the first to support America after 9/11, and he provided substantial help in organizing operations in Afghanistan. Putin made simple requests in return: membership in the World Trade Organization (WTO), dropping visa entry requirements to European Union (EU) countries, and significant cooperation with the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). All this was promised to him and none of it happened.

Let's imagine for a moment that Russia had been integrated into the West. Then the corruption of the Russian judicial system and its susceptibility to administrative pressure would be balanced by European judicial institutions and the imperfections of its electoral system would be muted by European legislation and the European parliament. The government's economic policies would be in accord with the norms of the EU and WTO and Russia's military independence would be constrained by NATO rules. The human rights situation in Russia would be very different.

The West would only win in this scenario. Instead, it has surrounded Russia with missiles and radar stations and accumulated conventional weapons in close proximity to its borders. It would be naive to expect Russia to make concessions such as ratifying the Adapted Conventional Armed Forces in Europe Treaty under these conditions. Opinion polls show that promoting pro-Western policies in Russia today without an equivalent response from the West would be political suicide for Russian leaders. Neither the military establishment nor citizens would support such concessions.

The situation in Georgia is a global embarrassment, a tale of contradictions. And, the reaction from Russians and Americans is, simply put, ironic. Russian leaders were crying crocodile tears over the genocide of Ossetians, and voicing outrage over the shelling of Tskhinvali. But they had done the very same thing in Chechnya just a few years ago. The American administration is no better, attacking Iraq for bogus reasons, destroying an entire nation, inciting further religious terrorism, and killing tens of thousands of civilians.

To understand Russia's actions in Georgia, the West must first understand that Russia does not see herself as the losing side that must be punished for the cold war. Second, there is a dangerous historic precedent: In 1919, the Entente forced Germany to sign the humiliating Treaty of Versailles. Historians suggest that the repercussions of that Treaty led to World War II. Had the Allies looked at the situation from the German point of view, history may have taken a better course.

Perhaps the conflict in the Caucasus will at least force the West to talk to Russia about real integration – WTO membership, for example. For if Russia continues to be "pushed away" – left alone with its anxieties and the anxieties of its leaders – relations will definitely sour. Do not forget how many nuclear warheads Russia has and how many Russians want to save the country's honor.


• Alfred Kokh is the author of the upcoming book, "A Crate of Vodka: An Insider View On The 20 Years That Shaped Modern Russia." He served as a deputy prime minister under Boris Yeltsin. This text was translated by Antonina W. Bouis.

prabir
BRFite
Posts: 150
Joined: 27 Aug 2008 03:22

Re: Caucasus Crisis

Postby prabir » 15 Oct 2008 19:57

"To understand Russia's actions in Georgia, the West must first understand that Russia does not see herself as the losing side that must be punished for the cold war. Second, there is a dangerous historic precedent: In 1919, the Entente forced Germany to sign the humiliating Treaty of Versailles. Historians suggest that the repercussions of that Treaty led to World War II. Had the Allies looked at the situation from the German point of view, history may have taken a better course. "



If there was no world war II then, freedom would not have come to Asian Countries, with India in particular. World War II ensured that "colonial system" where every european country had an exclusive right of exploitation gave away to freedom to a lot of Asian countries. It also caused a decisive shift in power from Britain, France, Germany, Italy and Japan to USA and USSR.
It may sound ironic, but, we have to thank Hitler for Indian Independence :-)
Sorry for digression from the topic

Suppiah
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2569
Joined: 03 Oct 2002 11:31
Location: -
Contact:

Re: Caucasus Crisis

Postby Suppiah » 16 Oct 2008 04:20

prabir wrote:It may sound ironic, but, we have to thank Hitler for Indian Independence :-)
Sorry for digression from the topic


And we have Reagan and Thatcher to thank for preventing Stalinist mass murderers from taking over India in collusion with their overseas paymasters. They have been reduced to begging for votes and begging for investment $$ from capitalist satans. Incidentally Herr Putin is a product of the same system though he smartly (like the Chinese) has stopped believing in the economic aspects of the ideology.

vavinash
BRFite
Posts: 556
Joined: 27 Sep 2008 22:06

Re: Caucasus Crisis

Postby vavinash » 16 Oct 2008 04:49

Suppiah wrote:
prabir wrote:It may sound ironic, but, we have to thank Hitler for Indian Independence :-)
Sorry for digression from the topic


And we have Reagan and Thatcher to thank for preventing Stalinist mass murderers from taking over India in collusion with their overseas paymasters. They have been reduced to begging for votes and begging for investment $$ from capitalist satans. Incidentally Herr Putin is a product of the same system though he smartly (like the Chinese) has stopped believing in the economic aspects of the ideology.


Patent rubbish!!! India would never have turned commie. JLN, shastri and IG were smart enough to keep russians on friendly terms without going overboard on socialism. LoL :rotfl: US and UK are now begging for Investment from BRIC nations not other way around. Uk is soon going to revert to their correct status as a mediocre third rate power. US will soon be reduced to one of the powers among 5-6 nations. Prabir is correct, its thanks to Hitler that Afro-Asian nations got their independence.

Igorr
BRFite
Posts: 598
Joined: 01 Feb 2005 18:13
Contact:

Re: Caucasus Crisis

Postby Igorr » 17 Oct 2008 03:53

vavinash wrote:Uk is soon going to revert to their correct status as a mediocre third rate power.

You are right: that that British half billion Empire could not crash 80 mil Hitler Germany alone says all British 'shine POwer' was a rubbish. The social organisation, moral level were in much worse condition thus in UK, than in then 'totalitarian' Germany and USSR. Neverthless the Bretons have been following to brag at each corner about their 'democracy' etc, till now...

prabir
BRFite
Posts: 150
Joined: 27 Aug 2008 03:22

Re: Caucasus Crisis

Postby prabir » 18 Oct 2008 20:19

Gradually forces of "natural justice" come into play. No country has dominated the affairs of the world in perpetuity.

Suppiah
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2569
Joined: 03 Oct 2002 11:31
Location: -
Contact:

Re: Caucasus Crisis

Postby Suppiah » 18 Oct 2008 22:24

Time to cash dividend cheques from 'self-determination' policy

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/7677834.stm

prabir
BRFite
Posts: 150
Joined: 27 Aug 2008 03:22

Re: Caucasus Crisis

Postby prabir » 19 Oct 2008 01:03

The difference is that Russians do not go hammer and tongs about the casualties the way, Americans and "green" soldiers of British army get worried when there is an incident.

Russian resolve is very firm and nationalist sentiment is dominant due to the right mix of policies of Putin. Britain will be the one which will reap the harvest for having backed the "wrong" elements in the Caucasus.

renukb
BRFite
Posts: 675
Joined: 18 Aug 2008 12:18

Re: Caucasus Crisis

Postby renukb » 19 Oct 2008 10:13

Russians are blinking to the pressure...
Russia fleet 'may leave Ukraine'
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7677152.stm

prabir
BRFite
Posts: 150
Joined: 27 Aug 2008 03:22

Re: Caucasus Crisis

Postby prabir » 19 Oct 2008 19:16

This is not blinking to pressure. Its just fooling the "fools". Whats wrong in giving false assurances to keep temperatures down ?

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17855
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Caucasus Crisis

Postby Philip » 20 Oct 2008 15:08

Yaas,Prabhir,it's just a flier so that gorgeous Yulia,who has made a deal with Moscow, can give hated Yuschenko the OOB in the coming elections! Watch how Russia and Ukraine cosy up after the elections with oil/gas for Ukraine on favourable terms allowing the Russian navy a long sojourn at Sevastopol!

prabir
BRFite
Posts: 150
Joined: 27 Aug 2008 03:22

Re: Caucasus Crisis

Postby prabir » 20 Oct 2008 18:18

This is exactly what will happen.
-- Respect Ukraine as a proud nation, so expect some good statements to come from Russian leaders
-- Ukranians and Russians share a good bond, so Russia will grant some favors
-- In return, it gets to keep the naval base

This will put to rest "dreams" of outsiders who have encouraged a rift so far

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17855
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Caucasus Crisis

Postby Philip » 21 Oct 2008 13:43

Prabs,here's another report on the collapse of the "Orange Revolution"."A house built upon sand will fall down".Old quote.The Orange Rev. was a CIA inspired plan to bring into power various right wing parties and coalitions of ex-Warsaw Pact nations.The method used was the same,anti-govt. demos in large number from right wing elements clamouring for "democracy",ousted post WPact govts. of the time.Since these revolutions were meant to benefit outide powers and NATO nations more than the locals,these govts.are falling/fading by the wayside.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world ... 67686.html

Orange Revolution implodes to leave a nation in despair

By Askold Krushelnycky in Kiev
Tuesday, 21 October 2008

REUTERS

Julia Tymoshenko warns of the dangers of an election in her televised prime ministerial address in Kiev

Anne Penketh: Russia will keep one eye on Ukraine and the other on relations with West
Their leaders are at war, their country is verging on bankruptcy and the Russians are growling on their doorstep. Ukrainians have been plunged into disillusion and despair by the lethal combination as they witness the death throes of the Orange Revolution that brought President Viktor Yushchenko and Prime Minister Julia Tymoshenko to power.

Now, it seems, the last vestiges of the idealism which fuelled the peaceful revolution four years ago are going to the wall as Mr Yushchenko insists on calling a third parliamentary election in as many years, in a move blocked by his rival, the Prime Minister.

Ms Tymoshenko, who has described the President's election plan as "reckless" for raising political tensions at a time of dire financial crisis that has devastated Western institutions, went on television on Sunday night to urge political leaders to unite behind her to shield the country from economic meltdown. She warned that holding a parliamentary election in December would "destroy the country".

But few top politicians heeded her call to attend a unity meeting yesterday. Those who joined her were members of her own bloc, the Communist Party and some rebels of the president's Our Ukraine party. "It is a great shame that there has been insufficient wisdom to form a united team," Ms Tymoshenko, clearly irritated, told a news conference. "But I feel we have seen a first attempt."

Ukraine's government has had to rescue two top banks, the national currency's rate has fallen 12 per cent, the stock market is in free fall and the country is seeking a multibillion loan from the International Monetary Fund (IMF) to stabilise the financial sector.

And with relations between Ukraine and Russia having suffered over Mr Yushchenko's support for Georgia during last August's Caucasus war, the Russian gas giant Gazprom has now suggested next year's price for gas imports could soar to $400 (£230) per 1,000 cubic metres from $179.50 now.

Ms Tymoshenko suggested the IMF, which sent a delegation for talks last week in Ukraine that are continuing this week, should make an aid package of up to $14bn dependent on the President abandoning his snap election plans.

At the start of 2005, the pro-Western Mr Yushchenko had massive support inside Ukraine, and the entire Western world seemed to be in love with the Orange Revolution. But he has managed to squander that immense goodwill in a stunning fashion by reneging on almost all of his election promises, particularly to fight rampant official corruption and to put behind bars some of the Mafia-like politicians and businessmen who have amassed huge fortunes by crooked means.

Over the past two years the relationship between the President and Prime Minister has degenerated from occasional snide bickering to a torrent of vicious insults and accusations so that talk of a revived Orange coalition is greeted with a cynicism that has increasingly squeezed out the optimism ushered in by the 2004 pro-democracy protests. Yet another election would further ratchet up that cynicism. One young businessman, Ihor Tokarivsky, who for weeks during the Orange Revolution braved freezing temperatures and the danger that force would be used to disperse the demonstrators, said: "Yushchenko and Tymoshenko had everything and people like me still continued to support them despite the shameful public fights and the fact that they failed to keep their promises to lock up some of the criminals who have ripped off this country.

"But this time I've had enough and I don't think I'll vote at all and I have lots of friends who feel the same. I don't believe any more that politicians will change the country for the better. Everyone just has to look out for themselves and their own families."

One former member of Ms Tymoshenko's BYuT party said: "Whatever the elections produce, little will change. Most MPs are there to make money and politics is only of concern to them insofar as they can use their positions to advance their business interests. It is hard to explain to a Westerner the level of cynicism prevalent in parliament. I wouldn't call it a parliament; rather it's Ukraine's most exclusive business club."

Ukraine: A nation in turmoil

*Political turmoil has intensified since the President dissolved parliament this month and called a snap election, the third in as many years, resisted by the Prime Minister.

*Relations with Russia have sunk to all-time low after war with Georgia.

*The Ukrainian currency, the hryvnia, hit all-time low of 5.9 to the US dollar on 8 October.

*Foreign debt totalled just over $100bn as of 1 July.

prabir
BRFite
Posts: 150
Joined: 27 Aug 2008 03:22

Re: Caucasus Crisis

Postby prabir » 21 Oct 2008 16:47

Good article Philip. They copied the western model without due checks and balances. I am not saying that there are no virtues in Western model. The problem is that, we cannot copy paste solutions in haste. Real income in Ukraine is falling, quality of life is falling. Foreign debt driven growth only makes matter worse. Foreign aid can be very deceptive as it has too many strings attached to it.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17855
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Caucasus Crisis

Postby Philip » 22 Oct 2008 16:14

Karl Marx is now back in favour.Marx and Engels are now becoming the hottest selling books in the west.The western media including Britain's "Torygraph" are commenting upon Marx's views today.Even Sarko was seen thumbing throiugh Marx recently! Marx's views on unbridled capitalism is now seen as being prophetic.When Germany was reunited,the "Ossies" of the eastern half,found to their dismay that there was no job security whatsoever for them,developed an inferiority complex with their western compatriots and many still long for the security of jobs and services that the socialist state provided for them.There is truly no pefect economic model.One needs the innovation and freedom of capitalism,combined with social security measures for the population.France is trying to do just that but has perhaps the highest taxation of citizens.The problem of invsting pension funds next arises as this is supposed to guarantee pensioners their lifestyle and health insurance until they kick the bucket.Ultimately "good governance" is what is required.If you have robber barons like US CEOs and their relatives like Indian politicos and babus,the country will suffer.

There is going to be some soul searching in the former Warsaw pact nations now with the collapse of the US economy.The fall of capitalism is sending shockwaves and ripples across the globe of Krakatoan proportions.Ukraine will now in all probability see a pro-Russian coalition emerge.

Suppiah
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2569
Joined: 03 Oct 2002 11:31
Location: -
Contact:

Re: Caucasus Crisis

Postby Suppiah » 22 Oct 2008 16:53

Guys dont go overboard with all this talk of 'collapse of US economy' and so on...it is just wishful thinking. US and others will emerge out of this crisis fairly quickly. UK has always been a third rate power once colonised people started visiting the island and figured out how small it is.

Anyone ready to bet a bottle of vodka that Russia will be in far worse shape as a result of this crisis a year from now? Already oil prices are hitting its economy hard. Watch out for more trouble.

prabir
BRFite
Posts: 150
Joined: 27 Aug 2008 03:22

Re: Caucasus Crisis

Postby prabir » 22 Oct 2008 17:41

Russia's fiscal situation is sound. They have not overspent like the US govt.

svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14220
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: Caucasus Crisis

Postby svinayak » 22 Oct 2008 18:55

prabir wrote:Good article Philip. They copied the western model without due checks and balances. I am not saying that there are no virtues in Western model. The problem is that, we cannot copy paste solutions in haste. Real income in Ukraine is falling, quality of life is falling. Foreign debt driven growth only makes matter worse. Foreign aid can be very deceptive as it has too many strings attached to it.


I met a Ukrainian Lady and she was talking about the democracy. She asked me about Indian democracy. Then she remarked that in Ukraine this debate keeps going on between the two sides and then what? It was apparent that they are not ready for this open discussion democratic system.

Johann
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2075
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Caucasus Crisis

Postby Johann » 22 Oct 2008 21:49

There is going to be some soul searching in the former Warsaw pact nations now with the collapse of the US economy.The fall of capitalism is sending shockwaves and ripples across the globe of Krakatoan proportions.Ukraine will now in all probability see a pro-Russian coalition emerge.


Philip,

I'm not sure what you are talking about;

a) Do not confuse NATO with the EU - there are states like Finland and Sweden for example which are inside the EU but outside NATO.

Eastern Europe has been economically integrating in particular with the EU, not the US. The EU's pull on those outside it remains that it is a *far* larger market for labour, goods and services than Russia (or even the US), as well as a uniquely attractive road to currency stability, more transparent and representative government, rule of law in consumer protection/environmental safety/commercial dispute resolution/etc.

Ukraine will likely stay outside NATO unless EU-Russian relations change significantly, but all major Ukrainian parties, even pro-Russian ones *want* to join the EU. This is despite the fact that the Russians sought to prevent ex-Soviet countries from joining the EU almost as much as they sought to prevent ex-Soviet and ex-WP states from joining NATO. Instead the Kremlin wants them to join Russia's proposed 'Single Economic Space'. So far Belarus is the only ex-Sov country in Europe to show interest in the Rusian proposal.

b) Eastern Europe can not be treated as a single entity in economic terms; it is composed of
- states already within the EU (all of the Warsaw Pact states outside the USSR)
- states preparing to join the EU (the Balkans; all of the ex-Yugoslav Federation republics including Serbia)
- ex-Soviet states who want to join the EU, and whom the EU is interested in but face Russian opposition (Ukraine and Moldova in particular)
- ex-Soviet Caucasian republics (Armenia, Georgia, Azerbaijan) who are very interested in joining the EU but whose prospects of full membership are remote given both limited EU interest and Russian opposition.

The real limiting factor here is not the keenness of these applicants, which is enormous, but the EU's wilingness and ability to expand. The EU, unless it passes the new constitution, or new laws can not accept new members by its own rules. In addition, there are differences within the EU over just how to handle issues with Russia such as energy security, ex-Soviet republics where the Kremlin wants exclusive influence, etc, which are resolved through the slow process of intra-EU discussions and consensus building.

If these internal EU wrangles can not resolved quickly we will most likely see the emergence some kind of half-way compromise of the kind adopted by Switzerland, Norway, Iceland, etc which *formally* remain outside the EU, but are within the European free-trade area, are partof the Schengen Area, and maintain EU-compatible laws, or like Montenegro which unilaterally adopted the Euro in order to accomodate these states aspirations. The result; de-facto EU economic and political integration.

c) Marx is not popular in Russia at all; he had very little to do with Russia in his lifetime, and Russia has very little to do with him now. Roughly 80% of the Russian economy is based largely on the extraction and export of natural resources - oil, gas, metals and timber. These are conducted by for-profit companies - majority owned either by the Kremlin, or people in the Kremlin, or people very close to it. This is statism and patronage, not Marxism. They are nevertheless very much tied to the global economy - a decline in global economic growth hits exports, which hurts the Russian economy.


prabir,

You are correct that the Kremlin has been much more financially prudent than the USG - the Russian state has put its resource export profits in to the stability/reserve fund, but it is going to start drawing from it much sooner than anticipated. What will happen once the fund is spent?

A few months back Deputy PM and Finance Minister Alexei Kudrin announced that Russia's oil and gas revenues would peak this year - forever, no matter how high oil and gas prices go once the global economy recovers. That is because Russia is hitting peak oil, and is either hitting peak gas, or soon will. In fact Gazprom is now building coal plants for the domestic markets because it lacks sufficient reserves to simultaneously meet domestic demand and export commitments. Russia has a narrow window to develop its economy away from such heavy reliance on oil and gas exports. The global economic slowdown, depending on its severity will extend peak oil/gas, but it will do so at the cost of revenues. Much of the above also goes for Russia's new best friends like Venezuela and Iran.

Additionally, the Russians may be getting back in to some expensive habits that they *swore* to themselves that they would never return to; for example, the Venezuelans now want the Russians to finance a $1b arms sale. The post-Soviet Russian principle has been hard cash arms sales to avoid ;

a) pouring huge amounts of arms at unsustainable "friendship" prices/financing to developing countries (India, Egypt, Syria, Iraq, Somalia, etc) and ideological lost causes (the communist govts in Afghanistan, Poland, East Germany, Angola, Nicaragua, etc)

b) make the military-industrial complex something that generated profits intead of eating ever larger amounts of revenue.

Putin had better suppress those Cold War reflexes and remember those Russia's lessons from those conflicts if he doesnt want to drain the stabilisation/reserve fund even sooner than it will be.

Nevertheless the bigger challenge is restructuring the economy. If substantial new revenue streams can not be found in the medium term, the economy's growth will be hit badly, and in particular Russian state will have to cut spending, or borrow heavily from the market.

Hitesh
BRFite
Posts: 793
Joined: 04 Jul 1999 11:31

Re: Caucasus Crisis

Postby Hitesh » 23 Oct 2008 02:37

Johann,

India is an exception. India has Russia's most reliable customer.

prabir
BRFite
Posts: 150
Joined: 27 Aug 2008 03:22

Re: Caucasus Crisis

Postby prabir » 23 Oct 2008 03:30

prabir,

You are correct that the Kremlin has been much more financially prudent than the USG - the Russian state has put its resource export profits in to the stability/reserve fund, but it is going to start drawing from it much sooner than anticipated. What will happen once the fund is spent?


Yes, but they seem to have invested a lot of money into new technology initiatives like nano tech, also started consolidating their specialized industry like Aerospace to curb internal inefficiencies. Their vision document specifically mentions the need to diversify their economy and lessen dependence on Oil and gas. But yes, you are very right about the possibility of repeating the same mistakes of the cold war era. The right strategy for them is to:
-- Maintain deterrence by creating pin pricks like Syria, Iran, Venezuela
-- Follow asymmetric model of responses without getting involved in matching one to one, two to two
And
yet maintain good relations with some members of the EU (Germany and France)

Its easy to divide opinion in democratic nations. Its easy and friendly too.

Johann
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2075
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Caucasus Crisis

Postby Johann » 23 Oct 2008 06:03

Hitesh wrote:Johann,

India is an exception. India has Russia's most reliable customer.


An exception to what?

The Russians still made an enormous loss on the weapons they sold to India, like most other recipients. Partly this was because the Soviet system lacked the means to actually calculate the true cost of what they produced. Partly this was because large quantities of weapons and training at unreal (literally) prices were the cement of the Soviet relationship with most of the non-communist 'third world', with diplomatic support for each others crises very much secondary. Partly it was Leninst theory (which M.N. Roy at one point contributed to) which called for communist alliance with the post-colonial third world in order to preciptate the economic collapse of capitalism in the first world, and the final long delayed workers revolution in the West.

Why do you think Indo-Russian arms sales negotiations are so tough these days? The Russians cant afford to put marginal influence over profits. The Soviets couldnt either, but they had different metrics. The Soviets generally got bases and a closely aligned foreign policy in exchange for that level military aid. If the Soviets had known how little they were going to get for their money, even they would not have given discounts and financing on the level that they did. India didnt betray the Russians/Soviets like the Egyptians, or self-destruct like Iraq, but the era of huge freebies in exchange for vague goodwill ended with the collapse of marxist-leninist economics and geopolitical theory in Moscow.

vavinash
BRFite
Posts: 556
Joined: 27 Sep 2008 22:06

Re: Caucasus Crisis

Postby vavinash » 23 Oct 2008 06:17

The russian arms are still way cheaper and more reliable than anything from Europe or US. GOi can be partly blamed for dragging the contracts till the seller gets frustrated and jacks up the prices. This happened with scorpene and Mi-17. The Mi-17's at 12.5 mil per pop is way cheaper and reliable than anything west can offer

Suppiah
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2569
Joined: 03 Oct 2002 11:31
Location: -
Contact:

Re: Caucasus Crisis

Postby Suppiah » 23 Oct 2008 08:39

Marxism is dead and buried even by those states that are sitting smugly watching with glee the current crisis in US/West Europe not realising their own backyard is on fire too. And their immune systems are weaker to deal with the plague.. Newspaper headlines make all things sound big. There were are few that bought and stocked up on batteries and food before y2k. That made big headlines too.

Russia of Putin is a horrible case of crony - capitalism that jails, exiles and poisons anyone daring to expose them. It needs constant flow of good numbers to keep going. Else there will be a big chaos, again.

vavinash
BRFite
Posts: 556
Joined: 27 Sep 2008 22:06

Re: Caucasus Crisis

Postby vavinash » 23 Oct 2008 08:49

Marxism is dead but socialism is on the rise in US.

Rye
BRFite
Posts: 1183
Joined: 05 Aug 2001 11:31

Re: Caucasus Crisis

Postby Rye » 23 Oct 2008 10:04

Suppiah wrote:
Russia of Putin is a horrible case of crony - capitalism that jails, exiles and poisons anyone daring to expose them


Are you sure about that? Putin took down the pro-west-crony capitalists who got rich off Yeltsin's garage sale of O&G assets to the Berezofskys and took state control of the industries, which rankled the UK, which is why the western press has nothing good to say about Putin.

abhischekcc
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4278
Joined: 12 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: If I can’t move the gods, I’ll stir up hell
Contact:

Re: Caucasus Crisis

Postby abhischekcc » 23 Oct 2008 10:54

Johann,

The facts you marshall give a conclusion that is an exact opposite of what you are saying.

India may have got cheap weapons from USSR, but we never had any Soviet base on our soil, and both our foreign and economic policies were sufficiently free of Soviet influences. Most importantly, we were never behind the invasion of Afghanistan. We bought the Mirage 2000 becasue the Soviets were dragging their feet.

While our relationship was not entirely commercial, it was not entirely political either. Something like what is developing between us and America these days.

If the Soviets could not calculate the true cost of the weapons, it does not mean they were giving it to us for free. Also, remember that as a resoruce-surplus country, they could always sell at a much lower price.

I mean, why blame us for benefiting if they were willing to empty their own pockets? :D


Return to “History & Current Affairs Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest