#1
Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs
www.mid.ru
October 6, 2015
Special briefing by Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Maria Zakharova, Moscow
This special briefing will be dedicated not only to the situation surrounding the Syrian settlement and actions taken on the ground and in the air to combat the Islamic State. I would describe the topic of this briefing as "the anti-Russian campaign launched in the media in connection with the start of the Russian military confrontation with the Islamic State at the request of official Damascus."
After the military component of the anti-terrorist operation by the Russian Air Force began in Syria at the request of the official Syrian government, the international media have launched a strong anti-Russian campaign to condemn the allegedly illegal, illogical and incomprehensible actions by Russia in Syria. We have read various accusations, including that we are pursuing our own, exclusively Russian interests in that region, where we are supposedly using fighting against the Islamic State and other terrorist groups as a cover. Literally in the first hours of the operation, they blamed us for the deaths of civilians, including children.
The Western media are acting in a fairly simplistic manner. You can see this for yourself on a daily basis. First, they publish statements by officials from countries that still, for whatever reasons, don't understand the consistency and the logic of Russia's policy in that region. These statements set the tone for numerous reports and publications with further comments and links to a variety of unconfirmed, informal or unnamed sources. The key message of these statements is that Russia's goal is to destroy the "moderate opposition" (exactly their words) in the region.
As a rule, all this is illustrated with pictures from archives or images that are entirely unrelated to this situation, region or period of time, and are backed by video footage, which, in fact, isn't related to this situation either. It wouldn't be an overstatement to say that almost all Western media are using these tactics in their work.
I'd like to mention some specific examples to illustrate what we are talking about so that you may recognise in these reports the media you represent. Later on we will put our heads together with you to think about what to do to prevent this from happening in the future.
Not long ago, on October 2, Foreign Policy, a fairly respectable and often-quoted publication, ran an article by Reid Standish (https://foreignpolicy.com/2015/10/02/russias-information-campaign-spreads-from-ukraine-to-syria/). The author writes that Russian airstrikes in Syria have hit the Army of Conquest, an alliance of rebel groups that rivals the Islamic State. The author cites information from the Britain-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights. I quote: "Russia announced on Friday that it had bombed camps outside the Islamic State stronghold of Raqqa, but it is also believed to have targeted areas controlled by an assortment of rebel groups in the same round of sorties." In terms of serious journalism that does not serve someone's interests but describes the events taking place on the ground, how can one cite information with a lead-in "it is also believed?" Who believes? If you are a serious journalist, one who is quoted by UN experts and representatives of official agencies in their reports, then you cite facts, present photos and produce specific information about events on the ground. How can a serious journalist write about events that result in victims and human lives without references?
Such publications rely on a clear-cut and well-prepared (I wouldn't say well-orchestrated) foundation. British Foreign Secretary Philip Hammond said about Russia's strikes in Syria: "It looks like a classic bit of Russian asymmetric warfare." We are speaking about serious policy. We have been talking about a struggle against a truly global evil. How can such descriptions be used by an official government representative?
British Prime Minister David Cameron provided his assessment of the Syrian developments, referring to the Russian anti-terrorist operation in Syria as a "mistake." The issue does not simply concern a political assessment, but rather also the reaction of the international community to our specific efforts to combat international terrorism. If it is a mistake, then what is this about? This is how they form public opinion. People watching TV in their kitchen trust the people on TV, and believe this is a mistake. In such cases, it's important to back up one's words with specific materials and facts because government leaders are accountable for their words and people's lives depend on them. According to David Cameron, Russia is "backing the butcher Assad, which is a terrible mistake for them and for the world. It's going to make the region more unstable. Most of the Russian air strikes, as far as we've been able to see so far, have been in parts of Syria not controlled by ISIL, but controlled by other opponents of the regime." This is something that a head of a state said, allowing himself to use emotional assessments and call our actions a "mistake" without providing specific facts.
US Defence Secretary Ashton Carter had a similar reaction when he used words such as "perhaps," "maybe," and "it seems" to describe Russia's actions. We are not talking about a minister of culture, sports, or tourism here, but the Defence Secretary.
As you may be aware, Russia and the United States have finally restored the communication channel between their respective defence departments. If words like "perhaps, maybe, and it seems" make you doubtful of certain issues, you can always pick up a phone and call the other party to dispel those doubts. Then, you can make public assessments that are clear and to the point. If, after such phone conversations, which can be had at the request of the US side at any moment, you still have concerns, you can talk about them publicly, but first run them by us.
Russia can be criticised for its lack of openness or non-transparency in recent years, but the level of openness demonstrated recently by our Defence Ministry, particularly with regard to the Syrian conflict, is unprecedented. The ministry holds regular briefings, provides answers to questions and makes available all information, photos and video materials. This concerns the public sphere of work with reporters. Perhaps, not everyone knows this but we are open to contacts between our two countries' military experts. If someone has concerns, we are willing to provide an answer. Why go to a news conference or a briefing and say words like "perhaps," "it seems," or "maybe" when you can pick up a phone and call your Russian colleagues who will dispel those concerns. Of course, after such statements, the international media come up with appropriate headers claiming that Russia's true goals in Syria do not include the Islamic State.
I was part of the Russian delegation in New York during the UN General Assembly session. The day after Russia's decision to assist the Syrian government in fighting ISIS, I watched the news. All US and Canadian TV stations covered it. The underlying message of these stories was in the roll captions or the text on the screen: "What are Russia's true goals in the region?", "What are Russia's goals in Syria?", "Is Russia really fighting ISIS?" This is how the public opinion is formed. Where is the objectivity and the room for the coordination and assistance that we are referring to? We call for cooperation and interaction. But an unequivocal sentence was handed down: "Russia's objectives in Syria are not what it lets on publicly".
Recently, White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest said that the United States continues to believe that Russian military aircraft in Syria are delivering strikes mainly on territories occupied by the Syrian opposition, not the Islamic State. Josh Earnest said that he saw news to the effect that at least a couple of strikes in recent days were aimed at ISIS-controlled territory, but there's no indication that Russia has changed its strategy towards focusing more effectively on fighting ISIS. They concentrate their efforts on the territory held by the Assad regime's opponents, which can also harbour extremists. This is what the White House spokesperson said.
The tragedy, which I'm about to mention, didn't happen a year or two ago. However, I think that human memory is capable of holding events that date back 14 years. I'm talking about the September 11 attacks when we felt the pain of the United States, knowing full well what terrorism is all about. When Washington declared that it was a threat to national security and a strike against the United States, Russia supported the United States in the UN Security Council, provided assistance in fighting terrorists without asking if they were real bad guys or not so bad. If someone engages in terrorist activities, blows up buildings, or kills children, they are terrorists.
By way of a reminder (maybe this is the root of the problem), the international community has so far failed to develop a single term to describe terrorism.
Each country has domestic legislation governing this area. We are well aware of that. But should this stop us from fighting the terrorist threat? Did it prevent Russia from supporting other countries in their fight against terrorism?
For us, international terrorism is really a matter of national security. We have experienced this. We know what it is and we don't want it in our country again. It is too painful for us. We count on your understanding.
There is another thing I cannot help but mention, that supports the general concept. Many media outlets claim that Russia is hitting targets near the cities of Hama, Homs, Rastan, Idlib and many others, where, according to reporters and officials, "terrorists have never made an appearance," and that the target of attacks is "the moderate opposition" and civilians. For example, the BBC, citing AFP, is publishing a map of Russian Air Force strikes on Syrian territory.
Memory cannot be so short lived. Before the start of Russian airstrikes, the same media outlets were tripping over each other to talk about Islamic State positions in these areas. For example, in early August, wide coverage was given to the abduction of 200 Christians by ISIS rebels in the Homs province. Is that some other Homs province? Are there many such provinces in Syria? Or is this hypocrisy, if, first, they say that rebels abducted 200 Christians in the Homs province and then, literally a month and a half later, they claim that there are no ISIS forces in Homs, and ask what exactly Russia is bombing there.
Reports about the capture of 200 Christians did not go unnoticed by our US colleagues and were actively promoted by the US State Department, which strongly condemned the hostage taking practice. Is it not terrorists who take hostages? Or are there "good" terrorists who were "good" in August and have probably become "very good" now? This is some kind of sick logic.
About a week ago, Western media reported in detail on the execution by ISIS rebels of seven men in the city of Rastan for their untraditional orientation. And then they ask us who we are bombing.
On July 29, the Americans delivered an airstrike on an ISIS tactical subunit in the Idlib area, which was immediately reported in a statement on the operation by the coalition that is designed to wipe out the Islamic State in Syria and Iraq.
The use of photo and video materials in the media, as well as, unfortunately, by official agencies, is a separate story.
On Day 1 of the operation, it was reported that a moderate opposition leader was killed as a result of Russian military operations. When a journalist prepares a story it does not matter where this information comes from. However, with the modern level of media technology you can check within five minutes what was previously reported on this issue. So, it was earlier reported that the person in question was captured by ISIS back in January 2014, while other media sources said that he was killed in the summer of 2015.
For the sake of objectivity, if you don't have any other sources to verify your information or for some reason you are unable to reach the Foreign Ministry or the Defense Ministry, have courage enough to say in your newspaper or magazine story that according to other sources, as it was in this case, the man in question was killed long ago. That is being not done. I can even tell you why. We had very many meetings and talks with our colleagues on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly session (some expressed support for the Russian position, while others sought clarification on certain issues). However, there were several meetings where our colleagues, virtually all as one, said this: "Perception is more important than reality." What is happening now is in fact the shaping of this perception, which is more important than reality, and reality is the fight against ISIS. As for the examples that I have mentioned, they serve precisely the purpose of shaping the perception that, unfortunately, can become the new reality that [people] will believe. It will differ from the present reality that threatens all of us "on the ground."
The allegations that the Russian Aerospace Force is responsible for civilian deaths and, which is particularly sordid, the deaths of children, are a topic in its own right. The photographs on the slides were made several days before the start of the Russian air force operation. They often show photographs of bombed cities but they don't say what city it is or when the photo was made, and they don't provide the coordinates. The captions just say something like "Russia is bombing [Syria]", "people are fleeing in a panic", or "a kid brings bread to his family that is hiding from Russian bombs." All of this is pure propaganda. If you show a kid who is bringing bread to his family, then you should also show a kid whose parents were beheaded by ISIS, which the Russian military are fighting in the region. If we are talking serious journalism, then stop feeding people propaganda and acting on orders from above, because you're are creating a new reality, you're turning a distorted perception into reality.
There are many examples like this. I'd like to remind you again that hourly reports on the Russian aerospace forces' operation in Syria are posted on the Russian Defence Ministry's website. The Russian Defence Ministry is open for interaction and answers all questions it receives. The Foreign Ministry is acting likewise.
I don't think I need to give you the links to the Defence Ministry's website, as I'm sure that you know them. The only thing I'd like to ask is that you use information from that site. I don't say that you have to accept it or agree with it, but you should use it as an alternative source of information.
We read US State Department briefings every day, which contain absurd accusations, including of Russia's unwillingness to join the international coalition. And they repeat this almost every day. We have said more than once that we are not opposed to joining forces against ISIS, but we can't join the coalition on its conditions because they run counter to international law. We said this clearly and openly. We even provided an example, saying that the international coalition in Iraq is acting perfectly legally because it is doing this with Baghdad's agreement. If the coalition does the same in Syria, its operation there will become legitimate, and we won't have any reasons to say otherwise. But our partners don't hear our arguments. Instead, they say every day that we refuse to cooperate. There's only one thing we have refused to do, which is to join illegal operations. We took the same stand over 10 years ago when an anti-Iraqi campaign was planned. And we've been proved right. The only decision we can make now is to refuse to take part in illegal actions. We can't join them because there's no UN Security Council decision or consent of the Damascus government. Why do they keep talking about our refusal again and again? People in the countries whose officials keep saying this are developing a biased attitude to Russia.
I was asked by a Western TV network today if Russia is not apprehensive about the lack of coordination in Syria, where accidents involving Russian fighter planes and coalition aircraft are possible. They asked me if Russia feels responsible. We are doing more than just feeling responsible. About two months ago, Russia proposed a two-track solution to the Syrian crisis. It provides for joining the efforts of all those who are fighting ISIS on the ground and in the air and for exchanging information and intelligence. The second track calls for redoubling efforts towards a political settlement based on the Geneva Communique of June 30, 2012. We did it in full awareness of our responsibility, and we knew that accidents cannot be ruled out. The only safeguard against this is to coordinate efforts. We didn't make our proposal secretly or behind closed doors but publicly, during negotiations and through diplomatic channels. We called public attention to it, and we spoke about it repeatedly. So why are we being accused of provoking accidents?
And one more thing. During one of the interviews, I asked a British journalist if he knew that it was his country that had severed any military ties with Russia. So why is Russia being labelled irresponsible now? We are open to contact and willing to answer any question through diplomatic channels, including military diplomats. You just need to dial and ask your question. Or you can propose some other form of information exchange, which we may accept. It's a matter of coordination. You can't refuse any contact and at the same time accuse us of failure to coordinate our actions.
In particular, US Department of State Deputy Spokesperson Mark Toner said in a daily briefing that the US sees "Russia's decision to undertake military action in Syria" as "a strategic mistake." This sounds very strange, as there have been several high- and top-level meetings, our presidents have met, and the Russian Foreign Minister and US State Secretary talked during the UN General Assembly. If what we're doing is wrong, go ahead and suggest what we should do. We've made our proposals and we are open for dialogue and keep urging our partners to coordinate efforts.
Mr Toner also said the US hasn't seen Russia "live up to what it's saying, live up to its words with action, which is (...) to take the fight to ISIL." This means that they don't want to hear what we say publicly or through diplomatic channels, and that they are only trying to mould public opinion. They keep saying that Russia has been demonstrating unwillingness to join the coalition operations. As I said, we've put forth our stance, which is that we will only join a legitimate operation, for which there are prerequisites. Our stance is not based on our vision of the situation but on international law, which has become everyone's concern in the past few years.
Another aspect that looks not only strange to us but which we can't understand is the accusations of our alleged reluctance to share information. I want to say, for the nth time, that we have launched this counterterrorist operation at the request of the Damascus government, that counterterrorist operations are not conducted through briefings or news conferences, and that our counterterrorist operation has been launched to fight terrorists. If you have any other questions about these actions and operations, Russia is open for contact with our foreign colleagues. You can do this through the Russian Defence Ministry.
Answers to media questions
Question: Yesterday, the Turkish Foreign Ministry reported a second intrusion into Turkey's airspace by Russian aircraft. This time, it was a MIG-29. What is your comment?
Maria Zakharova: The Russian Defence Ministry has issued a statement. Our colleagues will be ready to answer concrete questions, if, in your opinion, the statement they made is not enough. The Defence Ministry provided an exhaustive commentary on this score. We at the Foreign Ministry have confirmed that the Turkish Ministry of Foreign Affairs summoned the Russian Ambassador in Ankara. This falls into our frame of reference and we reported this. Let me quote the Turkish statement: "There is no crisis in our relations." Judging by news agency reports, Ankara regards the incident as "settled". But as of this minute I have only agency information.
Question: I mean the second aircraft. What you said is about the Saturday incident involving a SU-30. I am referring to today's incident with a MIG-29. The Turkish Foreign Ministry summoned the Russian Ambassador in Ankara once again.
Maria Zakharova: If the available commentary is not enough, you'll be given additional explanations by the Russian Defence Ministry.
Question: How can you comment on a recent CNN report claiming, with reference to a Pentagon source, that Russia may start a land operation in Syria?
Maria Zakharova: This is yet another point that has been mooted during the last few days. It's a sordid affair because parallels are being drawn with the Afghan campaign. Everyone is aware that it is a black page in Russian history and knows full well that there will be no return to the past. Statements of this kind are made by those who have forgotten, or reject, or refuse to quote the statements by the Russian leaders, including the President, the Defence Minister, the Foreign Minister, and the Speaker of the Federation Council, who all said that there was no question of a land operation in Syria. All quotes are simply being ignored, but every time some anonymous Pentagon sources start commenting on the Russian Federation's intentions. First, if the Pentagon has an opinion, it would be honest to present it in public. Second, you can pick up the phone and call the Russian Defence Ministry, which will provide you with full information. Third, if the case in point is serious media - and we still hope that the CNN is a serious media outlet - and you are referring to Pentagon sources, please quote the Russian leaders, who declared that there was no question of a land operation.
Question: I found a Moscow Times issue in Moscow with a front-page headline reading "Russia Can't Sell Its Syria Propaganda." A Moscow-based newspaper is saying this! How can you comment? Is it possibly because Russia is unable to state its position that the West is criticising you?
Maria Zakharova: I am pleased that you've found an alternative media outlet in Moscow. When they say that there are no alternative views in Moscow, please show them this newspaper and confirm that the Russian press presents all points of view.
Question: Yesterday, a Ukrainian representative at the political subgroup said that a telephone conversation between the Normandy Four foreign ministers was scheduled for tomorrow. Is this true? Will Mr Lavrov take part?
Maria Zakharova: I have no information of this sort and I cannot confirm that this telephone conversation will take place. If it's been planned, we'll inform you.
Question: Russia criticised the Western air raids in Syria, saying that they wouldn't achieve their goal. Why is Russia's air operation in Syria any different? Sergey Lavrov said Russia's air strikes are aimed at ISIS, Jabhat al-Nusra and other terrorist groups. Since this is a military operation, do you have a list of groups you'll be attacking? Which are terrorist groups, according to Russia?
Maria Zakharova: Let's begin with your first question. It is for military experts to assess efficiency, although we said that ISIS positions have not declined, while the number of crimes and the scale has grown over a year of the coalition forces' operation there. The difference is fundamental but simple. As you said, if air strikes are ineffective, why is Russia delivering them? We've explained our position over and over. Maybe we haven't found the right words?
First, we began our operation there at the request of the Syrian government, and it's extremely important that we are coordinating our operation with the Syrian army, which is fighting ISIS on the ground. This is a fundamental issue. In our opinion, this is why the coalition has been ineffective. You can't fight ISIS in the air without coordinating your efforts with those who are fighting it on the ground. In Syria, it is the Syrian army who is doing this. This is what we've been trying to explain. I sincerely hope that if you quote what I said today, maybe it will become clear that we encourage joining efforts and coordinating operations with the Syrian army. We see that the Western coalition is unwilling to coordinate its operation with the Syrian government and the army that is fighting ISIS on the ground. From now on, the Syrian army's operations will be reinforced with air strikes. This is the fundamental difference. We have been trying to explain this to the coalition for a year. If this is a matter of pride, then I suggest you go against your pride, which is certainly difficult to do after four years of rejecting coordination. But the trouble has grown to an unacceptable level. You must see, at long last, that it's time to act. Had you joined forces with the Syrian army, your operations would have been effective. But you haven't, so we've joined the fight.
As for terrorists and lists, you know that terrorist groups are very fluid. There are big terrorist groups such as ISIS and Jabhat al-Nusra, and there are small groups. For example, the United States repeatedly bombed a group named Khorasan in 2014, and this hasn't raised any questions. Khorasan is not ISIS or Jabhat al-Nusra. I'm not sure if it is on the US list of terrorist organisations. Yet no one asked why the US bombed it.
There are many terrorist and extremist groups, apart from ISIS and Jabhat al-Nusra, but they keep mutating. This is partly because of the import and export of terrorists and their mobility: they can form a union one day and fight each other the next. They may coordinate their operations today and join the other side tomorrow. I'd like to quote Sergey Lavrov, who said: "If it looks like a terrorist, if it acts like a terrorist, if it walks like a terrorist, if it fights like a terrorist, it's a terrorist." The criteria are clear.
Question: What's Turkey's stance in the Syrian conflict? What are its interests and whom is it supporting?
Maria Zakharova: This is for Turkey to say.
Question: The Russian Aerospace Forces have joined the counterterrorist operation in Syria. It is believed that it's impossible to defeat ISIS with airstrikes alone. Will the Russian army fight ISIS in Syria? Is Russia willing to attract more countries in the fight against ISIS, for example China?
Maria Zakharova: Regarding the number of states that should fight ISIS, it is for each individual state to decide if it is ready, that it is combat ready for this, and if it thinks it possible to join the fight. What matters is that this issue doesn't concern any one region alone such the Middle East or Europe, let alone the United States, but that it's a common problem. So, if a county has the capability and potential resources for this fight, no obstacles should get in the way of joining the fight. The key issues in this situation are coordination and interaction.
As for sending Russian troops to Syria, we spoke about this at length today. As President Vladimir Putin, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, Defence Minister Sergey Shoigu and Federation Council Speaker Valentina Matviyenko said, this possibility is not being considered.
Question: A TV series called Occupied recently premiered in Norway. It's about Russia seizing the Scandinavian countries and Norwegian oil fields. Can you comment on series like this?
Maria Zakharova: Television shows are made for viewers. If there is some other subtext, then that is, of course, regrettable. I don't watch such shows.
Question: Two years ago there was no Islamic State in Syria. It turns out that members of the so-called moderate opposition abducted two high priests, ate a soldier's heart, seized many towns and caused damage to the Syrian people. Is that "moderate opposition"?
Maria Zakharova: Regarding the "moderate opposition" you mentioned and certain military units that, according to our US partners, are purportedly fighting against ISIS on the ground, I'd like once again to draw your attention to Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov's comment yesterday at a news conference following his meeting with the foreign minister of Laos. We actually asked our American colleagues who exactly they mean when they advise us to coordinate our efforts with some Free Syrian Army. Where are these people, and what are their "call signs"? We have yet to receive an answer to this question from Washington.
Question: How do you assess the role of the international coalition in Iraq, which seems to be working in conjunction with the Iraqi government and army?
Maria Zakharova: I can only repeat our previous comments to the effect that closer coordination will lead to greater effectiveness in the fight against ISIS. It is senseless and dangerous to refuse to cooperate with those who are willing and able to contribute to the fight against this terrorist organisation for some political motives, for considerations of political expediency.
Question: What are the military success stories?
Maria Zakharova: Regarding military success stories, I advise you to go to military experts.
Question: State Duma Defence Committee Chairman Vladimir Komoyedov has said that the competent agencies are blocking attempts by those wishing to participate in combat operations on both sides from getting to the Middle East. What kind of volunteers are those? Is there any information about this?
Maria Zakharova: No, there is no information. I understand that he has made new comments on the issue today. To reiterate what I said earlier, there is no question of any official campaign regarding participation in ground operations. There are no official plans to call up, sign up or recruit any volunteers. Apparently, this is some kind of misunderstanding. We have a large number of political figures, deputies, who have their own opinion and who have the right and obligation to express it, of course. We comment on our official position and it is unequivocal: There are no, and there can be no ground operations or any troops on the ground. Russian leadership has stated this in no uncertain terms.
Question: On the issue of volunteers, is it against Russian law if a person goes to Syria as a volunteer to fight under Bashar Assad? You've said forcefully that Russia will never repeat the Afghan experience. Could you say why you are so sure about that?
Maria Zakharova: There are clear-cut and unambiguous statements that I have repeatedly cited today.
Regarding Russian laws, I can give you references so as not to misquote anything on the possible participation of volunteers.
Question: Russia has been criticised precisely for the fact that it is collaborating with the authorities that have killed thousands of their fellow citizens and have thus become illegitimate. Can you comment on that?
Maria Zakharova: First of all, I'd like to say a few words about authorities becoming illegitimate. Can you cite any international document that speaks about the illegitimacy of these authorities - cite it or at least name it? Maybe there is some decision by an international agency that has ruled that these are illegitimate authorities? I understand that there is no such quote and no such document.
We have heard various world leaders on different levels speak about the illegitimacy of this government, supporting their allegations with what you've just said. The question is not that we have said it is the best government in the world, with wonderful and remarkable people. We can see very well what the regime has done wrong and we have repeatedly expressed our assessments. Importantly, these assessments were made not in the past few years, but four and even more years ago. We have a realistic and objective view of what is going on in Syria.
The question is about the consequences of the forcible overthrow of the regime - something that many Western leaders speak so fervently about, leaders, who, by the way, put their signatures on the Geneva Communique of June 30, 2012. This document says in no uncertain terms that any political changes in Syria should happen through national accord and that the Syrian people should decide their own fate. So, all statements to the effect that the regime should be bombed, removed or changed are at odds with the Geneva Communique, which was approved by, among others, the UN Security Council.
The question is what will happen if this scenario is forced. We've seen this course of events in Libya. We saw that the figure of Libyan President Muammar Gaddafi was first demonised and then he was eliminated and we saw what happened as a result.
If we go back in time and ask all of you, including the media, what scenario you would have preferred and what path you would have chosen - removing a leader that was certainly not an angel or preserving a country and a nation and preventing the state from becoming a "black terrorist hole" - I'm more than sure that each of you would have voted for the second scenario. We talk about this, and call for efforts to deal with ISIS, at the same time promoting the political process. However, it seems that the second part of our proposal doesn't exist; it's as if Russia did not initiate the Geneva Communique that speaks unequivocally about the political transfer of power, as if Russia is not working with Damascus and is not stimulating political change, reform and political transit, as if Russia has not provided the Moscow platform for dialogue between the opposition and official Damascus. It's as if there is none of that. This is also a question of objectivity. There is no getting away from this and we understand very well that this is a wide-ranging issue. However, if we are being pushed towards a Libyan scenario we will not be involved in that, because Syria will detonate with far greater repercussions than Libya.
|
|
#2
Rossiyskaya Gazeta
October 6, 2015
Fedor Lukyanov, chairman of the Council for Foreign and Defence Policy and Higher School of Economics scientific research establishment research professor: Opportunities and risks of Syrian campaign
Autumn 2015 marks yet another milestone in Russian political history. For the first time in over a quarter century the country is officially mounting a large-scale military operation abroad. The motive is not "politically correct" peacekeeping and the reasons are of an entirely strategic nature. Moscow is calling for an international coalition against terror, but making clear it is also prepared to act on its own.
An event that is also out of the ordinary for the world situation. Fifteen years have passed under the sign of the mounting activity of the USA and its allies in the strong-arm regulation [regulirovaniye] (I cannot bring myself to say settlement [uregulirovaniye]) of regional conflicts, primarily in the expanded Middle East zone. The results are a hornets' nest of diverse conflicts, the religious war that has erupted within the Muslim world, and the impotence of outside forces in the face of the processes they have aroused.
Given that Russia has directly got involved in Middle East politics and has rushed to the very centre of the Syrian vortex, a critical reappraisal of the lessons of past years is particularly important.
The motives which prompted the Kremlin to decide on the military operation far beyond its national borders are clear. The Islamic State group (ISIL), banned in our country, is an undoubted enemy of Russia. In addition Vladimir Putin's political intuition came into play. He has seized an opportunity to turn the situation around and has forced others to respond to his initiative rather than the other way round. The demonstration of Russia's substantially expanded military potential is not an aim, but it is a factor. As is the formation of a circle of important partners in the region from Teheran to Beirut.
The risks are no less obvious. Moscow is in fact taking part in a fierce civil war on one of the sides - Bashar al-Asad's - and in a religious war, in solidarity (albeit only as a policy of convenience) with the Muslim world's Shi'i minority against the Sunni majority. That requires the careful structuring of policy, or else the scale of the damage, including the domestic political damage, considering the religious features of Russian Muslims, could be great.
Relations with the West will only become more difficult. Delivering a serious blow to Islamists is in the interests of almost everyone. But since Russia's potential success is linked to the consolidation not only of its influence, but also of the positions of the Al-Asad regime, a negative attitude from the USA and its allies is guaranteed. So far it is hard to predict whether this will get to the point of directly opposing Moscow, and there is a hope that they have nonetheless drawn some lessons from past experience. However that may be, at best the leading players will maintain neutrality. However, a fierce informational war is inevitable and has already begun.
The main dilemma of the wars which the major countries are now waging is that there is no concept of "victory" in them. Military campaigns have been conducted almost solely with a view to regime change, and this has invariably been achieved - in Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya. They have been reluctant to declare openly that this is a victory and furthermore the destruction of an unwanted regime has never become a victory. Military success has forced the victor either to engage in state building (Afghanistan, Iraq) - which is expensive and produces no results - or else to withdraw rapidly (Libya), leaving behind the ruins of statehood. However that may be, the aim of any campaign in the end has become the search for an "exit strategy".
Russian participation in Syria does of course have at least one fundamental difference from the US and NATO actions since the early 2000s - Moscow is not seeking to replace an existing regime, but to preserve and strengthen it. Whatever people may say about Al-Asad's lost legitimacy and the absence of effective control over a large section of territory, collaboration with a regular army and administrative apparatus, albeit a substantially weakened one, ensures more opportunities than helping insurgents.
However, that does not do away with the question of an "exit strategy", particularly if matters do not proceed as planned. In the end, Americans are delivering strikes against ISIL from the Incirlik air base in Turkey, where they will remain in the event of an unfavourable turn on the military operations theatre, but Russian pilots are based directly in Syria.
Any war has a logic of its own which at any moment can overrule political expediency. And it is hard to jump out of a hole, and the Middle East experience of almost all the powers which have tried to win big games there confirms it.
In the last decade, when the USA had got bogged down in the Middle East, Russian commentators observed not without a little light gloating that we had at least one advantage. Russia could afford not to interfere in conflicts which did not directly affect it. The USA as world leader was obligated to do so. Since then the American appetite has been moderated and other forms of influence are coming into play in order to avoid direct involvement. On the other hand, Russia, having restored its military potential, has regained its taste for action too. That is better than the depressed awareness of their impotence which the Russian regime and society regularly experienced in previous years and it is better than the triumph of unipolarity, but the history of the Middle East teaches us one thing - nothing ever goes the way we had thought there. And that must not be forgotten.
|
|
#3
Kremlin.ru
October 9, 2015
Meeting with Head of RusHydro Nikolai Shulginov
Vladimir Putin met with Chairman of the Board of RusHydro Nikolai Shulginov to discuss the company's current activities and upcoming plans.
President of Russia Vladimir Putin: Mr Shulginov, let me start by congratulating you on your appointment to the post of director of one of Russia's biggest energy companies. In the hydroelectricity sector, this is probably one of the biggest companies in the world.
This all makes for a lot to manage, but you have long experience and have spent your entire life working in the energy sector. I hope that you will put your experience, skills and knowledge into taking the company further. This company holds a very important place in our country's energy sector. There are problems of course, but also clear positive moments and obvious achievements made over recent years. The company has big plans for the future, very ambitious development plans.
I therefore congratulate you on this appointment and look forward to seeing your effective and energetic work.
Chairman of the Board and General Director of RusHydro Nikolai Shulginov: Thank you. Let me take this opportunity to thank you for placing such great trust in me. I hope to live up to your expectations. Of course I am ready to put my utmost effort into this work, otherwise I would not have agreed to such a serious offer. You are right: the company has very ambitious and important tasks ahead, tasks of national importance. We will need to work hard.
As far as my first impressions go, we are working now on developing a debt refinancing mechanism for RAO Energy Systems of the East [Energeticheskiye Sistemy Vostoka], as you instructed. These debts on loans and borrowing were inherited from RAO UES. Part of the debt arose because of an economically unjustified pricing policy that made it impossible to cover the costs of investment and repair programmes. The pricing policy made it possible to cover only the costs of routine operation and emergency repairs. Now, substantial debts have accumulated creating a heavy burden.
To address this situation, as you instructed, we have developed a mechanism by which RusHydro will organise an additional share issue, VTB bank will buy these shares, and the money obtained will be used to pay off the debts. Our other task is to consolidate assets of RAO Energy Systems of the East.
This mechanism will be effective if the state authorities are willing to provide state guarantees for at least part of these debt liabilities of RusHydro and its subsidiaries. I hope that you will give this plan your support.
The draft order has been drawn up and is currently going through the approvals process in the Government before being submitted to you. It makes provisions for all of these aspects, including the very important matter of drafting programmes on growth of company value, which is essential for investors today.
Regarding our current tasks, the company and its branches are getting ready for the autumn-winter season.
As for our construction projects, in accordance with your instruction, we are working on four projects to build heating and power stations in Amur Region, Khabarovsk Territory, on Sakhalin, and in Yakutia. This work is underway and keeping us busy.
We have made progress in Blagoveshchensk, where we are building a second unit of the Blagoveshchensk heating and power station. I think that we will be able to start launch facility operation for sure this year. As for the rest, I expect it will be ready in 2016-2017. We have received some criticism regarding the construction project's organisation and delays incurred, but I think that here, we need to make a close examination of each individual case. We need dialogue in this respect and must take into account technically justified objective circumstances. In this way, we can find the right solutions and settle on our deadlines, after all, it probably would not be for the best to hand over facilities that are not yet fully complete just for the sake of bringing forward the deadlines.
Vladimir Putin: It would not be good at all.
Nikolai Shulginov: Yes, on the contrary, it would create dangers and risks for the energy system's proper operation.
Overall, RusHydro's task is to guarantee facilities' reliable operation and safety. As we know, failure to comply with the rules leads to serious accidents and technological disasters. We know this well and this is why we are carrying out our campaign [to ensure safety and reliability] and are implementing our innovation and modernisation programmes. We need to step up this work and we will do this.
Regarding other construction projects, projects scheduled for this year, we completed work on the 100-MW Gotsalinskaya hydroelectric power station in Daghestan on October 1.
I have also already had the chance to fly with Mr Deripaska [general director of RUSAL] to the Boguchansky plant. This [the Boguchanskoye Energy and Metals Complex] is probably the first such private-public partnership. We switched on the Boguchanskaya heating and power station in December. You did a remote launch of operations at the first power generators. I know that Oleg Deripaska invited you, and we, as equal partners in this project, also invite you to the plant's opening in October, if your schedule allows.
Vladimir Putin: Good, thank you.
|
|
#4
Kremlin.ru
October 8, 2015
Meeting with Moscow State University Rector Viktor Sadovnichy
Viktor Sadovnichy briefed the President on the implementation of the Moscow State University development programme, particularly plans to build the Vorobyovy Gory science and technology cluster.
President of Russia Vladimir Putin: How are you, Mr Sadovnichy?
Moscow State University Rector Viktor Sadovnichy: Fine, thank you. And thank you for seeing me and for the meeting with the teachers. I headed Russia's Teacher of the Year competition and I worried for every teacher. It was a pleasure to see that you seemed to have liked them, while they were full of admiration for you. Thank you for the meeting.
Vladimir Putin: Those are talented people, enthusiastic about their profession.
Viktor Sadovnichy: Enthusiastic and very strong competitors this year: all 15 laureates and the five winners, and the absolute winner as well. They were all going head-to-head, but the absolute winner got a little more points and came in first under the competition rules.
A couple of words about the university. Generally, we are doing quite well. I would like to take up the initial development of the technology cluster. Everything is ready, we had a public review with some 300,000 Muscovites taking part in the discussion. A vast majority supported the development of Moscow State University and the adjacent territories. We are ready to create the first, as I believe, technology cluster in this country under a classical university on these new principles.
We would like to bring the university potential, which is 15,000 doctors of science, 5,000 post-graduate students and 50,000 students, to these laboratories, to this territory and to start, in a partnership with corporations, with businesses, creating new technologies and new products, annually growing through the enormous potential of Moscow State University and the people who would like to and wish to work in this cluster.
This is a vast territory of over 100 hectares practically in the centre of Moscow. We have studied all the issues dealing with the start of construction, now that the public hearings are over and the Moscow Government has issued the appropriate document, so now we are beginning design. I would like to ask you to support this project, so we could begin work on design and construction.
I hope that in four or five years we will create a unique complex, a space, a technology cluster built on new principles. This is not just another techno park; this is about the university's potential, university's ideas, about the needs of corporations, joint laboratories and the creation of unique unprecedented products. This is the first issue.
Mr President, there is one more matter I would like to raise. We have set up a medical centre, also the first of its kind at a classical university. In the past, departments of medicine were turned into medical schools of higher learning, thus back in the 1930s the medical department of Moscow State University became what we now know as the Sechenov First Moscow Medical University.
We did not teach medicine, but in 1992 I managed to get the department back, and later we built a unique medical centre - 50,000 square metres, 13 operating theatres, a very serious centre with all the latest equipment. We began working and obtained a license, but it did not become part of the healthcare system, because medical schools are subordinate to the Healthcare Ministry, while we have nothing to do with it.
My second request, Mr President, is for you to support this project and instruct the ministries to resolve the situation in terms of this medical centre's status.
Vladimir Putin: What would you like?
Viktor Sadovnichy: I would like it to become part of Russia's healthcare system. Currently, it is merely educational.
Vladimir Putin: We need to talk to the Healthcare Ministry and find a format that would make it possible to retain it within the university, within the higher education system, but at the same time establish its connection to the Healthcare Ministry. Is that the goal?
Viktor Sadovnichy: Yes, that is it.
Vladimir Putin: Let us consider it with our colleagues.
Viktor Sadovnichy: Some more information, Mr President.
In December, we are to launch the Lomonosov satellite. This was your directive and we have done everything. The satellite is ready, and we would like to launch it in December from the Vostochny Space Launch Centre. All the preparatory work is underway. I am in constant contact with the Federal Space Agency (Roscosmos) and the Defence Ministry, which helps us with assigning frequencies and with the delivery of this heavy satellite - it's 600 kilogrammes.
We hope that your support and instructions, along with the preparations that are already underway, will make it possible to launch the unique Lomonosov research satellite. It will carry a lot of equipment made at Moscow University.
Vladimir Putin: You need to agree with Roscosmos on the dates.
Viktor Sadovnichy: We know there may be certain delays, but we are ready to launch in December.
Vladimir Putin: You need to develop a system of communications and power supply. These are purely technical matters; however, the most important thing is that everything is done with good quality - this is what matters most.
Viktor Sadovnichy: Mr President, one more thing - another one of our successes: we have built an observatory in the Caucasus, in Karachayevo-Circassia. This is the third largest mirror in Russia, and the computerisation quality is the highest. We are already obtaining unique results. It is like a town: the telescope and the buildings take up a vast territory. Besides, this is a very good place for night viewings - you can see the stars very well.
Overall, this has all been reflected in the rankings and we keep improving our positions. There is hardly a ranking system that does not place us in the top ten, hundred or 50. Moreover, the latest rankings place us second or third in Europe, and about 20-24th in the world. Such is the success of Moscow State University even when rated by those who have a slightly different approach to organising education.
Vladimir Putin: So, overall you assess the development of your university as positive and meeting current requirements.
Viktor Sadovnichy: This is thanks to you, because the instructions coming from the Board of Trustees and your directives, and the opportunity to meet with you, I believe, all create conditions for even better work. We promise that. I believe Moscow State University should keep moving up step by step. We will try not to let you down, Mr President.
Vladimir Putin: Good. Best of luck to you.
Viktor Sadovnichy: Thank you.
|
|
#5
Kremlin.ru
October 8, 2015
Meeting with winners of Teacher of the Year national competition
Vladimir Putin met with the winners of the Teacher of the Year national competition. This year 78 teachers from all of Russia's federal districts took part in the competition's final stage.
The Teacher of the Year national competition was established in 1992.
After the meeting at the Sirius educational centre, the President spoke with the centre's students and attended a presentation of the animated film Savva. The Heart of the Warrior.
The script for the film was written by American author Gregory Poirier; the film was directed by Russian producer and composer Maxim Fadeyev. The work took seven years and involved professionals from several countries. The animated film created in Russian and English will be released in Great Britain, Korea, China, Italy, Australia, the United States, Eastern Europe, South America and the Middle East.
President of Russia Vladimir Putin: Good afternoon, friends.
I would like to begin by congratulating you on the recent Teacher's Day and, of course, on your victory in such a prestigious competition as Russia's Teacher of the Year 2015.
As you may know, we hold such meetings regularly, and I am especially pleased that today we have gathered at Sirius - a centre for training gifted children. Of course, we should think and are thinking (as I hope you can see) about the development of the education system. This is reflected primarily in the resources allocated by the state for these purposes.
Compared to 2005, our spending on general education has grown fourfold, amounting to 1.4 trillion rubles in last year's consolidated budget. This is a significant amount.
The conditions you and your colleagues work in are very important. In 2006, some 40 percent or even less of educational establishments met all the requirements, whereas now their share has gone up to 90 percent.
Regarding teachers' salaries. You know this better than I do: without a proper salary, there is no way we can raise the prestige of a teacher, of the profession in general, which is undoubtedly the most important one in any society, including ours.
If we take 2005 again, the average salary was 6,500 rubles, which accounted for 77 percent of the national average. Now, over the past year we have created a situation when the average salary of a schoolteacher is 8 percent higher than the national average, amounting to 35,000 rubles.
You and I know very well that there is a significant difference between the regions - I am referring to the average figure, but nevertheless, it exceeds the national average by 8 percent. I know that there is never enough money, and this should probably not be the limit, but these are the objective indicators.
Internet access is one of such objective indicators that is very important if we bear in mind that the main thing today is not simply to pass on knowledge, though this is very important, but to teach people to learn; we often say this now, meaning that a school classroom is not the only source of knowledge. So, in 2005, 3.7 percent of all the schools in the country had internet access. Today internet is available at 90-95 percent of all schools. This is a truly impressive indicator.
There are things that did not even exist before. Thus, rural schools never had school buses. Now 98 percent of all rural schools have the opportunity to use this service. However, there are other positive things in the development of school education.
At the same time, naturally, any big system has its problems and things that need to be done additionally: we need to develop the system of education and help our teaching corps.
Let us consider this, especially now that we have gathered at such an unusual educational establishment as the centre for the support of talented children. We have many of them: very many people who can and want to make great strides in their profession and take part in the affairs of the country. Undoubtedly, you can do a lot to support these kids in their development in these areas.
One more thing I would like to say in my opening remarks: today is the birthday of one of our colleagues, Sergei Kocherezhko. Please accept my best wishes.
This is all I wanted to say by way of an opening.
|
|
#6
Kremlin.ru
October 7, 2015
Meeting with Defence Minister Sergei Shoigu
Vladimir Putin had a working meeting with Defence Minister Sergei Shoigu. Mr Shoigu briefed the President on the Russian Aerospace Forces' operation in Syria.
The Russian Aerospace Forces are currently carrying out missions to support Syrian government troops in combatting terrorists and are launching airstrikes against the Islamic State's positions in Syria.
Defence Minister Sergei Shoigu: Mr President, acting on your decision, since the 30th, we have been carrying out missions to strike ISIS, Jabhat al-Nusra, and other terrorist groups present on Syrian territory. Since September 30, we have conducted strikes against 112 targets. We are increasing our strikes' intensiveness. Our various intelligence and reconnaissance forces have been working intensively over these last two days and have identified a large number of ISIS targets: command posts, ammunition depots, military hardware, and training camps for their fighters. Vessels from our Caspian Fleet joined our aviation in attacking these targets this morning.
Four warships launched 26 Kalibr cruise missiles against 11 targets. Our target monitoring data shows that all targets were destroyed and civilian facilities were not damaged in the strikes. These strikes' results demonstrate the high effectiveness of our missiles launched from a big distance of nearly 1,500 kilometres.
This morning, 23 attack aircraft also continued their strikes against insurgent positions. Since September 30, we have destroyed 19 command posts, 12 ammunition depots, 71 pieces of military hardware, and six explosives production workshops producing explosives for car bombs and so on. We are continuing our operations according to plan.
President of Russia Vladimir Putin: Mr Shoigu, we know how complicated antiterrorist operations of this kind are. It is still too early to assess the results, but what has been accomplished so far is certainly very positive. The Defence Ministry's work overall, and the work of the experts at General Staff and our officers and service personnel in the field deserve a high assessment. Special thanks should go to the pilots at work in Syria, of course, and as this experience with using high-precision weapons shows, to the Caspian Fleet seamen.
The fact that these strikes were carried out using high-precision weapons launched from the Caspian Sea's waters, around 1,500 kilometres away, and all of the planned targets were destroyed is evidence of our defence industry's good preparation and the service personnel's good professional skills.
At the same time, we realise that conflicts of this kind must end in a political settlement. I discussed this matter just this morning with the Russian Foreign Minister. During my recent visit to Paris, the President of France, Mr Hollande, voiced an interesting idea that he thought is worth a try, namely, to have President Assad's government troops join forces with the Free Syrian Army. True, we do not know yet where this army is and who heads it, but if we take the view that these people are part of the healthy opposition, if it were possible to have them join in the fight against terrorist organisations such as ISIS, Jabhat al-Nusra and others, this would help pave the way to a future political settlement in Syria.
The Foreign Ministry will continue these efforts, given that we are in contact with practically all of the opposition forces, but I ask you too to support the Foreign Ministry's efforts through your partnership channels. That is my first point.
Second, we must continue working with our foreign partners, because without their participation, without the participation of Saudi Arabia, Turkey, the United States, Iran, Iraq and other neighbouring countries, this work has little chance of being organised as it should.
In this respect, I have a question: What is the situation with work between our defence experts and their US and Turkish partners to coordinate things or at least keep each other informed?
Sergei Shoigu: We have organised contact with our Turkish partners. We now have direct communication between the Turkish army's central command post and our National Defence Control Centre to organise our operations along the Turkish border so as to avoid incidents involving violation of airspace.
We held a videoconference with our American colleagues and began examining matters regarding ways to ensure our joint work and security in this territory. We have examined the document the Pentagon sent us, and today will discuss the fact that we are ready to approve this document and start work accordingly.
Next, we invited all of the military attaches yesterday and proposed to them, our colleagues, all who are involved in this work in one way or another, to provide us information on targets, if they have such information of course, so that we can work more effectively against ISIS' camps and units.
We are waiting for our colleagues' answers today and we hope they will inform us of the targets they may have. Of course, we should take further steps to organise this work and continue it in systemic fashion because no matter how we look at the situation, without each other's support it will not be possible to complete this task. Past experience shows this to be the case. Our colleagues have been working on these tasks over the last year, but sadly, we have yet to see visible results.
Vladimir Putin: It is fair enough if they say they know the situation better because they have been conducting operations in this territory (on an unlawful basis, as I have said) for more than a year now, but if they are there and know the situation better, let them share with us information on the targets they have identified over this time, and we will work them through.
As for our next steps, as we agreed, it will be synchronised with the Syrian army's operations on the ground. Our Aerospace Forces will provide effective support for the Syrian army's offensive.
Sergei Shoigu: Mr President, this work has been planned. We briefed you on the first plans and stages and will keep you updated on the missions' results.
Vladimir Putin: Good.
|
|
#7
Government.ru
October 3, 2015
Dmitry Medvedev's interview with Rossiya 1 TV Channel
Dmitry Medvedev gave an interview to Sergei Brilev, host of the Vesti v Subbotu (Saturday News) programme.
Excerpts from Dmitry Medvedev's interview:
Sergei Brilev: There is certainly the Syrian direction. I would like to ask you about the economic underpinnings of the unfolding events. Because when Russian air force strikes against Syrian targets were launched, many ideas and conjectures emerged as to what lies behind it. One such theory is that Russia is defending not just international law and Syria's secular regime but also its own weapons market. Another hypothesis I read recently says that if Russia does not protect Assad, then Qatar will be able to lay a gas pipeline to the Mediterranean and overshadow Russian gas supplies to Europe. In part, Russia is conducting the operation for those reasons.
Dmitry Medvedev: A wonderful conspiracy theory.
Sergei Brilev: That's right, a conspiracy theory. But is there an economic motive behind Russian air force strikes against terrorist targets in Syria?
Dmitry Medvedev: The President gave a comprehensive account of the reasons for this decision. He explained what we are defending in this case. And it is us that we are defending: we are defending the people of Russia from the terrorist threat. Because it is better to do it abroad than to fight terrorism inside the country. That is why I can neither add nor take away anything from his account; it is exhaustive and absolutely accurate. Regarding the economic aspect, you see, we have economic relations with Syria and with Arab countries, but, how could I put it plainly... We have no crucial economic interests in Syria. We do sell weapons there but the amounts involved are not huge; several hundred million US dollars, maybe. And I am sure you know that the total portfolio of our [defence] contracts amounts to 15 billion US dollars. In other words, we do not have any extraordinary economic interests. This is why all that talk about keeping someone away from somewhere, which pipeline to annihilate, who to back where...
Sergei Brilev: Oh yes, Russian pilots are an armed unit of Russian oil and gas companies...
Dmitry Medvedev: Yes, all that is just a conspiracy theory or propaganda that is naturally being used in such a situation by a number of countries.
Sergei Brilev: The last thing I want to ask you. Just before the interview somebody asked me: You will probably have a question about Syria and additional expenses for the Russian budget? So, are there any extra expenses in Syria now?
Dmitry Medvedev: The Army of the Russian Federation has been properly provided for in the past years. Which makes it possible, as you know, to pay servicemen good salaries and, on the other hand, to re-arm the army. Our military-industrial complex is doing fairly well now, and our army is becoming ever more up-to-date. Those budget expenses, those items in the budget will suffice for special military missions, including the mission which is currently underway in Syria.
Sergei Brilev: Thank you, Mr Medvedev.
|
|
#8
Government.ru
October 3, 2015
Meeting of the Government Commission on Import Substitution
Sochi, Krasnodar Territory
Russian regions' role in import substitution.
Extract from Dmitry Medvedev's remarks:
Around 40 regional plans on import substitution have been approved so far. All key agencies, particularly the Industry and Trade, Agriculture and Economic Development ministries, must assist the regions in the development and implementation of import substitution plans.
A number of measures, both federal and regional, have been approved this year to support industry. We are subsidising loans and leasing payments, providing tax cuts and state guarantees, and reducing rental rates.
One of the ways to support industry is to develop industrial infrastructure and set up special areas for investors to set up production. There are some good examples of such areas in the Kaliningrad, Kaluga and Leningrad regions.
Legislation on industrial production has also been updated. Here we can cite the well-known law On Industrial Policy, and we also amended the law On Procurement of Goods, Works and Services for State Needs by Certain Types of Legal Entities. The latter amendments help regulate procurement by state companies so that they acquire predominantly Russian products.
It is not our goal to create artificial obstacles in trade. We are working to ensure that there are cutting edge high-tech enterprises in Russia, both industrial and agricultural, and that their production is in demand, both domestically and, if possible, abroad. For that we need an efficient non-oil-and-gas export system. A law was passed in July to establish as part of Vnesheconombank a Russian Export Centre that will operate as a one-stop centre to assist enterprises in entering new markets.
|
|
#9
Government.ru
October 2, 2015
International Investment Forum Sochi-2015
Sochi, Krasnodar Territory
The forum's main topics were fulfilling Russia's export potential, implementing import-substitution programmes, developing its financial market and transforming its economic structure.
Dmitry Medvedev's address at a plenary session:
Even when relations between countries are going through a rough patch, business should be above politics, bringing countries and markets closer instead of separating them. In the end of the day, business-to-business contacts create much stronger ties than any kind of politics.
The year 2015 turned out to be very rich in events and important for Russia. The global economy is also going through many things. Growth rates around the world are still modest, falling slightly below expert expectations in the United States. The EU economy has posted zero growth. Although the threat of Greece's withdrawal from the European Union has somewhat subsided, this does not mean that the Greek issue has been solved. In addition, Europe has yet to come up with a common policy regarding hundreds of thousands of illegal migrants from the Middle East and North Africa who are fleeing war and poverty. China has challenges of its own related to the declining growth rates, slowing foreign trade and the value of the renminbi.
All in all, all these factors taken together exert a downward pressure on stock indexes around the world and have led to the depreciation of a number of national currencies, proving once again how promptly the global economy is responding to issues in the developing markets. The Russian economy, just as in any other country, is both hostage to and beneficiary of globalisation. There is no way Russia can ignore, in splendid isolation, global trends, focusing exclusively on its own vision for the future.
Russia and the whole world are currently going through a rough patch. The price of oil has nosedived, the rouble has sharply depreciated, and in the last eighteen months the Russian economy has had to stand up to unprecedented sanctions pressure from the West. We live and work while facing harsh restrictions in terms of access to foreign capital markets. We can't access technologies in many areas either.
However, while the price of oil is by definition hard to predict, we realised from the start what will be the cost of the political decisions we had made. We were fully aware of the fact that a number of countries, above all in the West, will seek to put economic and political pressure on us, so our choice to follow along this path was deliberate. Today, it is also clear that the reasons behind attempts to drag all conflicts of the past century into the 21st century run much deeper than it might seem, underpinned by attempts to restrain Russia's involvement in the creation of a new world economic order. In an environment like this, with external pressure, global economic uncertainty and low oil prices, this crisis is not just ordinary turmoil. In fact, we are witnessing the emergence of a new reality. I'm talking about basic economic and social indicators that will determine the state of the global economy for the decades to come.
This is a serious and complex change, but it offers many development opportunities. We are working jointly with the expert community on an extended strategy of socioeconomic development, the so-called Strategy 2030, in order to use these opportunities to the best of our abilities. The new technological order is only in the making in the world, many new markets are rising, and it's imperative that we join the process at this stage. Russia must discard the catch-up development model once and for all. A survival strategy is not enough, as in this case we'll lag behind, and this time we won't catch up with the more robust economies. We know that these are ambitious goals that are difficult to achieve, but goals must be ambitious, especially considering the structural deficiencies that developed in Russia over decades. So the Government is now focused on adjusting economic imbalances and, of course, on combating crisis elements.
Given the low oil prices, which are likely to remain low for a long time, we must reorient the economy from its reliance on raw materials to other growth points without delay. For the first time in years, our oil and gas revenue is below 50 percent of overall revenues. This is a result of the low mineral prices and a flexible exchange policy. But we must reinforce this trend.
We must not sit out the "oil ice age", this pause in the growth of oil prices. Even when oil prices resume their growth, which is bound to happen due to the cyclical nature of this process, they must not be seen again as the main source of budgetary revenue. As before, we should invest the oil revenue in sovereign wealth funds. The new conditions are forcing the Government to review its attitude to many aspects of its work, instruments and regulatory methods, which can help us attain our goals.
I'd like to speak in more detail about four vital elements, namely investment activity, import substitution, the quality of state governance and the budgetary policy. These are the areas where we must focus our attention.
First, investment activity, especially in the real sector: stimulating investment activity is of exceptional importance. Money is a resource, just like oil or metals. So whoever wants to attract investors must offer appealing and beneficial terms.
It is clear that import substitution is among the priorities for the Government, but its possibilities and resources are not endless. Social programmes, the defence sector and other important areas all require attention and financial resources from the Government. For this reason, it is important to put private capital first. This way, the role of the Government would become clearer. Our aim is to remove barriers that prevent the market from benefiting from these funds.
Russia is not the only country to suffer from investors' poor appetite. Unfortunately it is true that the interest rate in Russia is quite high, which makes it harder to take out a loan. However, if Western experience is any guide, with low interest rates investment often remains at the same level or increases only slightly. Business apathy of this kind is to a large extent due to global economic uncertainty. In Russia, this is not just about economic risks, but also a number of other aspects - political, legal, and psychological - when what matters are trust and protection of private undertakings. Our response to the external economic pressure should consist of not just maintaining economic freedoms by expanding them to a maximum extent as a foundation of the modern economic growth model.
We have recently established a number of institutions and mechanisms for attracting private investment into the economy. First, the Government promotes public-private partnerships and concessions by enacting legislation to this effect. We are currently working on adding public-private initiatives to government and regional programmes. Laws have been adopted enabling businesses to expand their footprint in programmes aimed at creating and upgrading the social sector, housing and utilities, transport, communications and the energy sector.
The Industry Development Fund is up and running and provides pre-investment project funding. So far, 35 projects have been approved for a total amount of 12.5 billion roubles. The fund will operate as a one-stop-shop in providing government support to industrial enterprises.
Subsidies are being allocated from the federal budget to cover R&D costs and part of interest rate payments.
The Government has streamlined a number of procedures and has made financial instruments available to a wider range of investors. This has led to higher confidence in Russian assets. For example, in July Russia has been recognised as one of the most attractive BRICS countries for investors, and in the World Economic Forum's Global Competitiveness Report, released this week, Russia moved up eight positions to 45th place, which means that there are improvements, an upward, rather than downward, trend.
By the end 2015 we are expected to implement roadmaps of the National Entrepreneurial Initiative. Overall, business regulations will be improved in 11 areas that the business community had selected as the most troubled ones. Now we must think about carrying on with this effort.
We have established a corporation to promote the development of small and medium-size enterprises (SME). It is expected to serve as a single entry point for participating in programmes for SMEs, while also managing funding and borrowings to support such companies. Today, I appointed Alexander Braverman to lead this corporation.
The fourth antimonopoly package has been adopted. About this antimonopoly package. The novelties here include a more precise definition of mala fide competition. They also simplify the bidding procedure for the use of state property (it will be converted to electronic format), and lay the foundations for establishing collegial bodies as part of the Antimonopoly Service, which will provide explanations on the application of competition law and deal with complaints from businesses about the decisions and orders of local antitrust authorities. Amendments have been drafted to the Federal Law on Protection of Competition to eliminate excessive antimonopoly control of companies that do not have significant market share. These amendments will cut the list of reasons for unscheduled inspections of small businesses.
Improvement of the investment climate is one of the key performance indicators for regional leaders.
The federal Government has shared with the regions certain powers required to shape the local business climate. In Russia, unfortunately, clear-cut rules do not guarantee effective state management, which is largely determined by the leader who enforces these rules.
In early September, we approved a standard for competition development in the regions, in addition to the region's investment attractiveness, which is another standard aimed at encouraging competition. A national rating should help evaluate this work.
We have introduced a lot of tools that provide access to investment in specific regions, such as special economic zones, industrial and technology parks. Major investors - both Russian and foreign, including well-known international brands - are working there both in conventional and innovative industries.
It is obvious that each region needs to discover its own model, its own individual success formula, be it Kaliningrad or the North Caucasus, Crimea, the Arctic or the Far East. Now we have developed a success formula for the Far East - it is now referred to as a priority development area. We provide significant incentives there, such as a simplified procedure for launching new production facilities, administrative support and preferential tax treatment.
Nine priority development areas (PDAs) have been established in the Far East with nearly 21 billion roubles allocated by the Government for that purpose.
The PDA privileges will initially be extended to single-industry towns.
We are currently discussing the feasibility of adopting a different way of balancing the two approaches to interacting with the regions - the territorial principle and the by-industry approach. We are considering including special sections with specific activities and targets for individual regions in government and industry programmes; we are also thinking about federal programmes to be linked to investment plans, including those worked out by companies co-owned by the state. For now, we are only considering this for the Caucasus and the Far East.
Import substitution is an essential element of structural reform. It is competitive Russian businesses that make the economy more balanced and more resilient to crises. To coordinate the import substitution work, a Government commission has been established, which I head.
The return of Russian goods to our market is the first step here. Our far-reaching objective is, of course, to ensure the output of competitive domestic products, so that they would be marketed both in Russia and beyond.
The import substitution policy does not imply Russia's isolation or building some artificial barriers; it is aimed at making Russian non-commodity products competitive on global markets. Therefore, to boost exports, we have established the Russian export hub, which provides one-stop-shop government support for exporters. Russia's Eximbank has started off a programme to subsidise interest rates on export credits. EXIAR has been allowed to fully cover certain export-oriented projects.
We will continue helping local manufacturers next year. Import substitution has grown from a political issue into specific investment projects in just over a year.
Companies that participate in import substitution projects receive federal subsidies to replenish working capital. A project financing programme has been launched, with 31 projects selected with a total funding of nearly 285 billion roubles. We have also recapitalised Russian banks by 1 trillion roubles, so that they would be able to finance our industries.
The changing rate of the rouble, our so-called countersanctions have given Russian companies certain advantages. They include the reduction of rouble denominated costs and a certain optimisation of the competitive field. As a result, we have begun to export more non-ferrous metals, fertiliser, oil products and aircraft.
However, this cost gain, which literally descended on our companies from the skies, will not last forever - two or three years at the most. After all, an economic crisis is the best possible auditor for inefficient companies.
There is no question about total import substitution. The complete disappearance of imported goods from our markets might be giving an extra chance to Russian manufacturers, but we cannot create a sterile environment for them. Here, we will continue to be guided by common sense and public interest. Our goods and our products that substitute imports should not be more expensive than their foreign analogues and of course they should be of comparable quality.
First of all, we need to change the quality of state oversight. We have a huge number of supervisory and control agencies. They are not only beyond our means but they are simply an impediment. We have already taken the first steps towards optimisation. There are a number of directives, both from the President and the Government. There are a number of decisions, among others, on merging a number of agencies, including the Federal Antimonopoly Service and the Tariffs Service.
The state's economic activity should be qualitatively different. Apart from the fact that the state in our country represents government institutions, it is also a major economic player. By virtue of its dominant position today, the state should serve as a national model of effectiveness. The situation here is far from ideal.
Together with companies, the Government has adopted long-term development programmes with certain mechanisms of chief executives' personal responsibility, as well as investment programmes that are reviewed by the Government's Expert Council and after their approval, are subject to an independent technological and price auditing procedure.
Unified treasuries have been established at all important companies and major state companies to ensure a more effective use of financial resources. The number of non-core assets is also being gradually reduced.
We must improve the work of government authorities. There are three key requirements. First, they must be size effective, and we have been working towards this end by reducing the number of officials. We will most likely take additional decisions on this issue soon. Second, they must be efficient, which calls for reviewing the system of setting goals for ministries and agencies and assessing their performance. And third, the operation of government authorities must be transparent, which brings us to the special role of public control.
At this time, the budgetary policy can only become more austere. This is the underlying principle of the budget for next year, which we have almost finished drafting.
International commitments, defence and security, agriculture and, of course, social obligations are protected budget items.
As for the rest, we must streamline expenditures by slashing ineffective spending. We have reduced spending in a number of spheres by 10 percent or more.
We will allocate investment resources only to vital infrastructure projects.
Balancing the budget is a standing requirement. Deficit must not exceed three percent, and inflation must not be above the target figures.
The goal of our budgetary policy is not just to cut spending per se, but to ensure macroeconomic stability. This alone will enable us to honour our pledge to business not to increase taxes.
Attention to regional and local budgets must be increased. Like the federal authorities, the regional governments have approved and are implementing antirecession plans, cutting ineffective spending and cancelling government acquisitions that are not of priority significance. In order to reduce the regions' debts, we are substituting expensive market loans with cheaper budgetary loans. This year, we have increased the volume of these loans to 310 billion roubles, or double the planned figure.
Scientist Alexander Graham Bell used to say "When one door closes, another opens; but we often look so long and so regretfully upon the closed door that we do not see the one which has opened for us." There is a door into a new reality, and the quality of this new reality depends on us and us alone, on how all of us work.
|
|
#10
Russia Beyond the Headlines
www.rbth.ru
October 8, 2015
Sochi forum: Sanctions curbing foreign investment in innovation in Russia
Participants of the recent International Investment Forum in Sochi say that U.S. and EU sanctions on Russia are impeding international investment in innovative start-ups, with foreign companies not aware of what they can do under the new conditions. Meanwhile, according to Russian observers, several new innovative clusters may be created in Russia, including in Sochi.
Alexei Lossan, RBTH
The sanctions imposed by the United States and the European Union on Russia over its role in the Ukraine conflict are hindering international investment in innovative start-ups, according to a spokesman for Russia's Skolkovo Foundation science and tech development center.
Speaking at the 2015 International Investment Forum in Sochi on Russia's Black Sea coast, which finished on Oct. 4, Pekka Viljakainen, advisor to the Skolkovo Foundation's president on the startup environment, said that the "sanctions are written in such an unclear way that many investors do not know whether they can buy a ticket to Russia, and certainly are not sure whether they are allowed to invest in Russian projects."
"The biggest problem in connection with the sanctions is that potential investors in Europe and the U.S. do not know what they can and what they cannot do in Russia. Therefore, it is important to confirm that the investment in start-ups does not fall under sanctions," he said at a session organized with the support of the Open Innovation forum.
Creating the conditions for development
According to Oleg Fomichev, deputy minister of Economic Development of Russia, innovation in Russia is mostly developing in specially created clusters - industrial parks, business incubators or special economic zones.
In the future, Fomichev said, such clusters - of which there are 26 at present - may be created in other regions of the country, for example, in the Krasnodar Region in the south, where Sochi is located. Thanks to the subtropical climate, the former capital of the Olympic Games could become the center of Russia's "Silicon Valley," he said.
However, according to Minister of Communications Nikolai Nikiforov, out of 85 Russian regions, only about 20 are engaged in innovation.
"First and foremost, it is a question of attracting talented businessmen and engineers, creating the institutional conditions for business development," he said.
In particular, a program for the construction of industrial parks in the field of innovative technologies was completed in Russia in 2014, and a total of 750 residents are already working at such sites.
According to Nikiforov, it is necessary to meet three conditions for the development of innovation - the creation of a comfortable environment, the availability of human capital and interest in research & development on the part of state-owned companies.
"In Russia, the share of state presence in the economy is large, and where state-owned companies invest in innovation, life will be going swimmingly," said Nikiforov.
Interaction with the global community is a key factor
According to Alexei Komissarov, head of the Industry Development Fund, innovation could become a mechanism for attracting investments in a specific region.
"In an era of global technological revolution, technologies have become a stronger currency than money," he said.
However, according to Viljakainen, attracting investment is important, but not the only factor for the development of innovation.
"If all issues were resolved by money, Saudi Arabia would be the most innovative country in the world, but to date no one uses any product from Saudi Arabia except oil," he said.
Viljakainen considers the interaction of startups with the international community as a key factor for the development of innovation.
"There are virtually no foreigners among the founders of the companies that are residents of Skolkovo - as a result, Russian developers do not know how to commercialize their product," he said.
According to him, "every startup should focus on the world market, just when it is at an early stage of development."
|
|
#11
Government.ru
September 28, 2015
International online conference marking Skolkovo's fifth anniversary
Dmitry Medvedev has taken part in the international online conference Russian Agenda in Technological Revolution.
From Dmitry Medvedev's remarks at the international online conference marking Skolkovo's fifth anniversary:
The Skolkovo concept
When we started discussing the idea of creating a centre like Skolkovo, we considered how and where to do it. There are many research centres in Russia, and using one of them as a starting point could have been an option. Another option was to engage with a major company or several companies. However, we made a deliberate choice to launch a greenfield project in order to create the infrastructure from the ground up and build a cutting-edge innovation centre. There were no similar facilities in Russia at that time. Comparing Skolkovo to Silicon Valley or some other places is simplistic since Russia is special in its own way; it has its own mentality, academic and business traditions. We thought that it would make sense to build this facility not far from Moscow under the private-public partnership model with a substantial amount of public, but also private, investment. I think that this approach has lived up to expectations.
We need this concentrated effort. This project is about building intellectual capacity, accumulating funding and management solutions in one place. It is for this reason that the Skolkovo project was created. It required major investment, but I'm confident that it was worth it. In every way, this will be a world-class innovation centre.
Start-ups
There are currently about 1,000 start-ups at Skolkovo, and their number will grow.
Skoltech
It was clear to us that a major innovation centre needed a specialised school. Skoltech was conceived from the outset as a vital element for the centre's development. When we discussed possible partners, we wanted to use best education and management practices for creating an institution of this kind.
MIT partnership
We have done quite a lot with MIT. Skoltech held its first graduation ceremony earlier this year. Those who graduated from Skoltech are forward looking, well-trained specialists.
This partnership continues. I'm glad that our colleagues think that this partnership has yielded encouraging results, especially against the background of the challenging political environment we've seen lately, including the far-from-perfect relations between Russia and the United States. The fact that we continue to work together in research and education is important for future generations of students and for strengthening the atmosphere of trust and cooperation in the academic and corporate worlds. This is a very positive example of cooperation.
Intellectual property and the Internet
We are very pleased to have a representative office of a prestigious international organisation such as WIPO here. I hope that this will benefit everyone who is concerned with intellectual property regulation, and create a better situation for intellectual property protection in Russia.
There are no rules for Internet development. In fact there are only two approaches to regulating relations concerning the Internet as well as relations on the web. The first view is that the Internet should be left alone and developed under its own rules. The second is that some system segments should be regulated. As someone who represents the government here, I'm closer to the second point of view. This does not mean that we should try to influence the Web unreasonably, but the internet does have legal implications now.
Regarding domain name registration, it is unlikely that anyone would view the current system as absolutely clear, transparent and fair, because it is concentrated in one country. This looks strange at the very least because we never even gave a mandate to this country (I'm referring to the United States here). It would seem appropriate to create some sort of a general framework to help determine the rules for domain name registration along with other important World Wide Web development elements in the future.
The second set of questions, in fact, concerns intellectual property: how we can protect copyright on the web. We need to develop a plan that will be, on the one hand, acceptable to copyright owners, but on the other hand, will not paralyse the information environment, will not create any impassable barriers for those who use intellectual property in a legitimate way. Combining these approaches is a very large and complex task. I hope that we'll be working on this together - I mean all the interested countries, of course, with support of the World Intellectual Property Organisation.
User databases
We have a law that requires that databases on our users are located in Russia. Similar laws exist in many other countries. A significant number of large companies install their servers here, including Google and a number of others, or make an agreement with Russian companies about this. We are not trying to oust anyone. We definitely would like anyone operating lawfully in our country to stay and work with us. It is a question of goodwill to find compromise and reach an agreement on specific issues of presence and abidance by Russian regulations.
Just a few years ago, these questions were not of much interest to world leaders or national governments. In any case, hard as I tried at the various summits I attended (such as the G8, G20 and bilateral meetings), I couldn't draw our partners' attention to that. Most of my attempts were dismissed with a "no, this is not so important or interesting, not yet anyway, let's get back to this later." Now it seems to finally dawn on them that the issue needs to be addressed, not only in our country but also in other countries - in Europe and in the United States and elsewhere.
Innovation development
I see no other development path other than that based on innovation. Russia has always been seen as a major power whose prosperity is based on hydrocarbons, arms trade and several other elements, it's clear that high technology is crucial for development in the near and more distant future.
As for what we are working on now, including at Skolkovo and many other research centres, it's obvious that our field-specific and other priorities are similar to the majority of research centres around the world. Our research priorities largely coincide.
We have outlined five key priorities for developing research at Skolkovo. They include biotechnology and high-tech energy solutions, because Russia is one of the world's largest energy suppliers and energy technology is changing and becoming increasingly more complex, which results in the development of a fundamentally new reality. I believe that research should be based on these priorities. We are happy to be cooperating with our partners in this sphere.
Driverless cars
I believe that within about 50 years the so-called driverless or robotic cars will become a common part of the transport system. Hence, the leading car producers and the governments, which set traffic regulations, should coordinate the rules for the use of these vehicles. This is very important. Any vehicle is a source of danger and hence its use should be guided by strict legal and technical regulations.
Cooperation with Asian-Pacific partners
Of course, we can cooperate with any Asia-Pacific "tiger," developing cooperation and joint high-tech businesses in a number of spheres, considering that research and design and the process of creation as a whole are the strong points of Russia. Our weak point is commercialisation, the implementation of ideas in production, which is something we can learn from our Asia-Pacific neighbours, including Japan, the Republic of Korea, China and several other countries.
Vladivostok research centre
We invested much money and intellect in Far Eastern Federal University, a research centre based in Vladivostok in the Primorye Territory. We have built a large campus. It has become a real university centre. Many top professionals from Moscow and other cities are now working there. The university has many visiting professors and scholars-in-residence from many countries, but primarily from Asia and Pacific.
Open Innovations Forum
I'd like to invite our partners to the Open Innovations Forum in late October. I hope there will be many guests and many interesting solutions. This will bring us closer together and promote mutual understanding and research and production cooperation.
Legislation
We have overhauled legislation on research and intellectual property in the past few years, including the amendment of civil legislation.
Research funding
We are aware of the importance of research and of financing fundamental, applied and university research even in a difficult economic situation and a restricted budget. Therefore, spending on research will not be changed in the 2016 budget from this year at the least. In other words, we will not reduce government spending on research but will instead increase these allocations whenever we can, if and when we find the necessary resources for this.
|
|
#12
www.rt.com
October 9, 2015
Communists seek retirement age referendum from Russian govt
After Russian Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev urged the government to think about raising the retirement age, the Communist Party written to him, saying that such a move requires major public support and can only be decided by a referendum.
"I am asking you before giving final instructions to the government about this initiative to thoroughly study the opinions of our citizens in order to [take into account] the potential protest. In this connection I am asking you to consider the possibility of a nationwide referendum or opinion poll to understand what the real public opinion is," MP Vadim Solovyov wrote in a letter to Medvedev.
In comments to RIA Novosti, Solovyov said that, according to the Constitution, referendums possessed supreme legal power in the country and therefore if the majority of the population rejects the idea of raising the pension age, this possibility should forever be removed from the political agenda.
On Wednesday, the Russian government discussed changes to the pension system, and Medvedev said that sooner or later the authorities would have to consider raising the retirement age. However, the PM added that the move was not planned for the near future.
The current retirement age in Russia is 60 years for men and 55 years for women.
In April, the Communists already voiced their opposition to government policy regarding pensions in reply to the Labor Ministry's proposal to increase the retirement age to a universal 65 years. To this, Communist lawmakers said that the "belt-tightening measures" should be first tested on government ministers.
Also in April, President Vladimir Putin mentioned the raising of the retirement age in his televised Q&A session. He urged the officials to be extremely careful and only to resort to such steps if absolutely necessary.
|
|
#13
Finance Ministry's Nesterenko: retirement age increase 'inevitable'
KRASNOGORSK. Oct 9 (Interfax) - The interim decisions approved for next year in light of the budget deficit do not eliminate the need to raise the retirement age.
The draft budget for 2016 approved by the government this week indexes pensions by just 4%, rather than the actual inflation rate in 2015 (about 12%), with an option to conduct a supplementary indexation in July. In addition, the indexation will not apply to working pensioners. The budget process featured no substantive discussion on the issue of increasing the retirement age, which the Finance Ministry is constantly promoting, Finance Ministry officials said.
"There really are problems in the pension system. Our view, the view of the Finance Ministry - we are not dropping this, despite the various political decisions - is that the solution lies in raising the pension age," First Deputy Finance Minister Tatyana Nesterenko said in Krasnogorsk on Friday at a finance forum.
Our goal in the budget process is to reduce the budget's reliance on state non-budgetary funds. The pension system is in need of profound reform. The problem consists in the serious demographic changes, in the market situation," Nesterenko said.
On the bright side, as average wages in the economy decline, the income replacement ratio of pensions is increasing, despite the low indexation rate. "Even without taking any actions, we will practically reach that political goal that was set some time ago to reach a certain ratio of pensions to wages by sometime around 2020," she said, noting that the 4% indexation with the possibility of one more increase is a compulsory decision which "is not aimed entirely at achieving the main goal of social policy, reducing poverty," she said.
"We have a colossal amount of work ahead of us in terms of the proposals to lower the pension system's reliance on the federal budget. The next challenge we are resolving is to slow the pace of salary increases. The decision has been made for all federal entities, state employees, military personnel to not index wages and salaries at all for another year," Nesterenko said.
"We understand and expect that this is very important from the standpoint of setting examples for economic agents, and economic agents, via a reduction in these rates, create opportunities for investment. It is important for us to promote every incentive for investment. It is important for us to create every incentive for economic agents to make a profit - and that can be done through cost cutting, labor productivity, cuts to salaries, which in Russia are rising a lot faster than labor productivity - this is a fact. Therefore, our contribution to reducing growth in inflation is that we have halted salary growth," she said.
|
|
#14
Plans for hiding names of property owners from public scrutiny in focus
By Tamara Zamyatin
MOSCOW, October 7. /TASS/. The bill just initiated by the federal security service FSB for making secret the personal data of property owners contains a rational idea - protecting people from criminal encroachments - but at the same time it leaves vast room for corruption and criticism, polled experts have told TASS.
The gist of the proposal is personal data contained in the official property register will be available only to authorized bodies of power and law enforcers. Public activists and journalists will be barred from it. On Monday, the Russian government's legislative commission came out in support of the bill. After its discussion at a meeting of the Cabinet of Ministers the draft will be submitted to the State Duma (lower house of parliament) for consideration.
In the meantime, Russian media and society have launched a wide discussion of the FSB's idea of protecting the owners of private properties, planes and yachts from inquisitive compatriots. The general director of the anti-corruption studies and initiatives centre of Transparency International-Russia, Anton Pominov, has told the daily Noviye Izvestia the bill contradicts the concept of anti-corruption, civil and media control. Pominov sees the fears of corrupt officials possessing ill-gotten fortunes behind the proposed legal act. The co-leader of the Delovaya Rossiya (Business Russia) non-governmental organization, Anton Danilov-Danilyan, disagrees. This is what he told the RBC Daily: "The problem is the data from the state register of real estate is being used by one and all without restrictions for private commercial interests. Raiders do the same, too. The bill is correct. May there remain only official control, and not private control of unknown origin."
The director of the Globalization Problems Institute, Mikhail Delyagin, sees the FSB's bill as an element of supporting the security of society and the security of individual citizens.
"Let us recall the recent unrest in Kiev and other Ukrainian cities, which last February resulted in a government coup in Ukraine. The rioters were terrorizing top officials, let alone governors, mayors and leaders of political parties at home, threatened their families and forced them to leave the country. That became possible because information about the property of individuals was open to everybody," Delyagin told TASS.
"Hence the conclusion: a private person has the right to demand the authorities should make secret the family address. But this right should not apply to other properties, let alone yachts and planes. I believe that the FSB's bill is a response to high-profile exposures of civil servants' undeclared properties by some opposition figures, like Aleksey Navalny," he believes.
The head of the National Anti-Corruption Committee, member of the presidential committee for human rights, Kirill Kabanov, who had participated in drafting the bill, has told TASS the purpose of the document is not to make secret the data contained in the state property register, but to close the register to public access.
"Regrettably, the statistics of crimes and raider attacks in Russia are rather high. Those who own a multi-level apartment or a large plot of land should remember some smart people may find a loophole and some flaws in the documents to prove in court the deal was void and strip owners of their assets. There have been many such cases across the nation," Kabanov said.
"As for planes and ships, the proposal for removing the names of their owners from open data bases was made by the Transport Ministry. As a rule aircraft and ships belong to large public corporations, so property data may be used by competitors for criminal or defamation purposes," Kabanov said.
"I am involved in anti-corruption activities myself, but I don't think that the FSB's bill will infringe my right to public investigation. Firstly, the system of declaring incomes and property by civil servants remains. Secondly, there remains the system of queries addressed to the state register or to law enforcement agencies regarding property owners. When the inquirer gets the reply, the agencies concerned will retain a clue to who requested the information and why. This will minimize the misuse of information about real estate for criminal purposes or for marring reputations," Kabanov said.
|
|
#15
Russian resources of reserve funds may be exhausted in 2017-2018 at current spending rate
KRASNOGORSK, October 9. /TASS/. Resources of reserve funds may be exhausted in 2017-2018 at their current spending rates, Russia's First Deputy Minister of Finance Tatiana Nesterenko said on Friday.
"It is impossible to speak about development and investments in the private sector when our latest financial resources are used to close the deficit with limited resources to replenish the budget, when we have no foreign markets and domestic markets are limited. Reserve funds are depleting. We believe reserve funds may end at such rates of their spending. We will use up resources received when oil prices were high by 2017-2018," Nesterenko said.
The target is to keep total resources of the National Wealth Fund and the Reserve Fund at the level of at least 2 trillion rubles ($32.5 bln) by 2018 year-end, Finance Minister Anton Siluanov said in September.
The Reserve Fund amounted to 4.67 trillion rubles ($75.8 bln) and the National Wealth Fund equaled 4.87 trillion rubles ($79.1 bln) as of October 1.
|
|
#16
Russia Beyond the Headlines
www.rbth.ru
October 6, 2015
Revitalizing the 'Made in Russia' brand
In the past few years, dozens of small businesses have popped up in disused Russian factories and workshops, bringing home-grown designs into existence and turning a profit. But their founders want more, including restoring lost manufacturing skills and putting the country on the map for quality exports.
Mikhail Bolotin, special to RBTH
It started with some tinkering in the kitchen with a saw and bits of wood. Konstantin Lagutin and Anna Sazhinova, two young architects, had just completed their studies in 2008 and were making a modest living doing interior design in Moscow, but quickly realized that no one was able to build them what they wanted.
They kept running into the same objections from the furniture manufacturers they approached with ideas, that these were too complicated, or the orders were too small or too few. So instead they rolled up their sleeves and sawed, drilled and hammered their innovations into reality themselves.
"Russia is a country full of imperfections," Lagutin says. "If you want to do something decent then you have to do it yourself." The next realization, though, was that one-off contracts weren't going to get them far, and they'd have to consider mass production. So they expanded.
Today they work with a team of 30 people in their own furniture workshop called Archpole. Located in a former lamp factory in Moscow, Archpole produces chairs (sold for about $80), tables, dressers and couches (the most expensive going for $1,300) and targets a middle-class clientele that values the aesthetics and quality of its environs - which is an increasing segment of the Russian population today, Lagutin notes. Demand grew even more when people saw that the company's products are more than competitive when compared by price to European designer furniture.
The two designers don't see themselves as lone crusaders but rather as part of a new wave that is gaining traction in Russia and across a spectrum of areas and products.
"When I started in 2011, there were perhaps a dozen names that people knew," says Ksenia Nunis, the co-founder of Depstore, a designer goods outlet in Moscow's fashionable Tsvetnoy Central Market department store. Today there is a far greater selection and big chains have also shown interest as they seek to reduce logistical costs, she says.
"This is a healthy trend because only those who can handle the pressure of retailers, large sales and manage their own production needs will last on the market. Now is the ideal time to start your own brand," states Nunis.
When she started her business as an online shop, one goal was to make Russian designers known, while another was to erase the barrier between Western and Russian products.
"It was clear that people had reservations about 'Made in Russia' products, mainly because of concern about low quality," says the businesswoman.
However, although Russian goods make up about 80 percent of her inventory, Nunis also makes a point to stock well-known foreign brands. The reason: Although retailers recognize the quality of small suppliers products, the continue to complain that they are unprofessional in their marketing and often don't even know what wholesale prices are. Stocking foreign brands is the only way Russian producers will seriously consider how to offer good quality at reasonable prices, Nunis says.
Small cutting boards from great oaks
However, the same cannot be said for the company Fuga-Russia, who combined good business acumen with a quality range of oak-made kitchen accessories to secure its place on the shelves of the Globus Gourmet supermarket chain.
Co-founder Jana Osmanova had successful previous careers in investment and PR in Moscow but found herself wanting something more. "I was born here, and I am not indifferent to what happens around me," says the entrepreneur. One idea was to revive the tradition of manufacturers that lay dormant since the Soviet era - while making them profitable, of course.
So Osmanova started making oak cutting boards in early 2015. Since Russia is rich in wood and Osmanova knows how to keep a tight rein on spending, the initial plan seemed sound. Apart for the perennial problem facing small new ventures: "Like many founders of businesses we had the problem that existing manufacturers don't want to implement our ideas. But nor did we want to resort to some soulless mass production in China," Osmanova says.
So like the architects Lagutin and Sazhinova, she and her partners decided to set up their own workshop, and today the Fuga-Russia team consists of 15 people. "It was a conscious decision to produce in Russia, even if it is more difficult," she says. Despite the current recession and the decreased spending power of the population, business so far is following her original vision. After half a year on the market and by selling the cutting boards for $25-35, the company is already turning a profit.
If the shoe fits - make it
While some of the new wave of small manufacturers have some kind of entrepreneurial experience under their belt, more started out from scratch with only a very basic business plan, and in some cases, not even that.
Since 2009, Vladimir Grigoriev has run a footwear company called Afour in St. Petersburg. Today it makes 20 pairs of designer shoes and boots as day from three rooms Grigoriev rents in a unused Soviet shoe factory on the edge of the city center. But everything started from a notion to make a few original models for himself.
"A friend's mother worked as a shoe designer and helped me get going," said Grigoriev, whose job as a graphic designer inspired him to offer original, customizable styles and colors.
Grigoriev hired a shoemaker to come to his workshop once a week to assemble his own designs for his friends, and then their friends in turn. Social network websites and promotion came next, and then an online store where customers could create their own designs, from burgundy brogues to yellow-black winter boots.
"Some of our clients still think we import our shoes from England," laughs Andrei, who manages Afour's orders. So to avoid any confusion, some styles now bear a tiny Russian flag. "We're proud that we produce locally, but we don't use this as an additional selling point," he adds.
Growth is good so far, with Afour doubling its output each year since it began, but the biggest leap to being a truly Russian business is yet to come. "At some point we will buy all our raw materials in Russia," predicts Andrei. For now, though, almost everything is surplus bought from European manufacturers.
The same 100-percent-Russian vision also spurs on the founders of Archpole in Moscow as they now look to expand. The financial year went so well that the two architects bought an old farm in the countryside so they can relocate production from the city and theoretically have room for exponential growth as they launch new furniture ranges. "If we really want to make an impact then we need large-scale production with thousands of employees instead of a few dozen," says Lagutin.
Then the trucks that bring all manner of other goods to Russia from abroad can one day be fully loaded with furniture on the drive back.
|
|
#17
www.rt.com
October 9, 2015
Russian military operation in Syria bolsters oil market, domestic stocks
Oil prices have risen 12 percent in October to a two-month high. Rising crude coincides with Russia's airstrikes against Islamic State targets in Syria which began on September 30.
The price of Brent in London increased over one percent to $53 per barrel on Friday. US benchmark WTI is trading higher than $50 per barrel for the first time in three months after hitting six-year lows in late August. Other factors contributing to rising oil prices include a weakened dollar and shrinking US production.
Crude prices can be particularly responsive to unrest or violence in the Middle East, one of world's biggest oil-producing regions. While Syria does not have significant oil reserves, crude prices rise over fears the conflict could spread to the broader region.
"Syria is not a crude oil producer-its real significance to the energy markets is not a heightening of its ongoing internal conflict but rather the risk of contagion within the region at large," the Wall Street Journal quotes NUS Consulting Group as saying.
Surging crude has also strengthened the Russian stock market which has gained 7.5 percent in October. On Friday, the ruble-denominated MICEX index passed 1700 points for the first time since September 21. The dollar-traded RTS index is trading 1.66 percent higher than on Thursday.
The growth of Russian stocks has also been supported by capital inflow. The total net cash inflow of funds investing in Russian shares was $100.5 million in the first week of October, compared to a $16.7 million outflow the previous week, according to Emerging Portfolio Fund Research.
The Russian ruble has gained over six percent against the dollar in October and is up 13 percent since August.
|
|
#18
www.rt.com
October 9, 2015
Turning point? EU Commission head says relations with Russia 'must be improved,' US 'can't dictate'
Europe must treat Russia with more decency, improve the relationship, and not let EU policies be dictated by Washington, European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker said in a surprise speech in Germany.
It is now critical for the EU to work on its relations with Russia, Juncker said in the southern German town of Passau: "We must make efforts towards a practical relationship with Russia. It is not sexy but that must be the case, we can't go on like this."
Moreover, the US needs to keep its influence out of EU relations with other countries, Juncker added.
"Russia must be treated decently ... We can't let our relationship with Russia be dictated by Washington."
EU-Russia relations have deteriorated since the EU imposed sanctions on Russia for its alleged role in the Ukrainian conflict. The Russian government has unswervingly denied these allegations.
In the meantime, some progress has recently been reported in eastern Ukraine, as the armed forces of the self-proclaimed Lugansk People's Republic (LNR) have begun withdrawing weapons under 100 mm caliber from the conflict zone. Ukraine's Joint Staff has also announced the start of a withdrawal of artillery from the region.
The withdrawal of weapons is part of the Minsk agreements, which was agreed upon by the leaders of the Normandy Four, namely France, Germany, Ukraine and Russia, in February. The deal required a ceasefire, a weapons withdrawal, constitutional reforms, legislative recognition of a special status for the unrecognized republics, and release and exchange of prisoners on an all-for-all basis.
However, lasting truce was only reached in late August. Kiev and the self-proclaimed Donetsk and Lugansk republics maintain the armistice has been holding since September 1, although both sides still occasionally accuse each other of violations.
Moscow continues to stress the importance of direct dialogue between Kiev and representatives of the Donetsk and Lugansk People's Republics.
Russian President Vladimir Putin told CBS's '60 Minutes' at the end of September that all countries need to respect Ukraine's sovereignty.
"At no time in the past, now or in the future has or will Russia take any part in actions aimed at overthrowing the legitimate government," Putin said, adding that Moscow "would like other countries to respect the sovereignty of other states, including Ukraine. Respecting the sovereignty means preventing coups, unconstitutional actions and illegitimate overthrowing of the legitimate government."
EU sanctions against Russia could be renewed at the end of this year, however, even though some European countries have been hit hard by the fall in trade triggered, in part, by Moscow's counter-sanctions on food imports.
EU sanctions include restrictions on lending to major Russian state-owned banks, as well as defense and oil companies. In addition, Brussels has imposed restrictions on supplying weapons and military equipment to Russia, as well as military technology, dual-use technologies, high-tech equipment, and technologies for oil production. A number of Russian and Ukrainian officials have also been blacklisted by the West.
|
|
#19
www.rt.com
October 8, 2015
Any NATO movement toward Russia's borders will lead to reciprocal steps - Kremlin
Vladimir Putin's press secretary has said that the excuses used by NATO to move its infrastructure to Russian borders were nothing but camouflage and warned that none of such steps would be left unanswered.
"An invented excuse about the suggested threat coming from Russia is possibly just camouflage used to disguise the plans to further expand NATO toward our borders," RIA Novosti quoted Dmitry Peskov as saying.
"We are talking about a buildup, there have been statements about larger contingent, we are talking about an increase of military presence. And it is military presence practically near the Russian borders," he said, adding that this project was not new and that it could cause no other feelings but regret.
"Of course, any plans to bring NATO's military infrastructure closer to the Russian Federation lead to reciprocal steps needed to restore the necessary parity," Peskov said.
Earlier Thursday, NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg announced the alliance's plans to boost its Response Force and set up two more headquarters in Hungary and Slovakia. Stoltenberg admitted that this will be the biggest reinforcement since the end of the Cold War as six more, smaller headquarters had already appeared in Eastern Europe.
Russian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Maria Zakharova commented on NATO's buildup of forces in Eastern Europe, saying that these steps were not contributing to peace and stability on the continent.
"First of all, we need to hear and understand the position of those who take such actions. They need to tell us about their goals and objectives so that we could comment on them. So far, none of the latest events added stability to the European continent. On the contrary, this stability is being put in jeopardy," Zakharova said.
|
|
#20
Valdai Discussion Club/Ogonyok
http://valdaiclub.com
October 9, 2015
RUSSIANS IN SYRIA: FERVOUR AFTER SYNDROME
By Fyodor Lukyanov
Fyodor Lukyanov is Academic Director of the Foundation for Development and Support of the Valdai Discussion Club, Research Professor at the National Research University - Higher School of Economics, Editor-in-Chief of the Russia in Global Affairs journal.
The Russian operation in Syria is an indisputable milestone in the country's political development. For the first time in over a quarter of a century, the Kremlin is officially conducting a high-scale military operation abroad, motivated not by peacekeeping and "peace enforcement", but by strategic reasons.
The "Afghan syndrome" is history. After the withdrawal from Afghanistan in 1989, Moscow has been showing an idiosyncratic attitude towards such military and political campaigns, watching the United States repeat the Soviet blunders with a slight sense of malevolence.
Why the turn? The Ukrainian collision perceived in spring 2014 as another leap towards a new capacity of Russia's global influence transformed into another fixation of the country's regional status. Its pinnacle was the Minsk Process - a marshy and laborious diplomatic marathon foredoomed to losses.
Russian leaders figured that Ukraine was prospectless in terms of its role in international affairs. Leading Western states were eagerly propping up the model where the pivotal, if not sole, subject of negotiations with Moscow was settlement of the Ukrainian crisis. The Middle East, despite its hopelessness, is a much more topical issue. It stands on the crossing of strategic lines, rather than on the sideline offshoot to a dead end, like Ukraine.
Vladimir Putin's political intuition has panned out. He took the opportunity to break the gridlock, forcing others to react to Russia's initiative, not the other way around. This knack of the Russian leader has been demonstrated on many occasions throughout the years of his presidency - both on the international and home arena.
By destroying chemical weapons on Moscow's insistent advice, Damascus gave up the "tool of last resort", protection in case the survival of not only the regime, but also of everyone deeming it the lesser evil would be at stake. Ditching it in such a situation would not be a very decorous act. However, the originally moderate reaction of the West (ambiguously negative) and the overt presence of some mutual understanding with the West paves way for assumptions that the operation has chances for success. I remind that no one had originally been giving countenance to the feasibility of the proposals on chemical weapons.
The Islamic State is indeed an enemy of Russia; weakening it is crucial for our security in any case. Yet, Moscow entered the civil war siding with Bashar al-Assad and his adherents. It can be called a war on terror, but there is no alternative to backing the formally legal government against its enemies. In essence, John Kerry voiced Washington's acknowledgement that immediate resignation of the Syrian president is no longer on the agenda. However, Russia should be prepared for a sharp flare up of accusations of war with all enemies of Assad, not only ISIS. For the monarchies of the Persian Gulf, for instance, it is not just a fiasco of their policy, it is humiliation.
Moscow's actions are technically akin to the role the NATO coalition played in Libya in 2011. NATO provided aerial cover for the rebels, who took advantage of the air strikes to turn the campaign around. Of course, the difference is that Russia sides with a regular and quite capable army. Besides, a coalition was formed. Iran and Iraq have united their forces with Russia in Syria; add to that the Hezbollah movement in Lebanon. It is a serious regional bloc that, we assume, will stay intact after the end of the campaign. There is another side of the coin - Russia risks being pulled into the center of a religious war.
Russian officials swear that a ground operation was out of the question. There are no reasons to doubt their words, but it is hard to rule out unforeseen turns of the events. For example, the desire to revenge the losses (especially if they, as it is customary in the ISIS ranks, are ritual) may become a mechanism getting it bogged down deeper and deeper.
Should no contingencies occur, success would consist in achieving a tipping point in the operation and in toppling the progress ISIS made in the last months. Russia's positions in the region will be strengthened, Moscow will break from the Ukrainian quagmire and act on a much wider operational expanse. Revival of old Syria is unreal, but Assad's fixation on a certain territory, which will also serve as a Russian platform in the Middle East, is executable.
The Middle East has entered a period of change, which will continue regardless of ISIS' fate. The military scenario, successful or not, should be accompanied by intensive diplomacy, bearing in mind that intricate conflicts are solvable, yet such specific wars are won behind the negotiation table just as often (if not more often) than on the battlefield.
Should the run of events divert from the expected course, i.e. the Libyan scenario, and instead follow the Iraqi or, worse, the Vietnamese one, Russia will run into huge internal and external problems.
On the other hand, the last two years, since the autumn of 2013, when the Ukrainian struggle around the EU association erupted, Russia has been living in the atmosphere of a military and political fervour. But this fervour, the social mobilization and the agenda it generates substitutes all other matters. In particular, the need to develop a new model of socio-economic development to replace the one exhausted before the crisis and now falls a long way short of the situation that took a twist. And despite the incessant mantras about national interests and the concordance between foreign policy and domestic demands, the geopolitical achievements are becoming intrinsically valuable.
Of course, the topic of ridding the world of the plague called the Islamic State is a lot more attractive than the lackluster discussions about the need to raise the retirement age. But substitution of one topic by another endlessly will not work out.
This is an abridged version of the article, published in Russian in Ogonyok magazine.
|
|
#21
Assad's future remains apple of discord among parties to Syria's crisis
By Tamara Zamyatina
MOSCOW, October 8. /TASS/. The large-scale offensive which Syria's government army launched on Thursday against the positions of Islamic State militants with Russia's air support has brought to the forefront the issue of Syria's future political system after the victory over the IS has been achieved, polled experts have told TASS. In the meantime, the future of Bashar Assad as the head of state remains an apple of discord among the countries and parties involved in settling the Syrian crisis.
Russian President Vladimir Putin last week said the struggle with terrorism must proceed alongside the political process in Syria. "The Syrian president agrees with this. He is prepared to call early parliamentary elections, establish contact with the sound opposition and invite it into running the nation," Putin said. For the first time ever since the beginning of the Syrian crisis Assad told Iranian television in an interview on Monday he would be prepared to step down, if that decision of his would settle the crisis. But it is entirely up to the people to decide who would be their next president, Assad said.
Germany's Chancellor Angela Merkel insists Syria should start a political process with representatives of the Syrian opposition and the government in Damascus taking part. And President Francois Hollande, of France, too, has pointed to the usefulness of pooling efforts by the authorities in Damascus and the Syrian opposition in the struggle against the Islamic State.
The president of the Religion and Politics Institute, Aleksandr Ignatenko, believes that "the shift of Western politicians' emphasis from the demand for Assad's resignation to the need for starting a political process in Syria is a good sign ruling out a solution from the position of strength."
"A political process implies the establishment of institutions of power, which cannot be done in the context of the civil war in Syria and the struggle against the Islamic State. It will be wrong to place the cart before the horse. But while the struggle against the radical Islamists continues, it might be possible for the ruling coalition and the opposition to meet for talks, conferences and round-table discussions, in other words, to continue the Geneva process with the aim to find a way out of the dead end. The probability is high the Syrian people will elect a different man, not Bashar Assad, as their president," Aleksandr Ignatenko said.
The leading research fellow at the Oriental Studies Institute under the Russian Academy of Sciences, Boris Dolgov, believes that Assad's statement he would agree to resign, if that helped settle the crisis in Syria was nothing but "rhetoric." "Who is the man Assad will be able to hand power over to? There is no worthy personality on Syria's political landscape at the moment. As for the Syrian opposition abroad, whose delegation we welcomed at our institute on five or six occasions, it represents nobody but itself and has no forces inside the country to rely on," Dolgov told TASS.
"Since the Syrian crisis began I've been to Damascus twice, and I have first-hand experience that more than one-third of the country's population is connected with Assad's regime and supports him in his struggle against the Islamic State. He is the sole leader that unites IS opponents. The Syrian people pin their hopes for a peaceful future on this man," Dolgov said.
Turkey's ambassador to Russia Umit Yardim whose country is a member of NATO, strongly disagrees with this. "The Assad regime has no future and the Syrian crisis will remain insoluble without a diplomatic solution of the Assad problem," Yardim told TASS at a reception at his residence in Moscow on Thursday.
He claims the influx of Syrian refugees into Turkey is a result of Assad's rule. "Turkey has had to accommodate 2.5 million Syrian refugees, including one million children. As many as 350,000 children from refugee families need education in Turkey and 250,000 Syrians are staying at refugee camps. Turkey has to spend $7-8 billion a year to support all those who have fled from the civil war in Syria."
Yardim sees a solution of the "Assad problem" in drafting road maps for establishing a new system of government in Syria after victory over the Islamic State.
|
|
#22
www.rt.com
October 8, 2015
Over 70 percent of Russians support anti-ISIS airstrikes in Syria - poll
Over 70 percent of Russian citizens support their country's Air Force operations against ISIS terrorists in Syria - and almost a half of them agree that it's right to support Syria's legitimate government and President Bashar Assad.
According to the latest research released by the Levada Center, an independent Russian pollster, 72 percent of Russians are positive about the airstrikes on Islamic State (previously ISIL/ISIS) positions. Fourteen percent were negative toward the operation, and the same share of people said they had no opinion on the subject.
In addition, 47 percent of respondents said that Russia should support Syrian President Bashar Assad in his fight against both Islamic State and the armed opposition. Twenty-eight percent said that it would be better for Russia to stay out of the Syrian conflict, while 8 percent said Russia should join the Western coalition and begin fighting against ISIS and the Syrian government. Eighteen percent said that they either had insufficient information, or did not have a clear opinion.
Levada's previous research on Russians' attitude to their country's policies concerning Syria was conducted in the third week of September, and showed that 39 percent of respondents approved of Moscow's support for the Syrian government, with the share of those who disapproved at 11 percent.
Moscow has supported Bashar Assad's government since the start of the Syrian civil war, both with supplies of military hardware and diplomatic efforts. Russia has also delivered about 30 aircraft loads of humanitarian aid to Syria during the past two years, and has evacuated hundreds of refugees out of the war-torn country, both Russian and foreign citizens.
Last week, Russia started to carry out surgical airstrikes on terrorist positions in Syria after a request for such military aid was made by President Assad. The head of Russia's presidential administration, Sergey Ivanov, emphasized that Moscow would not be involved in any ground operation - aid would only be in the form of airstrikes.
This week, ships of Russia's Caspian Sea flotilla fired cruise missiles at ISIS positions in Syria. According to the Defense Ministry's press reports, since the start of the operation the Russian strikes have destroyed at least 112 objects, including command points, ammunition depots and armored vehicles belonging to the terrorists.
|
|
#23
Sputnik
October 9, 2015
Most Russians Support Putin's Decision on Anti-ISIL Campaign in Syria
MOSCOW (Sputnik) - According to the survey conducted by the Russian Public Opinion Research Center (VCIOM), 38 percent of respondents said they fully support the decision to dispatch aircraft to Syria, while 28 percent said they conditionally approve of this step.
Some 15 percent conditionally disapprove of the decision, with 12 percent of respondents saying they definitely do not approve. Seven percent of respondents found it difficult to answer this question, according to a survey.
The poll was conducted by VCIOM October 3-4 among 1,600 people in 46 regions of Russia.
Russia's Sukhoi Su-25, Su-24M and Su-34 attack aircraft, with the support of Su-30 jets, commenced precision airstrikes against ISIL targets in Syria on September 30, following a request from Syrian President Bashar Assad.
According to the Russian Defense Ministry, since the beginning of the air campaign Russian air forces have carried out about 140 strikes against terrorist positions, including command centers, training camps and ammunition depots. Russian warships in the Caspian Sea have fired 26 cruise missiles on ISIL targets.
According to the Russian Defense Ministry, airstrikes have considerably damaged Islamic State's command and logistics networks, as well as infrastructure used to equip suicide bombers.
|
#24 Sputnik October 9, 2015 Russian Jets Carry Out Record 67 Sorties Against ISIL Targets in Syria [Graphics here http://sputniknews.com/middleeast/20151009/1028268881/russia-airstrikes-syria-past-24-hours.html] Russian jets have carried out 67 sorties against the Islamic State targets in Syria in past 24 hours, Russian Air Force chief Lieutenant General Igor Makushev told journalists. Attack aircraft from the Russian air group deployed in Syria carried out record 67 combat missions in the past 24 hours hitting a total of 60 Islamic State targets, the Russian General Staff said Friday. "In the past 24 hours, the Russian combat aircraft carried out 67 missions. The Sukhoi Su-34 and Su-24SM planes destroyed 60 terrorist targets," Deputy Chief of the General Staff of the Russian Armed Forces, Lt. Gen. Igor Makushev told reporters in Moscow. The intensity and effectiveness of airstrikes by Russian air force against the Islamic State targets significantly increased in the past 24 hours, inflicting heavy casualties among terrorists. According to Deputy Chief of the Russian General Staff, Lt. Gen. Igor Makushev, the Russian Sukhoi Su-34 and Su-25SM strike aircraft destroyed six command and communication posts, six ammunition and fuel depots, 17 training camps, three underground bunkers, 16 fortified positions, a vehicle repairs facility, 17 vehicles and two multiple-launch rocket systems. A Russian airstrike destroyed a terrorist base and ammunition depot located in a former prison building in the outskirts of Aleppo, killing some 100 militants, Makushev said. In addition, directs hits by Russian KAB-500S precision guided bombs destroyed the headquarters of the Liwa al-Haqq terrorist group. "Radio intercepts confirm that this airstrike killed two IS high-ranking field commanders and about 200 terrorists," the general said. Russia's Sukhoi Su-25, Su-24M and Su-34 attack aircraft, with the support of Su-30 jets, commenced precision airstrikes against ISIL targets in Syria on September 30, following a request from Syrian President Bashar Assad. According to the Russian Defense Ministry, since the beginning of the air campaign Russian air forces have carried out about 140 strikes against terrorist positions, including command centers, training camps and ammunition depots. Russian warships in the Caspian Sea fired 26 cruise missiles on ISIL targets on Wednesday. |
|
#25
Moskovskiy Komsomolets
October 6, 2015
Newspaper contrasts Russian pilots' anti-ISIL success with USA "bombing desert"
Aleksandr Stepanov, Russian Su aircraft referred to as 'sudden death'
The Russian air group of the Russian Aerospace Troops has been conducting a special operation to eliminate the terrorist infrastructure in Syria, inflicting pinpoint strikes against strategically important facilities, for less than a week. About 50 modern planes and helicopters are bombing the command posts of the rebels seeking shelter in the mountain areas.
They are hitting only specific targets (munitions, arms as well as petroleum, oil and lubricants [POL] depots). Knowing what they are doing, as if running in "lightning-retaliation" tactics. The Russian defence department is notifying society of the successes of the operation online. The Defence Ministry is conducting briefings, reporting damaged facilities of the bandit elements, daily.
The people in uniform are demonstrating unusual familiarity with the situation here, commenting with unprecedented accuracy on details of the special operation. For example, Su-25 ground-attack aircraft attacked a terrorist training camp in the area of Kaslajuk in Idlib Province. As a result of the strike, shelters of the rebels and a workshop manufacturing homemade explosive devices, including "suicide belts", were taken out.
All this testifies that the Russian force is operating only after detailed specification of the data obtained from the Syrian army headquarters. But the emotional bravado of the Defence Ministry, albeit abounding in facts, would not be so convincing were it not for the video accounts, which undeniably attest to all that the defence department is reporting. The ignition and detonation of munitions stored in the rebels' storage depots can be seen distinctly in a video made available by Russia's Defence Ministry. This was the result of direct hits on the target by KAB-500 adjustable aerial bombs.... A video which is being widely circulated on social networks and is breaking records for the number of YouTube visits. In just several days some clips on the official Defence Ministry channel have amassed more than 5m views.
What, on the other hand, prevented the United States for a whole year selecting the right targets, not pointlessly bombing the desert? After the mounting of 6,000 air strikes by US aircraft, just three grainy videos, from which it is altogether difficult to draw any conclusions, have trickled out onto the internet. To compare: in just several days the Russian air contingent has inflicted 60 air strikes on ISIL (Islamic State group) facilities, destroying more than 50 facilities here.
Only Russian pilots have achieved a perfectly tangible result. It is no accident that ISIL members have tagged the Russian Su aircraft (the Su-24 and Su-34 bombers and the Su-25 attack planes) "maut mufajiyah", which, translated from the Arabic, means "sudden death". American pilots, on the contrary, have been in no hurry. For the West this has been an aviation desert storm, in which prevailing was impossible, indeed, there was no-one over whom to prevail. An operation in which there are no losers, like there are no winners either, for that matter....
Russia has different objectives: this aviation Blitzkrieg is designed to "break the back" of the ISIL terrorist "enclave". This is why the Russian pilots stationed at the Humaymim air base are hitting specific targets: command posts, munitions, arms and POL depots. This strategy will make it possible not only to deprive the rebels of a vitally important artery, but also to sow panic among them. The data of radio intercepts and conversations of the rebels testify that the Russian planes are showing up where they are least expected.
Never before has Russian aviation operated as intrepidly and skilfully.
The accuracy with which strategic bunkers are being hit by modern Russian aircraft is surprising even Western sceptics. MK was told by a source in the Russian Aerospace Troops Main Command that only aces have been sent to Syria: the majority of pilots were participants and prize winners at various stages of the Aviadarts competition.
The officer says that the competition among those wishing to take part in the Syrian operation is greater than that to get into the academy.... They are undoubtedly attracted not only by professional, but also material, interest.
Increased rates of pay and bonuses for combat missions and career growth. The payments will undoubtedly depend on the nature and difficulty of the assignments and also on the time spent on the territory of a foreign state. Whereas a lieutenant-colonel pilot somewhere around Voronezh gets up to R100,000 a month, in the Syrian desert he will be paid 3.5-4 times more. Plus the "full package" of social guarantees for his family if, God forbid, something were to happen. In this case the sum total of compensation for members of the family of the deceased would amount to roughly R6m.
It is already known for a fact that all participants in the Syrian operation will acquire the status of participant in combat operations. The corresponding bill has already been prepared and will shortly be going to parliament. Almost all the Russian pilots performing combat assignments in Syria have combat experience acquired both in the counterterrorist operation in the North Caucasus and at the time of the operation to enforce peace on Georgia.
The successful operations of the Russian air group in Syria in elimination of the ISIL infrastructure demonstrate the increased combat possibilities of the Russian army, military expert Igor Korotchenko, chief editor of the journal Natsionalnaya Oborona, believes.
The Syrian Blitzkrieg will be a kind of litmus test of the level of Russia's military-industrial complex and military science. After all, Russian pilots in Syria are road-testing new modes of combat employment of ground-attack and bomber aviation, military pilot 1st class Sergey Abakumov, candidate of military sciences, believes. For the first time in the history of the modern Russian army, incidentally....
"Our country's combat aviation has in recent years been intensively involved in combat training in order now, in Syria, to inflict pinpoint damage on the terrorists' facilities. The sniper skills of the Russian military pilots acquired at the time of numerous exercises are today permitting them to so expertly and effectively destroy the ISIL infrastructure," Korotchenko believes.
The Russian Defence Ministry has put out a video of the destruction of a cluster of equipment of the terrorists in Syria by an air strike of an Su-24M bomber. On this occasion the footage was made from beneath the floor of the aircraft, which makes it possible to observe the bombing process from an unusual angle.
The video is released on YouTube.com by a Russian Defence Ministry user.
After the first week of the operation in Syria, all the Western experts who had concocted myths concerning the presence of Russian troops in eastern Ukraine suddenly went silent. Now the world community really knows what the timeframe of such lengthy confrontation would have been had troops from Russia really infiltrated there....
These are "lightning-retaliation" tactics. Inevitable retaliation.... This is why the Iraqi prime minister said that he had no objection to Russia inflicting air strikes on ISIL positions on Iraqi territory and has already sent Moscow a corresponding request. If this initiative obtains the support of the government of Iraq, things will be none-too-pleasant for ISIL members. The Russian Kh-29L air-to-surface missiles, with which the modern Su aircraft are equipped, have a laser homing warhead and can hit a target to an accuracy of up to 2 m. More accurate than you need, as the pilots say....
"Russia is now rapidly making good the lag in tactical experience of the employment of aviation, which is achieved only at a time of combat operations. In the United States, for example, such experience has been continuously accumulated since the time of the Korean War. We, on the other hand, ceased to systematically collate the development of aviation tactics as of the end of the 1980s, when we left Afghanistan. Our Air Force has since then been taught chiefly at range facilities. The present operations of our aviation in Syria are an excellent opportunity to test-run new modes of the employment of aviation," Sergey Abakumov said.
Russia's Defence Ministry emphasizes that Russia is not a party to the conflict since the Syrian ground troops are being given air support based on an appeal of the leadership of the Syrian Arab Republic. All the same, we are "polite people", and not only in words....
The Russian Defence Ministry has released the first images from onboard a bomber which struck at ISIL positions. We would point out that the decree of the Russian Federation Council authorizing use of the Russian Armed Forces outside of the state took effect today.
The video is carried on YouTube.com by a Russian Defence Ministry user.
Federation Council speaker Valentina Matviyenko during an official visit to Jordan: "We are not planning and will not be participating in any ground operations, we shall not be pulled for any length of time into a resolution of the Syrian crisis, therefore. This is merely support of the air force and the operations of the regular Syrian army and the Kurdish militias against ISIL terrorists."
Presidential press spokesman Dmitriy Peskov said that the Kremlin was not involving itself in questions of volunteer detachments fighting in Syria. "I don't think so. This is not a function of the state," he said. "As a rule, such organizations exist and operate independently," Peskov said, pointing out that if it is a question of volunteers fighting in the ranks of terrorists, this is a crime. As far, though, as supporters of the armed forces of Syria are concerned, he has no information on this score.
|
|
#26
www.rt.com
October 9, 2015
Proof please? CNN claims Russian missiles crashed in Iran, Moscow refutes, US can't confirm
A CNN report, claiming that several Russian cruise missiles targeting Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS/ISIL) positions in Syria actually landed in Iran, has been refuted by the Russian Defense Ministry, while the US State Department say they can't confirm.
The American broadcaster cited two unnamed US officials, who said that four Russian missiles had crashed somewhere in Iran after being launched from vessels in the Caspian Sea. The report suggested that "some buildings were damaged and civilians may have been hurt."
This triggered a quick reaction from the Russian Defense Ministry, with spokesman Igor Konashenkov saying that all the missiles had hit their targets on Wednesday. "Unlike CNN, we don't distribute information citing anonymous sources, but show the very missile launches and the way they hit their targets almost in real time," Konashenkov said. The spokesman pointed out that the strike targets are being photographed before and after being hit, while Russian drones are monitoring the situation from Syrian skies 24/7.
The high precision strikes might have been "unpleasant and surprising for our colleagues in the Pentagon," but the fact is that "the missiles launched from the ships hit their targets," he said.
"Otherwise one would have to acknowledge that IS facilities - located at a considerable distance from each other - exploded all by themselves," Konashenkov said.
US State Department spokesman John Kirby said that he couldn't confirm CNN's report, according to Reuters.
Meanwhile, a source in Iran's Defense Ministry told RIA Novosti that Tehran has "no information of Russian missiles crashing on Iranian territory."
On Wednesday, four Russian naval warships in the Caspian Sea fired a total of 26 missiles at positions of Islamic State in Syria, hitting all the targets, according to Defense Minister Sergey Shoigu.
Moscow slams Carter's warning about cost of Syria strikes
Konashenkov also lashed out at a fresh statement from Pentagon head Ashton Carter, who predicted Russian losses in its Syrian operation.
"In their assessments of the US military's actions in various operations conducted by them all over the world, the Russian Defense Ministry has never stooped to publicly speaking of expectations of the deaths of American soldiers" Konashenkov stressed.
According to the spokesman, Carters' words demonstrate the degree of cynicism among "some of the representatives" of the current US government.
Moscow's air operation in Syria "will have consequences primarily for Russia itself," Carter said at a press conference at NATO headquarters in Brussels.
"I expect that in the next few days the Russians will begin to lose in Syria," the US Defense Secretary added, also mentioning the possibility of retaliatory attacks by extremists in Russia.
Russia launched its anti-terror air campaign in Syria at the request of the Syrian government on September 30.The Russian military has destroyed over a hundred terrorist targets, including command posts, ammunition depots, training camps and armored vehicles, since the start of the operation.
|
|
#27
Russian missile strikes against IS in Syria hit Pentagon, NATO on rebound - analysts
By Tamara Zamyantina
MOSCOW, October 9. /TASS/. Russia's massive attack with 26 cruise missiles against targets of the terrorist Islamic State in Syria has proved more than effective and entailed a rather painful reaction from the Pentagon and NATO's headquarters, polled military specialists have told TASS.
Russia's naval group in the land-locked Caspian Sea on October 7 dealt a massive strike with sea-launched Kalibr-NK cruise missiles against infrastructures of the terrorist group Islamic State in Syrian territory. The Russian Defense Ministry said the missiles hit munitions production facilities, command centers, ammunition and weapons depots, storages of fuels and lubricants, and training camps.
NATO's Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg has voiced alarm over Russian cruise missile attacks on targets in Syria and declared the alliance's readiness to protect the allies, including Turkey. The reaction from the Pentagon and the US Congress was still more nervous. The Congress is going to launch a probe into the operation of the US intelligence services, which had failed to warn the Department of Defense in advance about Russia's plans for the Caspian naval force's missile strikes against the Islamic State.
"The Pentagon and NATO are in such commotion following the launch of Kalibr missiles because Russia has never had such weapons before - small, highly accurate and equipped with modern electronics. The missile is the newest product of the defense-industrial complex. Besides, this is the first instance in Soviet and Russian military history of cruise missiles' launch against ground targets in a real combat operation. It is not accidental that a video showing a Kalibr cruise missile flying over Iran and Iraq has got several million views on YouTube," the deputy director of the Institute of US and Canada Studies, Major-General Pavel Zolotaryov, retired, has told TASS.
He said the cruise missiles' accuracy was very high, with maximum deviations from the target - 'circular error probable' in military parlance - not exceeding two or three meters. "Missiles that accurate do not have to be necessarily armed with nuclear warheads. A conventional warhead will guarantee the target's complete elimination without causing extra destruction," Zolotaryov said.
The president of the International Center for Geo-Political Analysis, Colonel-General Leonid Ivashov, retired, believes that the strike by Russia's Kalibr missiles against IS targets in Syria has had a literally stunning effect on the Pentagon and NATO. "The military doctrine adopted on July 1 mentioned the emergence of other countries' highly accurate missiles as one of the main threats to the United States' national security. That Russia has used highly accurate missiles has been a real shock for the Pentagon," Ivashov said.
"The United States and the European Union have realized that Russia has solid counter-arguments against the United States' monopoly on using sea-launched cruise missiles that had been used to bomb Yugoslavia and Iraq," Ivashov said. "By their technical parameters the Kalibr missiles by far surpass their US counterparts. This missile is capable of selecting any of a dozen likely routes and no air defense or anti-missile defense will ever be able to identify the likely flight path. With its effective range of 2,600 kilometers and its two-meter circular error capability Kalibr will be a truly formidable weapon."
|
|
#28
What's behind NATO's "much ado" about routine air incident?
By Lyudmila Alexandrova
MOSCOW, October 7. /TASS/. NATO's hue and cry over unintentional violation of Turkey's airspace by Russian planes, involved in the air operation against the Islamic State, is a sure sign the alliance has joined the information war against Russia and the United States is out to spoil relations between Russia and Turkey, Russian experts believe.
The Turkish Foreign Ministry has twice invited Russian ambassador to express protest to him over violations of the country's airspace by Russian planes. The Russian Defense Ministry on Monday acknowledged that a Russian Sukhoi-30 jet had strayed into Turkey's air space for several seconds, adding that it occurred in bad weather. The Russian military promised to take every measure to prevent such incidents in the future.
The North Atlantic Council met in urgent session on Tuesday to express full solidarity with Turkey. Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan said that Ankara was unable to stay calm in the face of violations of its airspace by Russian planes. NATO's Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg said the alliance's planes did not violate the airspace of other countries. "It is not the routine of any NATO country to violate the air space of other countries," he stated.
Russia's envoy to NATO Aleksandr Grushko believes that the incident involving a Russian plane in Turkey's airspace was used to get NATO involved in an information war. NATO has ignored Russia's explanations regarding the incident in Turkey's air space, the diplomat said with certainty.
In the meantime, the Russian Defence Ministry said that it might accept the Pentagon's proposals for coordinating operations against the Islamic State, Russian military spokesman Major-General Igor Konashenkov said on Tuesday, adding that experts would discuss the technicalities of that cooperation on Wednesday.
"Worldwide clamour over Russia's allegedly deliberate violation of Turkey's (and consequently, NATO's) air space is 'sheer nonsense'," says Russia's test pilot, Igor Malikov, holder of the Hero of Russia title. "If Turkish planes violated Russia's airspace in the same fashion, if they were in an inconvenient position to make a safe landing and had to enter another country's air space for the sake of safety, that's fine. Russia would've never staged anything like this clown show for the whole world to see."
"Violations of the air space of neighboring countries are customary for the air forces of all states," military expert Viktor Murakhovsky, editor-in-chief of the Arsenal of the Fatherland magazine, has told TASS. "One may recall incidents between NATO members Greece and Turkey. Last summer they were exchanging notes of protest almost on the daily basis."
According to the Greek Air Force Staff, planes of Turkey's 101st air squadron violated the country's airspace 1,306 times.
"Russia's actions were truly unintentional. Such matters are usually settled online and in a businesslike fashion. It is an entirely different matter if some reconnaissance plane deliberately ventures deep inside," Murakhovsky said.
NATO, he believes said, has joined the information war following the deployment of a Russian air and space force group in Syria and this explains why it draws attention to this incident in all ways possible.
As far as likely coordination of struggle against the Islamic State between Russia and the Pentagon is concerned, it can be established virtually in no time. "Russia, Iraq, Iran and Syria have deployed a coordination centre in Baghdad. The coordination centre of the US-led 62-nation coalition is also there.
No technical problems exist. A communication line can be arranged for rather quickly. First and foremost steps should be taken to rule out incidents among the forces fighting against the Islamic State."
NATO and Turkey reacted to a routine incident so emotionally largely because NATO and, first and foremost, the United States are unhappy about the continuing rapprochement between Russia and Turkey, Assistant Professor at the Moscow State University's world politics department, Aleksei Fenenko, has told TASS. "The energy dialogue between Russia and Turkey and their dialogue over the Middle East have alarmed the United States in earnest. This is something Washington would not like to see and it tries to upset it in every way possible. In the meantime, Turkey has binding commitments to NATO and certain rules of relationship with the United States to abide by."
|
|
#29
www.rt.com
October 7, 2015
Moscow ready to establish contacts with FSA, help it unite forces with Assad against ISIS
The Russian Defense Ministry is ready to assist Assad's military and the Free Syrian Army in uniting forces against Islamic State jihadists and other terror groups, Foreign Ministry spokesperson Maria Zakharova said.
In a statement Wednesday, Zakharova said that such diplomatic efforts are "based on the position voiced by Russia's president, Vladimir Putin," adding that Moscow will carry on with contacts with the "whole spectrum" of Syrian opposition.
Following Putin's orders, the Foreign Ministry is now also seeking to establish contacts with the Free Syrian Army (FSA) leadership to discuss the possibility of their involvement into the process of political settlement of the Syrian crisis.
Earlier Wednesday, the Russian president revealed that his French counterpart, Francois Hollande, had proposed uniting the FSA forces and President Assad's army to battle Islamic State terrorists. It could create the ground for political settlement in Syria, Putin added.
"During [my] recent visit to Paris, French President Francois Hollande expressed an interesting idea, saying it is worth trying to unite the efforts of [Syrian President Bashar] Assad's army and the so-called Free Syrian Army," Putin said during a meeting with Defense Minister Sergey Shoigu.
He said, however, that Russia does not know where exactly the FSA is or who heads it.
"If we assume that this [FSA] is the military wing of the so-called healthy part of the opposition, then uniting their forces [with Assad's army] against the common enemy - ISIS, Jabhat al-Nusra and other terrorist organizations - could create good ground for the political settlement in Syria," Putin added.
According to the Russian president, a political solution should end conflicts like the one in Syria.
"Such conflicts should end through solving political issues," he said.
Putin praised the preliminary results of the Russian Air Force operation in Syria against Islamic State militants.
"We know how complicated these anti-terrorist operations are. It is too early to review the results, but what has been done deserves high positive assessment."
Russia will give support to the Syrian Army's fight on the ground against Islamic State, Putin said.
"As for further work, we hope that it will be synchronized with the actions of the Syrian Army on the ground and military-space forces will effectively support the offensive operation of the Syrian Army [against terrorists]."
Putin ordered the Russian military to continue cooperation with the US, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Iraq and Iran on Syria.
"We should continue working with our foreign partners. Because without their participation, without the participation of Saudi Arabia, Turkey, US, Iraq, Iran and neighboring countries, it will be hard to organize such work in a proper way," Putin said.
Moscow launched its military operation against Islamic State terrorists at the request of the Syrian government on September 30. Since the start of the operation, the Russian military have destroyed at least 112 objects belonging to jihadists.
Among them are 19 commanding points, 12 ammunition depots, 71 armored vehicles and six factories that produced explosive devices, Russian Defense Minister Sergey Shoigu said Wednesday.
|
|
#30
Russia asks UK for assistance in establishing contacts with FSA
MOSCOW. Oct 9 (Interfax) - Russian Ambassador to the UK Alexander Yakovenko has asked for assistance in establishing contacts with the Free Syrian Army (FSA) to coordinate efforts in the fight against the group Islamic State (ISIL, which is banned in Russia).
"Dr Yakovenko also said that the Russian side would appreciate British assistance in establishing contacts with the "Free Syrian Army" on eventual coordination between the FSA and the Syrian armed forces in combating ISIS, and on possible FSA involvement in the political process," a report posted on the website of the Russian embassy in London says.
According to the report, Yakovenko and Foreign Office Political Director Sir Simon Gass exchanged opinions on the current situation in Syria during a meeting on Thursday.
"The Ambassador stressed the need to consolidate efforts international to effectively counter the threat to the entire international community emanating from the "Islamic State" and other terrorist groups. Dr Yakovenko and Sir Simon shared the view that the counter-terrorism effort should go hand in hand with joint work aimed at promoting a political settlement of the Syrian crisis," the Russian embassy in London says.
According to the report, "Upon request of the Political Director, the Ambassador explained the aims and the conduct of the current Russian military operation against ISIS, carried out in response to a request by the Syrian Government."
"He expressed interest in receiving information at the disposal of the UK side regarding the extremists' infrastructure so as to further enhance the efficiency of the air strikes," the report says.
|
|
#31
Russia Beyond the Headlines
www.rbth.ru
October 8, 2015
Two coalitions against ISIS: What next for Syria?
A week after the launch of Russian air strikes on targets inside Syria, the hopes of a wider coalition to fight the Islamic State (ISIS) militants that have taken over huge parts of the region have faded into thin air. Hopes that the common enemy, representing a civilizational challenge, would bring Russia and the Western coalition into one camp proved to be premature.
Sergey Strokan, Vladimir Mikheev
Despite a barrage of Western criticism over Russia's attacks, which are allegedly targeting the Syrian opposition instead of ISIS, Russia's military officials and observers insist the air strikes are proving effective so far.
In the face of such a decisive move by Russia, U.S. President Barack Obama announced a strategic plan to launch a general offensive on the de facto capital of ISIS, the north-eastern Syrian city of Raqqa. The operation would involve deploying 20,000 Kurdish fighters and some 5,000 rebels representing the Syrian opposition, and be backed up with U.S. Air Force support.
Obama's initiative to launch major offensive on ISIS positions in Syria, not attempted during more than a year of the existence of the U.S.-led coalition, has merely aggravated the rift between Moscow and Washington over the strategy of fighting ISIS. There are suspicions among Russian observers that the plan could be nothing more than a show of resolve and competence for the sake of "not being outdone" by the Russians.
Meanwhile, the second anti-ISIS coalition-in-the-making, comprising Russia, Iran, and Iraq along with Damascus, is showing its own resolve to emerge as a new force against ISIS. The new coalition is setting up a coordination center in Baghdad to carry out reconnaissance and analysis, with the unit due to begin operation in the coming weeks.
A newcomer to the second anti-ISIS coalition, led by Moscow, Iraq is making bold commitments. Seen as a U.S. client-state after more than a decade of American military presence in the country since the demise of dictator Saddam Hussein, Iraq has pledged to become more active in fighting ISIS and provide intelligence data to Iran, Syria, and Russia.
Meanwhile, the international reaction to Russia's military actions ranges from total rejection (Saudi Arabia and Turkey) to cautious admittance of possible cooperation (France) and an attitude of benign neglect (the United Arab Emirates).
Unexpectedly, the Emirates welcomed Russian involvement, saying that they had no reservations about it. A senior official in Abu Dhabi, quoted by French daily Le Figaro, said if the Russians manage to weaken the ISIS and al-Nusra radical groups, it would be considered by the UAE as "positive." Moreover, the country are not even concerned if Russia's steps end up prolonging the rule of Bashar al-Assad: "We have no problem in cooperating with Russia," said the unnamed official, "but not with Iran."
On the whole, since Moscow got involved in the Syrian conflict the changes in the configuration of political alliances and loyalties have accelerated. Still, this does not pave the way for a truly wide and comprehensive alliance.
The two anti-ISIS coalitions are not entirely on speaking terms, despite top-level liaison between Russian and American military officials. There is enough rhetoric in the air to suggest that the two alliances are in competition with each other, each de facto claiming supreme legitimacy as the principal anti-ISIS force.
Could this vanity fair hamper the fight against ISIS and other radicals that are jeopardizing regional stability? Dmitry Polikanov, member of the board of the Moscow-based Center for Policy Studies in Russia, an independent think tank, provided a comment for Troika Report.
"It could lead to uncoordinated efforts and, moreover, to clashes between members of different coalitions - not deliberately but unintentionally. I assume that it would be better for both coalitions to have a pact preventing harm being inflicted upon one another. Russia and the U.S. should have an agreement to make their actions more... wise, I would say.
"Right now, Barack Obama has proclaimed the necessity to provide more weapons to the Syrian rebels. As we know, recently such armaments were transferred from the rebels to the terrorist groups; this would eventually hamper the operations conducted by Russia."
- ISIS is identified as a global threat, as a global challenge. It requires global efforts to eradicate this danger. Why is there no coordination between Russia and the West at this critical point?
"This is due to the lack of political will on the part of the West. The Russian government has repeatedly called on joint efforts to combat Islamic State. All attempts have failed, unfortunately. It could be motivated by the personal ambitions of certain leaders."
- Can at some point in time one of the coalitions proclaim itself the winner?
"Actually, there can barely be a winner in this war. It would be dangerous to claim to be the victor. ISIS, like many other terrorist organizations, is a network organization. It is practically impossible to achieve complete victory. I think it would be more reasonable to speak about the process but not the result. The goal of Russia and its allies and the U.S.-led coalition should be to minimize the combat potential of ISIS."
Basically, the undeclared competition between the two coalitions will determine not so much the winner over ISIS but the new pecking order in the region.
For the United States it is becoming a matter of re-instating its credentials as the time-honored provider of security for the Middle East. For Russia, it is about securing a pro-Moscow regime in Damascus, establishing privileged relations with the rising regional power, Iran, and also coming back into global politics as an assertive agent to be reckoned with.
Despite this drastic discrepancy in strategic interests, the over-arching goal for both is evident: ISIS has no place in the civilized world.
|
|
#32
www.rt.com
October 8, 2015
'Who are Syrian moderates & where are they?'
By Neil Clark
Neil Clark is a journalist, writer, broadcaster and blogger. He has written for many newspapers and magazines in the UK and other countries including The Guardian, Morning Star, Daily and Sunday Express, Mail on Sunday, Daily Mail, Daily Telegraph, New Statesman, The Spectator, The Week, and The American Conservative. He is a regular pundit on RT and has also appeared on BBC TV and radio, Sky News, Press TV and the Voice of Russia. He is the co-founder of the Campaign For Public Ownership @PublicOwnership. His award winning blog can be found at www.neilclark66.blogspot.com. He tweets on politics and world affairs @NeilClark66
Nobody seemed to know a couple of weeks ago where US-backed Syrian 'moderate rebels' were, but now that Russia launched its anti-terror op in Syria, they are 'everywhere', while ISIS, on the contrary, is 'nowhere', says political analyst Neil Clark.
RT: Russian President Vladimir Putin said he received a proposal from the French president to form a coalition between Assad and the Free Syrian Army. It seems like an unexpected proposal. The Russian line is: who are these moderates? Could they form some sort of synergy against ISIL?
Neil Clark: Possibly, but again the big problem, as we said, is who actually are these people. Robert Fisk, veteran foreign correspondent wrote that the Free Syrian Army is mainly sitting in cafes in Istanbul drinking coffee. If that is the case, than I don't think they are going to be much use against ISIL. Obviously the widest possible coalition is to be built to defeat ISIL. That is what needs to be done.
What about the US. I don't think the US would like the FSA [Free Syrian Army] joining in with the Syrian Army because unfortunately the USA's main aim is still toppling the Syrian government. And that has been a big problem with fighting ISIL. The US hasn't responded to the Russian intervention very positively. And I think that is very telling, because if they were serious about defeating ISIL, they should be welcoming what Russia is doing.
RT: Who does Francois Hollande think this so-called moderate opposition is?
NC: Absolutely and how many of them are there. Because the 'moderate rebels' - nobody really seems to know where they are. They were nowhere a couple of weeks ago, but as soon as Russia starts bombing, they are everywhere. We were told that ISIS was everywhere a couple of weeks ago. And now ISIS is nowhere according to the US, and that Russia is bombing moderate rebels. So it is all very vague and we need to find out who these people actually are. What we do need is obviously troops on the ground to append the Russian campaign. The Syrian army is the main force that could do that. We've got to be very skeptical as to whether other forces could join in, simply because we don't know who they are and how many of them there are.
RT: Mixed messages from the Pentagon; one the one hand it is saying that it is willing to give Russia some tactical information, but not security information. One the other hand, another line from the Pentagon is saying that basically it is refusing to cooperate with Russia while Moscow is putting its policy in Syria in place. Did you expect such repose from the Pentagon?
NC: Well, I did expect that response, because I think what Putin has done here - he called Obama's bluff and called America and Britain's bluff on fighting ISIS. If they were generally concerned with defeating ISIS, they would be sharing security information with other countries that want to defeat ISIS and building the widest possible coalition. Here is Russia saying: "Look, we want to defeat ISIS, let's share information that can help us." And then the Americans are saying: "No, we will share some technical information, but not the most important information, which is the security information as to where ISIS cells are".
|
|
#33
www.rt.com
October 9, 2015
'US hoisted on its own petard over its Assad stance' - Col. L. Wilkerson
Defeating ISIS should be the first priority for everyone and only once it's solidly accomplished, should work on a more representative Syrian government begin, says Lawrence Wilkerson, retired US Army Colonel, ex-chief of staff to Secretary Colin Powell.
RT:What do you think about the western media's reaction to Russian airstrikes in Syria? Would Russia's involvement, as western media claims, "actively destabilize the country?"
Lawrence Wilkerson: That is not my assessment. I hope, I wish, I pray that Moscow, Washington, Ankara, Teheran, perhaps others are talking right now about how they coordinate their efforts to accomplish what should be all of our first priority, and that is to defeat these forces called DAESH/ISIS/ISIL, and to put everything else aside as it were until that is accomplished. That is going to take some time too. We've now got the possibility for this to spread majorly in Afghanistan - with the Taliban having taken Kunduz - that critical area. The Chinese are already looking at it because [Islamic State is] already doing things in Xinjiang province to disturb their state stability with the Uyghurs, the revolutionary movement that exists there. It's also doing things to destabilize Afghanistan and the surrounding area. It's concerning Moscow, I'm sure, because that's their soft underbelly there, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan and so forth...
We need to stop it, like you stop cancer at the point of origin. And the point of origin right now most prominently is Syria. All hands should be working on this. I welcome Russia's assistance.
RT:The stance of the US is that we have to remove Syrian President Bashar Assad from office and drive ISIS from the region at the same time. In your opinion, can Assad be removed and will little stability be maintained in Syria without recreating the same quagmire that we saw in countries like Libya, Iraq, etc?
LW: ...My first priority would be to defeat ISIS. I would bring in those who are fighting ISIS and coordinate those actions in order to defeat them. Once that's accomplished, and very solidly accomplished, mind you - not like we did in Libya, where we unveil the largest arms depots in North Africa without leaving anybody to take care of them to include shoulder-fired missiles and other sophisticated arms. No, in Syria we should make sure the enemy is thoroughly defeated, and then, and only then, should we work on an interim government, probably including President Assad, and a more representative government of the Syrian people, which will probably mean that Assad has to go at some point. But let's prioritize this properly and let's take care of priorities in order.
RT:Why is the US so obsessed with Assad and his regime? Why is it in US' best interest to be involved in the conflict?
LW: We walked ourselves into this corner with human rights interest, with people like Samantha Power and others in the White House telling President [Barack] Obama at the time that the Syrian civil war started, and it started over water more than anything else. Second year in a row Syrian farmers over 200, 000 have not been having any water. People like Samantha Power and others are seeing this as an opportunity to unseat Assad, whom they saw as a brutal dictator. And there is some proof of that. But Assad was not Mubarak - that was the template they were using. Mubarak was detested and he had to go, he was going to go - no matter what the US did. But Assad is not that. He has got quite a power base in the military, in the Alawite community in general, and in the business class in Syria, particularly in Damascus. So he is not going anywhere any time soon. I said that long ago. We [US] made these stupid statements about him being unacceptable, about his not staying in power and everything, and now we're hoisted on our own petard. We should be big enough to back up and say "No, we were wrong. Let's do that differently, let's defeat ISIS and then we will work on a more representative Syrian government."
|
|
#34
www.rt.com
October 7, 2015
'We need all-pervasive strategy against ISIS involving everyone' - Admiral Alan West
The first priority is to destroy ISIS, which is the top danger to all nations in the world, says former UK First Sea Lord, Admiral Lord West. And we can only do that if the whole coalition is involved with Russia, Iran and Assad forces, he adds.
Russian Navy warships have joined the anti-terror operation by firing missiles from the Caspian Sea at ISIS positions in Syria.
RT: Warships have now entered the fold. How will they help Russian counter-terrorist operation?
Admiral Lord West: I think using all arms is very valuable and clearly there've been ... the targets that have spotted by people on the ground and using ship-based missiles is a very good way of doing that. We do it, of course, using TacToms and things like that, so, it is their equivalent of that, that's useful. But I think the most important thing is that we've got to defeat and destroy ISIL - they are the most dangerous thing to all of the nations in the world. I describe them as 'the wolf closest to the shed'. We must destroy them and then think about getting security and peace to Syria. But the first thing is to destroy ISIL. And we can only do that, I believe, if the whole coalition is involved with Russia and also Iran, and, I am afraid, also with Assad. No matter how much some of us in the West don't like Assad, it has got to be all those people involved because we've got to destroy ISIL - that is the first priority.
RT: It's been a huge game changer this week with Russia getting involved because frankly the situation was going backwards before, wasn't it?
AW: I won't say it was going backwards but I've been saying for a long time - we need a comprehensive, agreed strategic plan for how we move forward. And it is no good just doing airstrikes, you have to have boots on the ground somehow, they have to be there. And also one needs to actually go to the heartland of ISIL which is within Syria. I am sure in time they will be pushed out to Iraq, I am sure they will. But that still leaves Syria. So, we've got to resolve that problem and it is highly complex and very difficult.
RT: Russia has maintained so far that there will be no foot on the ground. Why is Russia saying that won't happen? Could it practically help this ongoing fight or is this something that should be avoided at all cost?
AW: I think the involvement of either Russian or American, British or French ground troops in Syria will be an error at the moment. But at some stage there will have to be boots on the ground. And, perhaps, we will look at something like Egyptian or Jordanian - their non-sectarian type troops and forces - to go into certain areas what would have to be done in conjunction with an agreement from Assad because he has boots on the ground there. And then what Russia, America and ourselves [UK] and other countries can provide is the air capability, reconnaissance capability. We never talk about special forces, but I am sure they will be involved. And it needs to be a very comprehensive strategy; we need to absolutely take on ISIL in the propaganda sphere which we haven't done as well as we should have done. We need to absolutely strangle all their money supplies, which we haven't done properly yet. And it needs to be an all-pervasive strategy and it has to include everyone. Iran has to be involved; they have Hezbollah fighters actually on the ground there. So, it has to involve all these people. And it is no good being sort of 'namby pamby' about it saying: "I don't like them." At the end of the day ISIL want to kill our people...
|
#35 www.rt.com October 8, 2015 Bellingcat accuses Russia of faking videos showing jets dropping bombs on ISIS [Graphics here https://www.rt.com/news/317971-bellingcat-russia-syria-videos-geolocation/] British online investigative group Bellingcat is accusing Russia's Defense Ministry of faking videos of airstrikes on Islamic State targets. The group claims that geolocation tags show the videos were actually shot hundreds of kilometers away, where Islamic State has no presence. The Defense Ministry has been posting videos on its YouTube channel of airstrikes targeting Islamic State (formerly ISIS/ISIL) militants in locations such as their key stronghold of Raqqa in northern Syria. However, Bellingcat is claiming that the location bombed on October 3 was not the ISIS stronghold, but rather the town of Al-Latamneh, which is over 150 kilometers away in territory not under the control of the terrorist organization. They also say that local groups have their own videos shot on the ground proving it. The investigative group now wants to set up a crowdsourcing effort to try and geolocate every video published by the Russian Defense Ministry. 'Reading tea leaves' Bellingcat is no stranger to questioning official Russian photographic data, with the group accusing Moscow of altering satellite images from the MH17 disaster. The Malaysia Airlines plane was downed in eastern Ukraine on July 17, 2014, killing all 283 passengers and 15 crew members. At the end of July, Russia's Defense Ministry released military monitoring data showing Kiev military jets tracking the MH17 plane shortly before the crash. The ministry also posted satellite images of nearby areas where Kiev had had its air defense units deployed, but Bellingcat believed these were fake. The organization's claims were based largely on an analysis of satellite images, performed using the website FotoForensics.com. However, it appears that even the founder of that website is unconvinced of the veracity of the group's work. In an interview with the respected German publication Der Spiegel, image forensics expert Jens Kriese slammed the investigative group. "From the perspective of forensics, the Bellingcat approach is not very robust. The core of what they are doing is based on so-called Error Level Analysis (ELA). The method is subjective and not based entirely on science," he told Der Spiegel. "What Bellingcat is doing is nothing more than reading tea leaves. Error Level Analysis is a method used by hobbyists," said Kriese, who is a professional image analyst and former scientific researcher. Western hysteria The West has been quick to criticize Moscow's decision to launch airstrikes against ISIS, with US President Barack Obama saying that Russian attacks were actually helping the terrorist group. Meanwhile, there have been plenty of false accusations made against Russia, whose campaign is just a week old. For example, a photo was posted of a Syrian rescue worker carrying an injured girl bearing the description: "Russian strike in Homs that killed 33 civilians, including three children." As it turns out, the photo first appeared in social media on September 25. The Russian anti-terror operation started five days later, on September 30. Several media outlets as well as Twitter users spread the news that one of the Syrian rebel leaders, Iyad al-Deek, was killed in a Russian airstrike in September. However, earlier media reports claimed that the same person had been "kidnapped" by ISIS in January 2014, while in June local media said that he had died, calling him "a martyr." 'Manipulated reports picked by armchair analyst' Defense and security analyst Richard Galustian, who has worked in the Middle East and North African countries for some 40 years, told RT that the founder of Bellingcat, Eliot Higgins, cannot be taken seriously as he heavily relies on unverifiable and "manipulated" social media sources. "[He] is a complete fraudster. An unemployed internet addict who for ridiculous reasons 'sells' himself as an expert ... [Higgins] is part of a new generation of cyber armchair sleuths who use open source social media to gather 'intelligence' from on the ground," Galustian said. |
#36 www.rt.com October 8, 2015 Hysterical beast: The problem with The Daily Beast's Russia analysis RT Editorial [Many graphic elements here https://www.rt.com/op-edge/318011-daily-beast-weiss-russia/] This blog represents a range of opinions prepared by a team of authors working at RT. It contains commentary, views, feedback and responses to various events and news media items. This weekend, The Daily Beast's senior editor Michael Weiss attempted to unite his three fixations, Syria, Russia and RT in a diatribe headlined "Russia's propaganda blitz." In the article, he accuses the Russian media of doing exactly what CNN and other US news networks do in times of war. That is, giving a lot of attention to the story, embedding reporters with the military and delivering news from the perspective of 'our side.' Weiss mangles quotes. He claims that "the collapse of the Soviet Union, as (Vladimir) Putin notoriously said, was the 20th century's greatest tragedy." Putin never said this. The Russian President said "the collapse of the Soviet Union was the greatest geo-political catastrophe of the century." This is an entirely different matter. Later, the journalist misquotes Konstantin Kosachev, the head of the Foreign Affairs Committee of Russia's Federation Council. Weiss alleges that Kosachev said, "No one in diplomacy is allowed to criticize the policy of the country where he (sic) stationed." This is total nonsense. The actual Kosachev quote was: "If I were to allow myself to publicly comment on the policies of the host country, and even to blame that country of supporting extremism on top of that, many would be willing to ask me to leave the country in 24 hours. An embassy spokesperson is authorized to comment on their country's actions and definitely not to lecture another country, especially like a mentor." Many news sites have abandoned the practice of sub-editing copy before it's published. It appears that Weiss is not cut out for this "brave new world." He mentions somebody called 'Gatov.' There's no first name and no indication of who 'Gatov' is. An elementary school teacher would reprimand a child for that. Another bizarre quote is from "nationalist" Dmitry Bobrov: "Now we'll see if the national-betrayer, Putin, is ready to flush down the toilet all (the) Russians in Novorossiya." For real Russia experts, this individual wouldn't be a credible source. Bobrov was imprisoned for organizing a neo-Nazi group called Shulz-88 in St. Petersburg in the early 2000's. Shulz-88 members brutally assaulted foreigners - including students from African countries and Vietnam. Yet, it appears that for Weiss, anybody willing to criticize Putin is kosher. That's pretty rich for someone who in the same piece is attacking RT about commentators that appear on the channel. In his self-righteous indignation, Weiss even repeats the same sentence twice, in slightly different forms. Screenshot from www.thedailybeast.com Incidentally, some copy and paste anti-Russia websites reproduced the article verbatim, without correcting Weiss' mistakes. Including Ukraine's hilarious stopfake.org. Interestingly, the latter's mission statement reads: "The main purpose of this community is to check facts, verify information, and refute distorted information and propaganda about events in Ukraine covered in the media." If it's not about Ukraine, it seems facts don't matter. How very Kafka-esque. The Daily Beast can't seem to live with or without RT. Its hysterical propaganda is amusing in many ways, but it also exposes a worrying truth: there are some segments of the American media that cannot tolerate the idea of a genuinely free press when it's not promoting their own agenda. And now, for a bit of context... RT often gets inquiries from young Western journalists asking how they might break into covering Russian affairs. The standard reply is fairly straight forward. Spend some time in Russia, obtain a reasonable grasp of the language and get a feel for the country. It's a road countless journalists have been down and many of them are acclaimed Russia specialists today. Some come to Moscow, others prefer St. Petersburg. The more adventurous sometimes wind up in Siberia or even the Far East. Russia specialists can also have academic backgrounds or years of business experience in the country. Indeed, many of the most prominent English-language Russia pundits are native-Russians themselves. However, in recent years, a new breed of 'Russia expert' has emerged, especially in the US media. This person knows very little about Russia but still pontificates on the subject relentlessly. Michael Weiss is a prime example of such an "expert", a voracious critic of both Russia and RT. By all accounts, Weiss has never lived in Russia. He doesn't speak Russian. Nevertheless, he's marketed himself as an authority on all things Russia-related - when he isn't moonlighting as a self-styled Syria guru. Again, he can't speak Arabic. Nothing as it seems This year, Weiss became a senior editor at The Daily Beast, bringing his obsessive hatred of Russia to a wider audience. It's hardly a coincidence that the jingoistic portal has developed a fixation on RT. After all, RT bashing is a Weiss preoccupation. The problem is that every time Weiss picks up his cudgel, his lack of Russia knowledge is badly exposed. Just as Hassan Hassan attempted to give him credibility on Syria, Russian stringer Anna Nemtsova is used to lend some authority to his Russia hit-pieces. The new McCarthy-ism Despite his lack of any credentials that might qualify him to be a 'Russia expert,' Weiss edits a blog called The Interpreter. Apparently funded by the family of Mikhail Khodorkovsky, who was convicted of embezzlement and money laundering, the website purports to "report on events inside Russia." In reality, the Interpreter delivers non-stop, frenzied anti-Russian vitriol. If Khodorkovsky is really paying the bills, his strategy here seems bizarre. The disgraced oligarch has spoken of a desire to become Russia's President. How does bankrolling an English-language internet service, dedicated to smearing the country, assist in that regard? Also, why hire an editor who can't speak Russian? Surely there were far more qualified alternatives available? There are dozens of under-employed Russian-speaking journalists. In late spring, Mark Ames, famous for Moscow's Exile newspaper, delivered a withering dissection of how one particular ideological faction in the US, namely neo-conservatives, have infiltrated American discourse on Russia. Ames delved into Weiss' background. "During the late (George W) Bush years, Weiss worked for the neocon organ of Bill Kristol, the Weekly Standard; afterwards, Weiss headed up a neocon PR project, "Just Journalism," which policed the English-language press for any journalism critical of Israel in the wake of its brutal war on Gaza in 2008-9. Then, as Syria descended into civil war, Weiss became one of the leading neocon warmongers pushing for America to invade Syria. Perhaps most troubling of all... Weiss played a lead role in promoting the career of one of the most notorious academic frauds of our time, Elizabeth O'Bagy, the fake Syria "expert" whom Weiss teamed up with to argue for war in Syria. Apparently after O'Bagy was exposed as a fraud with no Syria credentials, Weiss skulked away, only to reappear with a new co-author-Peter Pomeranstev-and a new beat: Putin's Russia. Despite having zero Russia background and expertise, Weiss has successfully reemerged lately as a Russia expert on various TV news programs - the Elizabeth O'Bagy of Putin critics - and Pomerantsev's role in this partnership appears to be laundering Weiss' credentials," Ames wrote. Another Weiss pastime is smearing Stephen Cohen, the distinguished Sovietologist and Russia scholar. According to his Wikipedia entry, "Cohen is well known in both Russian and American circles. He is a close personal friend of former Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev, advised former US President George H.W. Bush in the late 1980s, helped Nikolai Bukharin's widow, Anna Larina, rehabilitate her name during the Soviet era, and met Joseph Stalin's daughter, Svetlana." This is akin to a regional soccer correspondent throwing mud at Michael Jordan. Cohen is a genuine Russia expert, with the credentials to prove it. He has forgotten more about the country than Michael Weiss will ever know. The fact that the latter gets far more attention right now, tells you all you need to know about the tragic state of the contemporary American media when it comes to coverage of Russia. |
|
#37
Valdai Discussion Club
http://valdaiclub.com
October 8, 2015
RUSSIA-TURKEY RELATIONS: TIME FOR DECISIVE MOVE
By Vladimir Avatkov and Mikhail Kochkin
Vladimir Avatkov is Director of the Center of Oriental Studies, International Relations and Public Diplomacy, Senior Lecturer at Diplomatic Academy of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation and MGIMO. Mikhail Kochkin is Fellow at the Center of Oriental Studies, International Relations and Public Diplomacy, chairman of the student organization "Eurasian Turkish Club."
The time for Russia's decisive move on the Turkish front has come. However, the tight geopolitical situation and the certain shortage of some foreign policy resources require careful calculation of each step.
Russia has found an excellent opportunity to strengthen its positions in Turkey amid the aggravating domestic political instability in the republic. The turmoil in Turkey arises from the impossibility to form a parliamentary coalition after the elections held in June 2015 and by the failure to cope with foreign policy problems, above all with the spreading terrorism and the mounting migration stream from Syria and Iraq.
At the same time, the domestic and the external crises have become so closely intertwined that separating them seems impracticable. In particular, if we take the problem of combating terrorism, Turkish Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoglu noted at the press conference in the UN on September 28 that Turkey was confronting a three-sided terrorist threat consisting of ISIS (external force), Kurdish Workers' Party and the Revolutionary People's Liberation Party-Front embracing the Marxist-Leninist ideology (domestic forces).
From the standpoint of social problems, the situation here is similar. The complicated demographic situation stemming, first and foremost, from the high unemployment rate among the youth has been further aggravated by the arrival of two million Syrians and 200,000 Iraqis to the Turkish territory. Turks, who used to welcome them with a sense of dignity, demonstrating to the world how much they cared about other Muslims, are now insisting on formation of safe zones on the territory of Syria for accommodation of refugees.
The rickety situation in the country is even more deteriorated by the preparations for the snap elections of November 1 and the existence of the interim government in Turkey, which makes state-level foreign policy planning practically impossible. It has already surfaced into Russian Energy Minister Alexander Novak's statement that signing an intergovernmental deal on construction of the first leg of the Turkish Stream project would most likely be postponed until the formation of a new Turkish government.
In this context, it seems quite logical for Turkish authorities to request support from other states. The question is whom will Turkey appeal to.
Against this backdrop, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan's one-day visit to Moscow in late September should seem like a positive sign. The results of the visit cropped up on the day following Erdogan's return to Turkey, when the president noted after a festive morning prayer, in response to journalists' questions, that Bashar al-Assad could stay at power in Syria during the transitional period. Such stark change in the Turkish president's rhetoric points to certain influence from Russia and the first steps towards settlement of the crisis in Syria.
Nonetheless, the positive changes were no longer visible at the session of the UN General Assembly, which was attended by Turkish Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoglu. At the press conference on September 28, he said that Assad was culpable for all the developments Syria had gone through, for the deaths of people and the flow of migrants to Europe, and that no solution for the Syrian problem could be found as long as Assad stayed at power. Davutoglu praised President Obama's speech and his insight into developing states and democratic regimes.
Thus, certain discrepancies between the two political leaders on Turkey's most crucial issue are in plain view. However, it seems that the cause of that is not in the differences of the politicians' outlook (although it plays a certain role, because Davutoglu has always been a more pro-West politician, while Erdogan shows a more independent standing). In large part, it is a result of Turkey's strive to stay between the opposing parties and try to yield certain benefits from each one. For Russia, it means that the current situation offers a chance to woo Turkey to take its side.
Howbeit, considering the current reality, Russia should not act the way it used to. The elections on June 7 showed that the Turkish society is shifting from the traditional classification of voters according to the Islamist/Laicitist principle. The social structure is complicating, resulting in, for instance, emergence of the People's Democratic Party, which atypically for Turkey represents interests of ethnic and social minorities: Kurds, Armenians, LGBT and others. Russia used to focus on collaboration with one party at a time, but this approach is no longer effective. Dialogue has to be conducted with every political force in order to have different opportunities in exerting influence on such important state for Russia as Turkey.
Moreover, an unexpected political issue arose in the Russia-Turkey relations in September. The countries approach it with a common stance. At the press conference in New York, Davutoglu eulogized Barack Obama's speech, although he remarked that it missed the Palestinian problem. Simultaneously, Moscow is actively engaged in solving the Palestinian problem, as seen in the negotiations between President of the Palestinian National Authority Mahmoud Abbas and Russian President Vladimir Putin on September 23.
Therefore, the time for Russia's decisive move on the Turkish front has come. However, the tight geopolitical situation and the certain shortage of some foreign policy resources require careful calculation of each step. Russia has already demonstrated the ability to act in such circumstances.
|
|
#38
Russia Beyond the Headlines
www.rbth.ru
October 8, 2015
Is there a Taliban-ISIS double threat to Russia and Central Asia?
The ongoing Taliban offensive on the Afghan strategic stronghold of Kunduz, which is only 45 miles away from the border with Tajikistan, has raised concerns that there could be a spillover of radical Islamism into Central Asia, the soft underbelly of Russia. While the experts approached by Troika Report ruled out air strikes such as those that Russia is currently carrying out in Syria, some pre-emptive moves by Moscow were considered a likely option.
Sergey Strokan, Vladimir Mikheev
The sudden deterioration of the regional security environment prompted Tajik President Emomali Rahmon to fly urgently to Sochi to meet Russian leader Vladimir Putin and discuss, among other things, the strengthening of "bilateral military-technical cooperation" and additional effective measures to make the southern border with Afghanistan as impregnable as possible.
Meanwhile, Ramzan Kadyrov, leader of Russia's Chechen Republic, met with Afghan Vice President Abdul Rashid Dostum. After the meeting Kadyrov voiced the opinion that Russia should provide substantial assistance to Afghanistan in blocking the advance of the Islamic State (ISIS) radical militant group, which is now targeting this region too.
However, Moscow-based experts with a career in security services, diplomacy and academic studies have conflicting views on the likelihood of Russia's readiness to go one step further than its current pre-emptive preparations and get directly involved in assisting the Afghan government to fight off the Islamist militants. There is also no consensus on the level of security threat to Russia and Central Asia from the expansion of ISIS jihadists' outreach to Afghanistan.
So how serious is the threat of the Taliban consolidating control of an area in the vicinity of Russia's Central Asian allies? Alexei Malashenko, a security expert at Moscow's Carnegie Center, claims the danger is being exaggerated.
"I think it is no threat to Russia. Moreover, it is no threat to Tajikistan as well; its real challenges are coming from within the country. I do not envisage the Taliban attacking Tajikistan; they do not have the force to do it."
"The Taliban is preoccupied with its own, domestic, Afghan affairs."
However, this opinion is disputed by another expert. Troika Report approached General Vyacheslav Trubnikov, former First Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs, former Director of the Russian Foreign Intelligence Service, and former ambassador to Afghanistan, for his insight into the matter. Should the recent victories by the Taliban convince and persuade Moscow that it is better to act pro-actively than retro-actively by enhancing security along Central Asian borders?
"My personal opinion is that the situation in Afghanistan has never been calm or stable. Russia and its allies under the auspices of the Collective Security Treaty Organisation (CSTO) are well aware of these dangerous developments inside Afghanistan. The recent CSTO summit paid due attention to these developments. It is essential for all the CSTO member states to be always on the alert.
"I do not think there is a direct link between Islamic State and the Taliban movement. But any terrorist threat, no matter where it comes from, should be responded to with certain pre-emptive actions. Such actions are effective only if they are well coordinated. The meeting of CSTO members was a step in the right direction."
- Given the air strikes currently being carried out by Russia in Syria, is there a possibility that a similar operation could be undertaken in Afghanistan?
"Up to now we have not received a request from the Afghan government to enter an agreement specifying collective actions. Unlike in Syria, whose legitimate government requested concrete assistance from Russia."
In any case, the capture of the strategic city of Kunduz by Taliban fighters, later pushed out by Afghan security forces, marks an escalation of the civil war in a country that has not seen stability for almost 40 years. The Taliban is on the march. What kind of a security threat is the Taliban for Central Asia? Georgy Mirsky, professor at the Higher School of Economics in Moscow and one of Russia's leading experts on Middle East affairs, had the following to say to Troika Report:
"There are various Islamist organizations - we should not focus only on the Taliban and al-Qaeda - there is Islamic State there and others. They are Sunnis but of different ethnic backgrounds: Arabs, Chechens, Uzbeks, Tajiks, Pashtuns, etc. If there is a rebellion somewhere in Tajikistan, the rebels can reckon on arms supplies from Afghanistan because after NATO forces leave there will be an awful lot of weapons around. Some of these weapons may be transferred by local Tajiks and Uzbeks to underground organizations inside Tajikistan and Uzbekistan."
- What countermeasures would it make sense for Russia to take in a pro-active mode?
"I met these kinds of people back in 1995, and they told me that their real and ultimate goal will be... Kazakhstan, and then [the Russian republics of] Tatarstan and Bashkiria. They would not achieve this goal. But the point is that they are ready to kill and die for this to happen. Russia should put up a barrier to prevent such incursions."
The resurgence of the Taliban, after displaying a higher degree of military operational skill during the attack on Kunduz, as well as reports that some of its units are merging with or being subjugated by ISIS militants, adds uncertainty to the fate of Afghan President Ashraf Ghani and to the preservation of a secular regime in Kabul.
The international jihadist forces now assembling in Afghanistan are a destabilizing factor for the entire region. This sounds an alarm bell for Russia and its allies in Central Asia, which sooner or later will force them to undertake pre-emptive action.
|
|
#39
Interfax
October 8, 2015
Russian officials discuss ISIS threat at Afghanistan security conference
Moscow, 8 October: The number of ISIS militants in Afghanistan has increased to 3,500 within a year, the Russian president's special representative for Afghanistan and director of the Second Asia Department of the Russian Foreign Ministry, Zamir Kabulov, said on Thursday [8 October].
"ISIS, which is rearing its head in Afghanistan, is a priority treat. Just think about this: ISIS properly appeared in Afghanistan only last year, and now it already has 3,500 armed people in its ranks as well as sympathizers who may soon become gunmen," Kabulov said at an international conference on Afghanistan.
According to him, it is noteworthy that ISIS in Afghanistan copies the tactics of the group's operations in Iraq, Syria, Libya and several other African countries.
"They would find the most influential man in the locality who has rivals. He would be offered cooperation and assistance in eliminating the rivals. This would be done. Once this happens, the man himself is eliminated. Thus, the entire district, the entire locality or a larger area, ends up in the hands of ISIS. ISIS is slowly expanding its zone of influence almost without fighting," Kabulov said.
Kabulov also said that ISIS in Afghanistan has been training gunmen from Russia, whose instructors are [include] individuals with US and British passports.
"A number of ISIS training centres are purposefully involved in training gunmen among people from Central Asia and some of Russia's regions. The language of instruction in these so-called camps is Russian," he said.
According to him, instructors in such camps come from various countries. They include Arabs, Pakistanis as well as individuals with American and British passports.
Speaking at the international conference on Afghanistan on Thursday, the chief of the General Staff of the Russian Armed Forces, Col-Gen Igor Sergun, confirmed the information about 3,500 ISIS gunmen in Afghanistan.
"Individual representatives of local extremist ethnically-based groups - the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan, Hizb ut-Tahrir, Lashkar-e-Taiba and the Islamic Jihad Union - have declared their readiness to conduct joint operations with ISIS. The total number of sympathisers who have not yet joined ISIS and bandit groups that formally retain their autonomous status is, according to our estimates, around 4,500," he said.
The general noted that "despite a significant increase in the number of ISIS supporters in Afghanistan, the ideology of this group has not yet spread widely in Afghanistan's parochial society, which has traditionally, over many centuries, fought foreign invaders".
"Because of that, in the majority of cases, financial interest is behind people's readiness to fight for ISIS. At the same time, paradoxically, ISIS ideas are steadily gaining a foothold among educated young people who have access to the internet and electronic media spreading extreme radical interpretations of Islam," Sergun said.
"At the same time, Islamists from ISIS have launched a propaganda campaign to discredit the ideological principles of Taleban leaders and cause a split in their ranks. For that purpose, Taleban leaders are often accused of betraying the idea of 'the jihad against the American occupiers' and holding 'collaborationist talks' with the Afghan government and the US administration," the general said.
His observation is that "the radical Taleban do not intend to share influence with others and lose any of the proceeds from drug trafficking, even for the sake of building a 'caliphate'".
"Since the beginning of this year, it is estimated that 900 people have been killed on both sides in clashes between ISIS and the bandit groups of the Islamic movement of the Taleban in the west and east of the country," Sergun said.
|
|
#40
Afghanistan Seeks Russian Military Support as US Commitment Wavers
October 9, 2015
WASHINGTON (Sputnik) - The Afghan government has reached out to Russia for military aid because it has lost confidence that the US is truly committed to ensuring the regime survives and the country remains stable, experts told Sputnik.
Afghan officials asked Russia for military aid earlier this week, including weapons, equipment and air support, to help fight terrorists within their country.
"The fact the Afghans appear to be reaching out to the Russians... indicates a high-level of worry in Afghan government circles as to what the future may hold in terms of the capacity of the regime to survive," University of Arizona Professor of History David Gibbs told Sputnik on Thursday.
Some Afghan officials, Gibbs argued, have become unnerved by lackluster signals from Washington, triggering fears that the United States is not going to stand by Kabul and prevent its implosion.
The Russians, Gibbs suggested, should not get involved in Afghanistan, especially given current circumstances and Russia's "disastrous" experience during the Soviet era.
"The fact that a high-level official in the Afghan government is reaching out to the Russians, the successors of the Soviets of all people, would suggest there is some feeling of panic going on here," Gibbs added.
Elizabeth Gould and Paul Fitzgerald, authors of highly-acclaimed books on US foreign policy, told Sputnik that Afghanistan is reaching out for help because the US mission there has failed.
"From the beginning, the American command had no idea of what it would take to get the Afghan army up and running," Gould and Fitzgerald explained.
The Afghans would be well advised to look to all regional neighbours including Russia to replace US involvement at all levels, Gould and Fitzgerald claimed.
The number of militants in Afghanistan is estimated to have reached 50,000, while membership in the Islamic State shows no signs of declining, Russian General Staff chief Gen. Valery Gerasimov said on Thursday.
Earlier on Thursday, US Defense Secretary Ashton Carter told reporters that the United States will adjust its military presence in Afghanistan in 2016 and beyond with the support of NATO allies.
|
|
#41
Russia Direct
www.russia-direct.org
October 8, 2015
Will the Kremlin respond to increased tensions in Nagorno-Karabakh?
Moscow faces tough choices about the escalating Nagorno-Karabakh crisis. Any change from the status quo could have implications not only for Russia's relationships with Armenia and Azerbaijan, but also for the region's integration processes.
By Sergey Markedonov
Sergey Markedonov is an Associate Professor at Russian State University for the Humanities based in Moscow (Russia). From May 2010 to October 2013, he was a visiting fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (Washington, DC, USA). In April-May 2015 he was a visiting fellow at the Center for Russia and Central Asia Studies, Institute of International Studies (IIS), Fudan University (Shanghai, China).
The rapid development of events in the Middle East, primarily Russia's intervention in the military confrontation in Syria, has dislodged other hot spots from the global agenda. But that does not mean that other unresolved ethnic and political problems have lost their relevance. Nowhere is this more evident than in the Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict over Nagorno-Karabakh.
Today the situation in the South Caucasus as a whole is relatively calm. Following Russia's recognition of their independence, South Ossetia and Abkhazia have received guarantees of security and socio-economic recovery. At the same time, despite Georgia's very public NATO aspirations, Tbilisi has not moved one inch closer to joining the Alliance.
As a result of the new status quo, these two ethno-political conflicts have acquired a certain amount of stability. Talk about Georgia's territorial integrity remains at the rhetorical level, while in practice there is no challenge to Russian dominance in Abkhazia and South Ossetia, never mind any attempt to oust Moscow from the two partially recognized republics.
But the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict is an exception to the general rule. Experts and diplomats following the developments almost unanimously note a rise in the number of armed incidents, not just in quantitative terms but also in their intensity.
Armenia and Azerbaijan begin to ratchet up the rhetoric
Besides large-caliber light weapons, mortars and grenade launchers, howitzers and artillery systems have now entered the fray. Moreover, the confrontation is growing not only on the frontiers of Nagorno-Karabakh itself, but all along the Armenian-Azerbaijani border.
The latest surge of military activity occurred on the eve of the 70th anniversary session of the UN General Assembly. Whereas the bellicose rhetoric once sounded mostly from Azerbaijani officials (not because of any particular militancy on their part, but because the conflict is perceived as a national trauma), in the fall of 2015 the Armenian side also began to talk tough.
For instance, Armenian President Serzh Sargsyan, in defining Nagorno-Karabakh as "one of the most militarized areas on the planet," said that the region was "an integral part" of Armenia. In turn, the Armenian Ministry of Defense outlined plans to respond to hostile action, noting its readiness to "use appropriate artillery and missile firepower."
Does this mean the age-old conflict is entering another acute phase? And what might be the next steps of the warring parties and other stakeholders? After Sargsyan's description of Karabakh as an integral part of Armenia, there is talk of Yerevan potentially revising its former approach to the status of the unrecognized Nagorno-Karabakh Republic (NKR).
Government officials have declared their solidarity for the self-determination of Karabakh Armenians, giving them de facto support in matters of defense, security and socio-economic development. But the question of recognition, although it has been raised (mostly by opposition politicians), is largely limited to discussion. Meanwhile, only the external indicators of the Armenian leader's words can be considered new in a political sense.
Even former President Robert Kocharian, Sargsyan's predecessor, named the conditions for the potential recognition of the NKR, namely the resumption of military activity, i.e. the effective end of the status quo. And although the sense of hostility is rising, as well as the number of incidents, clashes and loss of life, it does not mean that war is inevitable.
Yerevan seems to be pragmatically assessing the prospects for recognition in terms of the potential challenges, threats, gains and losses, and the extent to which they are diminishing or growing. Sargsyan's rhetoric is not the beginning of a formal legal procedure modeled on Abkhazian and South Ossetian recognition, but an additional signal to Baku regarding Yerevan's "red lines."
External stakeholders in the region
But the post-Soviet ethno-political conflicts are not simply confrontations between union members and autonomous entities of the former Soviet Union. They also involve external players. Nagorno-Karabakh is no exception. Such outside influence has a nature of its own.
First, it is not part of some kind of "proxy confrontation" between the West and Russia. Its aggravation is not directly related to the interests of Russia or those of the United States and its European allies. On the contrary, Moscow, Washington and Brussels all fear the "unfreezing" of the conflict, which, amid the growing turmoil and uncertainty in the Middle East and the hazy outlook for Ukraine, would only add to the list of international political risks.
Especially when considering the interests that neighboring countries have in Nagorno-Karabakh, above all Turkey (strategic ally of Baku) and Iran. Iran, is wary of the conflict (or indeed a peaceful settlement) being used against it.
The second feature of this outside influence follows on from here. The absence of any clear external agreement on what to do about Nagorno-Karabakh is a deterrent. Baku, which is keen to break the status quo, understands that in the event of tough action it will not receive unequivocal support from either the West or Russia.
Yerevan, on the other hand, has no such interest. On the contrary, it would like to preserve the status quo and is aware that Moscow is not prepared to sacrifice its special relationship with Azerbaijan, which exists alongside its strategic alliance with Armenia.
Russia's take on Nagorno-Karabakh
Moscow's position warrants special mention - not least in the context of Ukraine and the Middle East, where Russia has shown itself to be not just a keeper of the status quo, responding to events as they happen, but also a force capable of ripping up the rulebook and changing the agenda, even if the price is confrontation with the West.
In the fall of 2015, various media (including Deutsche Welle) touched upon Moscow's increased diplomatic activity aimed at untangling the "Karabakh knot" by putting pressure on Yerevan to gradually transfer five regions occupied by Armenian forces to Baku's control. Two of these regions (Lachin and Kelbajar) would remain under Armenian control to ensure links between "Greater Armenia" and the unrecognized NKR.
The architects of this scheme seem to be partially hostage to the Russian revisionism of recent years, forgetting that in Abkhazia and South Ossetia (2008), Crimea (2014) and Syria (2015), Moscow drastically upped the ante only when it was not possible to keep to the old rules of the game. In each instance, it was in fact proactive responsiveness.
In the case of Karabakh, the idea of" handing over regions" has no obvious dividends for the Kremlin, but merely adds to the unpredictability and risk. Both Armenia and Azerbaijan view Nagorno-Karabakh as the basis of national identity (a symbol of victory over the Turkic world in one case, and a national trauma in the other).
Any concession to the adversary could put an end to a political career in Baku or Yerevan. But even if it didn't, the "handover of regions" has the potential to destroy the fragile balance of forces and make military conflict inevitable. It is unlikely that a new front in the Caucasus will strengthen Moscow's influence, which was achieved mostly economically and diplomatically.
A full-scale resumption of war in Karabakh is unlikely to provoke a crisis inside the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) or the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU) for the simple reason that the member countries of these integration structures all have their own view of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict and their own special relationship with the conflicting parties.
Reluctance to make a "decisive choice" could paralyze Moscow's favored integration processes. This suggests that Moscow will take its time when it comes to diplomatic deals.
|
|
#42
Russia Beyond the Headlines
www.rbth.ru
October 8, 2015
Belarusian writer Svetlana Alexievich wins 2015 Nobel Prize in literature
Writer is best known for her books War's Unwomanly Face, Zinky Boys, Second-hand Time, Voices from Chernobyl
Eleonora Goldman, RBTH
The 2015 Nobel Prize in literature has been awarded to Belarusian writer Svetlana Alexievich "for her polyphonic writings, a monument to suffering and courage in our time," the Nobel Committee said on Oct. 8, the news agency TASS reports.
Alexievich, who was born in western Ukraine in 1948 and grew up in Belarus, has spent the past 35 years exploring Soviet identity through the more challenging and less charted terrain of the interior life. Through real voices, she explores the psychological journey of the Soviet, and more importantly, post-Soviet, people.
Alexievich was considered a strong candidate for the Nobel Prize for Literature in 2013 before Alice Munro was awarded the prize. Her new work Second-Hand Time, the Modern History of Russia and the former Soviet Union in Dramatic Confessions has been published in Russia, Sweden and Germany.
She is best known for her books War's Unwomanly Face, Zinky Boys, Voices from Chernobyl, etc.
Nobel prize winner writer Alexievich says she does not know what she'll do next
"I have been in this capacity (as the Nobel prize winner) for two hours only, I don't know what I'll do next," Alexievich told reporters in Minsk on Oct. 8, when asked about her future plans.
She said the Russian culture minister has already congratulated her.
The Belarusian president and culture minister have yet to do so. "No, the president has not congratulated me, neither the Belarusian, nor the Russian one," she said.
|
#43 Russia Beyond the Headlines/Rossiyskaya Gazeta www.rbth.ru October 14, 2013
Saying a long farewell to the inner Red Man The definitive exploration of Homo Sovieticus can be found in the non-fiction world of Svetlana Alexievich. Elena Yakovleva, Rossiyskaya Gazeta Svetlana Alexievich has spent the past 35 years exploring Soviet identity through the more challenging and less charted terrain of the interior life. Through real voices, she explores the psychological journey of the Soviet, and more importantly, post-Soviet, people. Alexievich was considered a strong candidate for the Nobel Prize for Literature in 2013 before Alice Munro was awarded the prize. Her new work "Second-Hand Time, the Modern History of Russia and the former Soviet Union in Dramatic Confessions," has been recently published in Russia, Sweden and Germany. In this interview with Rossiyskaya Gazeta, the writer talks about her oeuvre, overcoming the Soviet legacy and challenges of the new era. Q: In your new book, you explore the life of socialism in the human soul... I explore "home" socialism because all official socialism disappeared along with its rituals and dress. But it remains in the depths of human beings. We boldly and naively thought 20 to 25 years ago that it would be easy to part with that terrible, almost inhuman experience. But as it turns out, it's not. The "red man" is still alive in us. Q: This inner "red man," according to the confessions collected in your book, is a complicated creature. I'm not making excuses for him. I just think that we treated him rather roughly in the past. Everything was destroyed without giving serious thought about planning for the future. I'm not an apologist for the Soviet era, but I think it's too bad that we haven't analyzed the value of the things that blood was shed for. I prefer a social-democratic society. I lived for several years in Sweden and saw the availability of many benefits, administration by the state, and the equality of people. Wouldn't a development along those lines have been more natural than what happened to us? Q: Why did the experience of the "red man" suddenly give way to a terrible hedonism? I think that we have a breed of humanity that is not fully developed culturally. All of our cultural energies go towards making grabs for power and achieving something, but no one asks how they should arrange their life, their soul. The higher values, such as dying for ones country and defending it against enemies, never touched everyday life. What are we expending our civic energies on now? To protect the feelings of believers? But nobody is storming the churches. On the debate about gays? But no one has taken away the right of an adult to decide how to live. Maybe civic energies should be directed towards learning to live together and enjoying life? Q: How did you find in the choir of human voices the main idea of your book - that we are experiencing a "second-hand time"? For 35 years I have been writing a series of five books called "The Red Man. Voices of Utopia." "Second-Hand Time" is the final book. This is a metaphor for our ineptitude for the new. We were incapable of this new life, did not find we had the strength for it or ideas, or desires, or experience. During Perestroika, we thought we'll just keep talking about it and will have freedom. But it turned out that freedom is a hell of a lot of effort. We somehow always think that if we shed blood for lofty ideals, some kind of true and new life will come. There are many expectations like that in Russian literature. But a "new life" is long, boring work. Second-hand time is a time of the old, old prejudices. Europe has thousands of small groups, communities, that are always talking about improving their cities and homes, how to raise their children, how to help the starving people in Africa. Spending your time in this way produces a certain quality in the soul. And we don't have this. And for some reason, everything builds directly into hate. Once again, we are doing what we know how to do - determine if someone is "an enemy of our cause or friend." That's the way half the country thinks. Q: If we have a difficult legacy, and we get caught up in patterns of behavior, how can a different "inner man" be born? Russia is big, and it is impossible to take everything under control and iron out the experience of freedom. New people are appearing with a civic courage. The new generation has different ideas about everything. But for the new generation to begin to master the difficult experience of freedom, the intellectuals should start a dialogue with them. Today we have the voices of Ulitskaya and Akunin. But in Russia we have great cultural figures like Olga Sedakova. I am convinced that there are more of those people than we think. ... Many of the heroes of my book, when their friends were put in prison for samizdat [self-publishing prohibited books] thought that the most important thing was to open the door of freedom. And when the door of freedom opened, people ran in the opposite direction. They wanted to get dressed, put on shoes, and go to Antalya for a vacation. From all of these dressed and rested people, such monsters appeared! And we feel that we were not ready for this change. It is one thing to fight a huge monster and win, but another to discover it had hundreds of offshoots. In some ways it was worse. And we do not have the cultural skills to deal with them. But 20 years have passed, and the silence of the intelligentsia and the elite must end. It is time to speak out. ---- Svetlana Alexievich was born in the Ukraine and later moved to Belarus. She graduated from the Department of Journalism of Belarusian State University. She has written "War's Unwomanly Face," "Zinky Boys," "Charmed Death," "Chernobyl Prayer," "Last Witnesses," and "Second-Hand Time." She has received many awards, and in 2013 she was awarded the Peace Prize of German booksellers -- First published in Russian in Rossiyskaya Gazeta. |
|
#44
Poroshenko cautiously optimistic about implementation of Minsk agreements
ASTANA, October 9. /TASS/. The current truce in Ukraine's south-east gives reasons for cautious optimism regarding implementation and other items of the Minsk agreements, Ukraine's President Petro Poroshenko said on Friday following his talks with Kazakhstan's President Nursultan Nazarbayev.
"Not many believed in it, we undertook every effort, and, as a result of our efforts, for over two weeks now the fire has ceased. Thus, we have reasons for cautious optimism other items of the Minsk agreements will be implemented," he said during a news conference.
"Right now withdrawing of light equipment, tanks, mortars begins, which, in my opinion, will favor fixing the reached fragile truce," the Ukrainian president added.
Kazakhstan's president, in his turn, said he is for a peaceful settlement of the conflict in Ukraine's south-east.
"We are for a peace settlement of any conflict, there is no alternative to a peace settlement," he said. "Generally speaking, we are satisfied with implementation of all Minsk agreements."
He said during this complicated period Kazakhstan continues offering humanitarian aid to Ukraine.
"Kazakhstan has sent food to the people in Ukraine's south-east, and we shall continue this work," he said. "We have transferred money to accounts of the International Red Cross and to the Chernobyl Shelter Fund."
The Chernobyl Shelter Fund (CSF) was set up at the EBRD in 1997 to assist Ukraine in making the site of the current shelter over Chernobyl's destroyed reactor 4 stable and environmentally safe. The fund also aims to create the conditions for the eventual dismantling and decommissioning of the contaminated structure.
|
|
#45
Moscow hopes Minsk peace accords for Ukraine will be extended - source
MOSCOW. Oct 9 (Interfax) - Moscow believes that it would be advisable to extend the validity period of the Minsk peace agreements for Ukraine to 2016, a Russian diplomatic source told Interfax on Friday.
"We hope that the 'Minsk-2' [accords] will be prolonged. This stems from the very course of the settlement [process], in particular the decision of the DPR and the LPR (self-proclaimed Donetsk and Luhansk People's Republics) to reschedule their elections and the observance of the ceasefire by the sides," the source said after being asked about Russia's stance on the possibility of extending the Minsk peace deal.
At the same time, the source noted that the issue of extending the 'Minsk-2' agreements "has no time limits, but there is a wish that the implementation of the agreements would not fade away into eternity."
"What is important today is for this work within the Contact Group, especially within its political sub-group, to gain momentum," he said.
"If we abide by the letter and the spirit of OSCE standards when fulfilling the 'Minsk-2', no matter which way you look at it, it will spill over into January 2016 at least," the source added.
|
|
#46
Sputnik
October 9, 2015
Poroshenko Claims Russia Destroys 'World Order' by Striking ISIL in Syria
According to the Ukrainian leader, the Russian Air Force's operation in Syria against ISIL is leading to global instability. On the eve of Petro Poroshenko's accusation, Damascus said that Russian jets have destroyed 40% of the terrorists' infrastructure.
Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko believes by bombing ISIL facilities in Syria, Russia is undermining the 'global security order.'
In an interview with BBC 'News Night,' he said that "Vladimir Putin wants global instability," comparing the operation of the Russian fighter jets in Syria to the situation in Donbass, where according to him, "15 months ago there were Russian soldiers." However, he again gave no evidence of the presence of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation in Ukraine.
According to Poroshenko, Putin is bent on creating global chaos "because of the economic problems and loss of support in his own country." But according to the latest polls, Poroshenko himself has only 3% of supporters amongst the respondents with 33% not in support.
Kiev has repeatedly declared that Russia supplies the armed militias of Donbass and the Russian military has presence in the region. However, Moscow denies the charges, calling the conflict internally Ukrainian.
Since September 30, at the request of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, Russia has been conducting precise airstrikes on ISIL targets in Syria, using Su-25 frontline bombers, Su-24M, Su-34, and Su-30 CM.
However, the coalition, led by the US since September 2014, has carried out strikes on the positions of ISIL in Syria bypassing the UN Security Council and without coordinating the strikes with the Syrian authorities.
|
|
#47
Inhumane blockade in Donbas persists - Russia's OSCE ambassador
MOSCOW, October 9. /TASS /. Russia's Ambassador to the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) Alexander Lukashevich has pointed to the persisting inhumane blockade in Donbas. He was speaking in Vienna at a meeting on the situation in Ukraine and the need to implement the Minsk agreements. The text of his speech has been posted on the website of the Russian Foreign Ministry on Friday.
"We believe that progress in the humanitarian and economic areas should give an additional impetus to the peace process," the Russian diplomat said. "Some progress has been made in prisoner exchanges, the delivery of international humanitarian aid has become possible. Over the past week, dozens of trucks were able to deliver assistance to those in need."
"However, the inhumane blockade of Donbas persists," Lukashevich noted. "Local residents have no access to pure drinking water, which is a gross violation of international humanitarian law. Restrictions on the citizens' freedom of movement remain in force."
Meetings on Ukraine give hope that month-long efforts will not be in vain
The recent meetings on Ukraine give hope that month-long international efforts to help defuse the political crisis in the country will not go in vain, Russia's Ambassador to the OSCE went on to say.
"Now, after the meeting in Paris, we expect to see real actions from Kiev rather than an imitation [of actions]," the diplomat said. "To delay the process further is not in the interests of both the Ukrainian people and its European partners." "By shirking the direct dialogue with Donetsk and Luhansk and the need to coordinate the modality of the elections with them, Kiev has already missed the chance to hold local elections across the country on the single voting day in October," he noted.
"Nevertheless, the recent meetings on Ukraine make it possible to hope that the month-long international efforts to help resolve the political crisis in the country, including by the OSCE, will not go in vain," Russia's ambassador said. "The chances for success hinge on Kiev's further actions to scrupulously comply with its obligations enshrined in the Minsk Package of Measures, its willingness to actually seek joint solutions to the problems in the east of the country in the interests of preserving Ukraine's unity and territorial integrity."
Foreign mercenaries in Ukraine's armed forces contradict with Minsk-provisions
Kiev's decision to allow military service to foreign citizens as well the decision illegal armed formations become parts of the armed forces have nothing to do with the Minsk agreements, Alexander Lukashevich continued.
"The Ukrainian authorities demonstrate a similar approach regarding item 10 of the Complex Measures on Implementation of the Minsk agreements," he said. "Instead of disarming the illegal groups, they are made parts of the country's forces, and now the authorities have also legalised the service there of foreign mercenaries. Those 'innovations' have nothing to do with the Minsk accords."
The Russian ambassador said Kiev also ignored other provisions of the Complex of Measures to Implement the Minsk agreements.
"The law on Donbas special status is not working, the law on amnesty is missing," he said. "Addendums to the constitution, which key element should be decentralization minding specifics of Donbas, have never been discussed with representatives of the region."
At the same time, after stabilization of the situation at the front line, it is necessary to focus on implementation of the political requirements of Minsk-2.
"The summit of the Normandy Four in Paris on October 2 has removed misunderstanding regarding certain requirements of the Minsk Complex of Measures, confirmed a lack of alternative to it as a basis for the peaceful settlement of the situation in Donbass," the ambassador said.
Item 10 of the Complex of Measures to Implement the Minsk agreements reads necessary withdrawal from the territory of Ukraine of all foreign armed formations and disarmament of illegal groups. The document was signed by Special Representative of the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) Heidi Tagliavini, Ukraine's second President Leonid Kuchma, Russian Ambassador to Ukraine Mikhail Zurabov, as well as the leaders of the self-proclaimed Donetsk and Luhansk People's Republics (DPR and LPR), Alexander Zakharchenko and Igor Plotnitsky.
OSCE observers should agree drones flights with both sides
The Special Monitoring Mission (SMM) of the OSCE in Ukraine should agree use of technical means, including drones, with both parties to the conflict in Donbas, Russia's Ambassador to OSCE Alexander Lukashevich said.
"We stress the OSCE observers should observe strictly the parity, "mirror" approach to both parties," he said. "Observation and verification of the military equipment withdrawal, control of locations to keep it should be provided evenly at both sides from the engagement line and should be in SMM reports."
"This is equally applicable to use of technical means of observation, use of which should be agreed with all the parties," the ambassador said. "It is necessary to exclude the practice, where routes of drones are discussed and detailed with one party, while the other party receives only vague information."
The diplomat regretted "some reports demonstrate a difference in presenting information on similar violations by Kiev's military or by the militia."
|
|
#48
Interfax
October 9, 2015
Elections in DPR, LPR could be held on February 21
The preliminary date set for the local elections in the self-proclaimed republics in Donbas is February 21, 2016, Donetsk People's Republic (DNR) negotiator at the talks in Minsk Denis Pushilin has said.
"The estimated election date is February 21. This is the timing to allow Ukraine to really implement the Minsk agreements, not imitating it. In the meantime, Ukraine must implement the Minsk agreement increasingly. This is a preliminary date heard by the 'Normandy format'. The precise date will be available upon receiving the results of work of the political subgroup," Pushilin told reporters on Oct. 9.
At the next stage, provided that Ukraine is implementing the Minsk Agreements, the elections will be held in a broader format, he said.
"At the next stage, if this is agreed at the level of necessary documents, these won't be elections of mayors and heads of districts only. We will be voting for all people's deputies as well," Pushilin said.
|
|
#49
Over 1 mln Ukrainians flee to Russia since February 2014 - migration official
GENEVA, October 7. /TASS/. More than 1 million Ukrainians were forced to flee to Russia to "save their life and human dignity" since the crisis deteriorated in Ukraine in February 2014, a deputy head of Russia's Federal Migration Service said in Geneva on Wednesday.
"In total, Russia's government has allocated more than $200 million for the social welfare [in Russia] of Ukrainian citizens in 2014-2015," Nikolay Smorodin told the 66th session of the Executive Committee of the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR).
As of late September, around 400,000 Ukrainians have asked for temporary asylum in Russia, some 125,000 Ukrainians have said they wish to obtain Russia's citizenship and another 260,000 Ukrainians have applied for temporary residence permit, he said.
The official said Russia has "all the necessary resources for hosting Ukrainian citizens who are saving themselves from the interior armed conflict," and special focus is on education, healthcare, employment, food supplies and accommodation.
Besides, since August 2014, Russian humanitarian convoys have delivered 48,000 tons of foodstuffs, medicines and essentials for the citizens of Ukraine's south-east.
Moscow welcomes "the weighted and unbiased approach of the UNHCR towards the Ukrainian situation," Smorodin said, noting the particular steps of drawing attention to the Ukrainian refugees issue and impartial coverage of the crisis in Donbas.
"We believe that only the continued effort towards peaceful settlement in Ukraine's south-east may create stable conditions for the refugees' return home. The basis for this is the full implementation of the Minsk agreements," he said.
|
|
#50
Fort Russ
http://fortruss.blogspot.com
October 8, 2015
Ishchenko: What are the real issues preventing a settlement in Ukraine?
By Rostislav Ishchenko
cont.ws
http://cont.ws/post/130836
Translated for Fort Russ by Paul Siebert
"Difficulties of the Ukrainian settlement and diplomatic maneuvers around Donbass"
In order to answer the question why the settlement of the Ukrainian crisis is such a difficult process, we need to understand one simple thing - the Ukrainian crisis would not have arisen if the Ukrainian ruling elite had been minimally adequate not even to the level of management of a modern state, but at least to the preservation of its own interests. Let me explain this.
For Poroshenko Klitschko Yatsenyuk, Tyagnybok, Turchinov and other authors, editors and participants of the Ukrainian revolution as well as ordinary Nazis life was better, more profitable financially and promising politically during the reign of Yanukovych than after their seizure of power.
The above-mentioned individuals were politically promising figures: Klitschko, Yatsenyuk and Tyagnibok were the leaders of political parties with high ratings, Poroshenko was a constant contender for the top positions, who had already been the Minister of Economy and Foreign Affairs, the Secretary of the National Security Council. Turchinov oversaw one of the biggest political parties, whose presence in the parliament was guaranteed, and considering the inevitable defeat of Yanukovych in the elections of 2015, he would be among the opposition leaders who would legitimately come to power.
For Nazi goons, who later formed the so-called self-defense forces of Maidan, volunteer battalions and other illegal armed groups, life under Yanukovich was carefree. They could beat and sometimes kill anyone they wanted and when they wanted. The maximum penalty was a visit to the police station, where they were released almost immediately. The Party of Regions was financing the Nazis. They also received financial and organizational "aid" from Western friends.
Grant-eaters from pro-Western media and NGOs were handsomely paid for a completely unprofessional work (only they considered themselves journalists or experts). In addition, the Party of Regions was grooming and cherishing them.
After the coup, the Nazis were sent to the front, where the usual impunity instantly ended and they began to be killed too, what, in their view, is a gross injustice. Grant-eaters were no longer paid (the criminal regime was overthrown, there was no one to fight with). The most stupid of them, too, found themselves on the front lines (many of them have been killed), the cleverest became volunteers, but among them the competition is enormous - not everyone can get access to serious cash flows, with the majority of them begging for socks and tinned stew.
The political elite discovered that by seizing power it destroyed the country at the same time. In Ukraine, there is no law, no order and no money left. In addition, every person in power has earned himself a criminal liability with no statute of limitation (for crimes against humanity and war crimes) meaning not only life sentences, but death penalty and confiscation of property.
That is, all individuals and social groups participating in the coup have received less than what they would have achieved in the course of evolutionary development of the situation, while the incurred costs are not just huge, but incompatible with the result. From the very beginning it was clear that the collapse of the Ukrainian statehood created by the Nazis would be as inevitable as the defeat of Nazi Germany in April 1945. The timing of the collapse can be different, but the result is the same.
Therefore, all of them, starting from the lowest Nazi goons up to President Poroshenko got involved not because they were aware of all the risks and had a plan to minimize them, but only because of their complete intellectual sterility. They blindly believed that the US and the EU dreamed to use Ukraine as a strong and effective counterbalance to Russia, which meant that "white men" from the West sailing on big boats would pay for everything, arrange everything, help in every possible way while the local chieftains would only have to change their attire made of feathers and divvy up the profits. They continue to believe it even now.
In the period that has elapsed since February 2014 nothing has changed in the mental organization of the Ukrainian elite. They keep sincerely believing that they are of lasting value for Washington. They also sincerely believe that Russia will overstrain itself economically and self-destruct itself politically in two or three months. That is, according to them, they have to be a little patient, to hold on a bit more and the victory would be in their pocket.
I know that this inadequacy of such a large number of people, who for two and a half decades have ruled a big European state, might seem an exaggeration. But for many years I have talked with representatives of the Ukrainian elite, and I maintain that they are even dumber than they seem. In fact, they have often been saved just by their stupidity while their partners or opponents could not believe in such naivety and looked for some hidden meaning in the actions of Ukrainian politicians. Do you remember how the good-for-nothing Kuchma took power from the hardened Kravchuk, and then the worthless Yushchenko took power from Kuchma, then the orange camp lost power to Yanukovych. Finally Yanukovych, who prior to his infamous fall was said to be in full control of the political field in the country, gave power to absolutely worthless characters. But it turned out that this was not the limit, and we might expect such loony characters like Lyashko, Semenchenko and others. Even the"great" Kuchma and Kravchuk run errands for Poroshenko. Such turnover of power is possible only if all characters (from Kravchuk to Semenchenko) are roughly equal in terms of their intelligence.
The second part of the problem lies in the fact that our European "friends and partners", like all normal people, cannot believe that they are dealing with pathologically inadequate individuals, who have never said a word of truth in their lives. The Europeans know that a politician has to deceive both partners and opponents, and even voters, but they realize that all this should be done according to certain rules. That is, it is impossible to lie directly, because you would be immediately caught.
Therefore, during the first round of negotiations on the Ukrainian crisis it was extremely difficult for the Russian diplomacy to convince Merkel and Hollande that representatives of Ukraine lie constantly. Paris and Berlin believed that Kiev is definitely stretching the truth, but Moscow was also to blame. That was a strategy of the European "intermediation" in the conflict.
The situation began to change only after the second Minsk. After the second Minsk it became apparent to the Federal Chancellor of Germany and the President of France that Poroshenko was not only shamelessly lying, but trying to make them accomplices to his lies. And when they do not show sufficient enthusiasm - he complains to the United States. And if Hollande, who will not be running for president, does not care much, for Merkel it is important to be reelected. Poroshenko has become an irritating factor for Angela Merkel - a leader of the country which represents the European Union. So irritating that even Washington's arguments could not get her to close her eyes to the escapades of the Ukrainian president.
In Paris, Merkel, who did not want her peace initiative (Norman and Minsk formats) to fail because of the lying confectioner, took a position that could be called pro-Russian. Even after the departure of Putin and Poroshenko during the press conference Merkel and Hollande clearly defined their requirements to Kiev:
1. To introduce changes to the constitution with a real, not phony decentralization.
2. To ensure a defrosting of the law on the special status of Donbass.
3. To make changes in the legislation of Ukraine ensuring the realization of the right of Donbass.
4. To coordinate all these constitutional and legislative changes with the DPR/ LPR.
5. To adopt a law on the general and complete amnesty for militia and leaders of the DPR/ LPR.
Now Poroshenko must fulfill all of these requirements. Then he will have to enshrine in law Ukraine's refusal from Donbass (in fact, the law on the special status makes the presence of the DPR/ LPR within Ukraine more formal than of Canada belonging to the British Crown), and recognize the legitimacy of the current governments of the DPR/ LPR. Or he can try to lie again. But this time he would be lying directly to Merkel. It was Merkel, not Putin, who voiced the demands to Poroshenko. Therefore, these are not Russia's, but the EU's demands. It is unlikely that the daughter of a pastor would forgive the confectioner such abuse of her ideas about morality.
The only problem was that in order to implement these requirements Poroshenko needs time. About half a year, if he follows the Ukrainian legislation. To give Peter Alekseevich these six months the DPR/ LPR agreed to postpone the local elections till the end of the winter or even till March-April 2016. Kiev has already welcomed this decision.
Once Kiev agreed to the initiative of the DPR/ LPR it stepped into another trap. Now, whether it will carry out the reforms required by Minsk or not, the Minsk process is extended to 2016 (at least as long as the DPR/ LPR do not hold elections). And any attempt by Kiev to change something will be interpreted by Merkel as a derangement of the Minsk process through the fault of Poroshenko.
Let me remind you that the extension of Minsk was persistently demanded by Paris and Berlin without any objections from Russia and Donbass. Only Kiev and Washington wished to close the format in 2015. The reason is simple - Kiev cannot implement the Minsk format. But it put its signature on it. And the longer Poroshenko plays games with Merkel and Hollande, the weaker is the European support for Ukraine. In fact, it is nonexistent. To escape this trap, Kiev had to destroy the Minsk format and then talk about the creation of the new one.
Washington would be eager to join the new format and to squeeze the DPR/ LPR out of it. The only opportunity for Kiev to break up the Minsk format without entering into a conflict with Europe was a termination of the format, which was due to expire in 2015. After Paris and today's agreement to postpone the election in the DPR/ LPR Kiev no longer has this possibility.
As a bonus, now our European friends and partners have a good understanding who they are dealing with in Ukraine and do not have any illusions any more.
|
|
#51
Fort Russ
http://fortruss.blogspot.com
October 6, 2015
Kiev learned nothing from loss of Crimea and Donbass
Svpressa
http://svpressa.ru/politic/article/133163/?cbt=1
Translated for Fort Russ by Paul Siebert
"Patchwork quilt of "independent" Ukraine"
The loss of the Crimea and Donbass has taught nothing the politicians in Kiev"
The Ukrainian political analyst Vladimir Granovsky predicted the disintegration of the present Ukraine into two almost equal parts after the country's joining NATO.
Granovsky cited the results of a statistical survey, according to which about 60% of the population approved of Ukraine's joining NATO. The analyst also noted that the remaining 40% would be categorically against NATO, and this could lead to further division of the country.
"You say - "60% for NATO. And what about other 40%? After all, 40% is a lot. What will you do with this forty per cent if they are categorically opposed to NATO? To lose more territory?", - Granovsky asks the logical question.
"Any attempt by one group to dominate the other will lead to conflicts. Donbas is an example of such a conflict. The Crimea is a horrific example of a loss of territory.
He urged the government to seriously examine their own actions, noting that if the people of Donbas and the Crimea voted against Ukraine they had a reason.
"Without the analysis of their actions the Ukrainian authorities will not understand why the population voted against the Ukrainian state. We can continue to lose the territory. A human being is given brains in order to think and not to shout slogans", - concluded the expert.
He pointed out that Russia has managed to take the Crimea without a single shot, because the population of the peninsula was loyal to Moscow and not to Kiev, which did not want to listen to the Crimeans.
In response to a replica that in the case of the Crimea Russia simply "took advantage of the weakness of Ukraine", Granovsky made a distressing forecast for Kiev:
"Soon Poland and Hungary will also take advantage of this situation".
A new Ukrainian statehood that emerged after the collapse of the USSR was based on ethnic nationalism, linguistic and cultural dominance of the country's West over the country's Southeast", - explains a political commentator Viktor Shapinov.
- The Ukrainian language was imposed administratively on the Russian-speaking regions. In these circumstances, it is difficult to increase "loyalty". Although, before coming to power of radical nationalist forces as a result of the Maidan, the Crimea and other regions of South-East were tolerating the rule of Kiev.
"SP": - Is it still possible somehow to retain the population of Donbas?
- Now it is impossible to restore at least some loyalty of Donbas to Kiev. People here consider themselves the citizens of the DNR and the LNR and, despite the difficult economic and social situation, remain committed to the People's Republics. For the people to even begin to consider the possibility of returning to Ukraine a fundamental change of power in Kiev is required. Elimination of the openly Nazi elements is a prerequisite.
"SP": - Could Hungary, Poland and Romania use Russia's "Crimean experience"?
- The disintegration of Ukraine is a real scenario. In this situation, Poland, Hungary, Romania and, possibly, Slovakia might lay claim to certain territories. And, perhaps, take them de facto.
"SP": - And how the West would react to it?
- I think that it would shut its eyes to the attempts of East European allies to enlarge their territories. Although, officially it could condemn such attempts.
"SP": - And would the people of Galicia, Transcarpathia and Bukovina support an exit from Ukraine?
- Ethnic Hungarians, Romanians, Poles, Ruthenians, as well as some Hutsuls could easily support such separatism. It would depend on the overall situation. Prior to the coup d'etat in February 2014 only 15-20% of the Crimean people were in favor of joining Russia, but when it became clear who had come to power in Kiev - these sentiments were shared by more than 90% of the Crimean people.
"SP": - Granovsky predicts the division of Ukraine into two parts? Only two?
- It is difficult to predict now. A line dividing Ukraine into two parts - conditional Ukraine and Novorossia - are easily observed. I would not go as far as predict the possibilities for further splitting. Maybe, some independent entities under the control of one or another oligarchic group might arise. We'll have to wait and see. But the fact is that it would be very difficult for Ukraine to survive within its former borders.
- It should be noted that a hallmark of countries after the collapse of the Soviet Union and the dismantling of socialism was capitalist exploitation and a huge contradiction between the sentiments of the general population, who created the national wealth by their labor and nationalist elites, which determined the agenda and the rules of the game, - says a former representative of the Foreign Ministry of the DPR in Moscow Daria Mitina.
- The only exception was Belarus, where a different course was taken. In Ukraine, these contradictions had been growing and reached their peak in 2013. I would not divide the regions into Ukrainian and non-Ukrainian - the fault line was "Soviet values - anti-Soviet values", and the civil war today is not between Ukrainians and non-Ukrainians, but between the ideological grandchildren of Bandera and the heirs of the Soviet soldiers. In the "non-Ukrainian" or rather, the eastern and southern regions, these contradictions were more acute, because these regions, as an industrial and scientific basis of the Ukrainian state, felt discriminated against -imposed upon them was an alien system of values of the parasitic elite, which was based on ethnic nationalism and cannibalistic liberalism. By the way, the bosses have not realized it until now, and therefore they try to blame anyone - Russia, the Putin administration, Donbas, the Crimea, but not themselves.
"SP": - Can Kiev retain the population of Donbas? Which steps should be taken?
- This question is meaningless for almost a year and a half - since 24 April 2014 (the date of the beginning of the "ATO") it lost any meaning. The first drop of blood shed in Donbas was a watershed, after which it is ridiculous to talk about any loyalty.
"SP": - What actions can the Kiev regime undertake to save at least the part of Donbas it controls now?
- Of course, it will be taking advantage of the truce and the absence at this stage of attempts by the DPR and LNR to retake the occupied areas. However, the freezing of the conflict is not a solution of the problem, but only a postponement for an indefinite period. It is very difficult to hold the disloyal population on the huge territory by force. The population is armed. Therefore, Ukraine can control the situation in these areas only with the deployment of army and reinforced police units. At the moment, they are somehow managing the situation in one way or another, but that cannot last for a long time.
"SP": - How justified are the fears of Granovsky? Could Poland, Hungary and Romania use Russia's "Crimean experience?
- This issue will be decided not in Poland or Hungary, but in Washington. Poland is in the orbit of American influence, and without an American permission it would not be active. With Hungary it is more complicated - it might take advantage of the sentiments of the Hungarian population of Transcarpathia, but these sentiments are not clearly articulated now.
The West does not care about Ukraine's statehood. It will not be trying to save Ukraine's statehood, but to keep its own interests. At the moment, it is more convenient for Europe to have a single territory for the transit of the Russian energy resources than some obscure fragments.
"SP": - What will be the result of Ukraine's policy to join NATO?
- This is a purely theoretical question - NATO does not invite Ukraine. Therefore, it is completely worthless to calculate what percentage of Ukrainians is in favor of the entry. The collapse of Ukraine, if it takes place, will not be caused by its entry into NATO. Poroshenko has also announced that so far NATO does not invite Ukraine, but it is something to aspire to.
"SP": - Is it possible to preserve Ukraine as a state?
- Ukraine has not been preserved - the current Ukrainian Constitution refers to the Crimea, the Donetsk and Lugansk regions as a part of Ukraine, which are not both de facto and de jure. Further developments may have different scenarios, each of which is equally probable. The fate of the country, which has lost its national sovereignty, will largely depend on the factors of foreign policy.
And here is a comment from the Kiev journalist Dmitry Skvortsov.
"SP": - Why Ukraine has been unable to create a common identity for its citizens in the west and in the east of the country?
- Ukraine simply did not have enough time. Another generation or two down the line and the people of Sloboda Ukraine and Novorossia would have identified themselves as Ukrainians despising (at best) the "Moskals" like today's "truly European" residents of Zhytomyr and Chortkiv. Assimilation was carried out by the Ministry of Culture, Ministry of Education, but also - in much more "creative" ways in the youth environment - by nationalistic grant-eaters. Resistance to forced Ukrainization was represented almost exclusively by enthusiasts, with their own hand-drawn banners. All national television channels were Russophobic, and Moscow did not create resources for spreading a positive image of Russia.
"SP": - And why Kiev in all 25 years of independence did not make any efforts to increase the loyalty of the population of the South-East?
- It did not undertake anything because Ukrainization was successfully promoted anyway. In particular, through those Donbas oligarchs who held the region's population in check. Suffice it to recall how meekly the fans of the Donetsk football team swallowed the replacement of the Russian "ё" into Ukrainian "e" in the name of the football team "Shakhter" - the symbol of the eternal confrontation between Kiev and Donbas.
Are they undertaking anything now? They are. We should remember how quickly the Parliament lifted its ban on the use of regional languages. We have seen this absurd show "The united country", a deliberate and awkward attempt of TV and radio hosts to shift into Russian, to imitate some scanty humanitarian convoys to Donbas, to set up TV towers at the borders with the republics of Novorossia. But it is impossible to hide their Russophobic nature. Their spite gets to the surface. Hence the spontaneous bombing of cities, and the flow of hate in the Internet aimed at Donbas. Eventually, the blockade of Donbas and the Crimea receives almost complete understanding in the Ukrainian society.
"SP": - How can Kiev attract the non-Ukrainian population?
- Speaking of economic measures, then it is impossible for Kiev. Speaking in humanitarian terms, then Ukraine should cease to be Ukraine. It was deliberately created by Austrians, Poles and Germans to destroy the identity of Novorossiya and the surrounding regions. Therefore, the puppeteers of the Kiev regime and Ukrainian ideologues understand: any flirting with self-identification of the people is suicidal for the project "Ukraine".
Among these people there are not only Russians, but also Hungarians and Romanians, whose "mother countries" border on Ukraine. Even more dangerous for Ukraine are the Poles who hate it. They would have long ago raised the issue of their property in Galicia and Volyn (including whole cities), but "intra-European solidarity" in opposition to Russia wins. But once Brussels understands that the "patient is more dead than alive" they would immediately go in to grab "their own" so that Russia does not get it all. Here the forecast of Granovsky about the division of Ukraine looks realistic.
"SP" - Is Poroshenko capable of hearing the voices warning about the split?
- Petro Poroshenko and his American masters do not care a hoot about Ukraine. The first needs it as a means of enriching himself. The second needs it as a bridgehead against Russia. But the resources of Ukraine are almost exhausted. Therefore, soon it will not be interesting to either Poroshenko or to Washington. Only to Moscow, Budapest, Bucharest and Warsaw.
|
|
#52
www.foreignpolicy.com
October 8, 2015
Winter Is Coming. And So Is Ukraine's Far Right.
An armed, radical threat could tear Ukraine apart before snow falls in Kiev.
By Lev Golinkin
Lev Golinkin is the author of A Backpack, a Bear, and Eight Crates of Vodka.
There's a reason most revolutions in Eastern Europe begin in the winter, from Russia in 1905 to Ukraine's Maidan in 2013. Once the cold settles in, a government's empty promises are laid bare. Over the next several days, forecasters are predicting, the temperature in Ukraine will plunge to freezing. When President Petro Poroshenko looks at the thermometer, he should be worried.
Ukrainians are seething with anger over the plunging quality of life and the government's failure to purge the country of oligarchy and corruption, the very issues that ignited the 2013-2014 Maidan uprising in the first place. This is not Kremlin propaganda. A Washington Post article in August spoke of the "sense that last year's wave of protests delivered little but fresh misery." A recent Atlantic Council report states that "[i]f the Ukrainian government does not follow through with an ambitious reform agenda, public support for reforms will wane while dissatisfaction will increase, threatening political stability and the country's successful future." Even George Soros, a stalwart backer of Kiev, wrote this month that "the general population is increasingly dissatisfied both with the slow speed of reforms and the continued decline in living standards."
If Ukraine were a stable country, this mounting public disillusionment would manifest itself through an unseating of the ruling party in the next election or perhaps through a referendum of no confidence in the administration. But Ukraine - fresh off a revolution followed by 19 months of war - is far from stable. Its citizens have more weapons than they do trust in their government. If the average Ukrainian can't scrape together enough money to feed and heat his family in the brutal Ukrainian winter, he will blame Kiev (and the West) and express his outrage not at the polls, but in the streets.
Russian President Vladimir Putin is not the only one who would love to see the Poroshenko government fail. Ukraine has an active far-right movement composed of ultranationalist groups, organizations that combine radical political agendas (with racist and homophobic overtones) with sizable paramilitary formations. Some of these groups, such as Svoboda, began as far-right political parties that were on the margins of Ukraine's politics before Maidan. Others, like Right Sector, were formed out of paramilitary groups of street fighters that merged into a movement during the uprising. As the war against Russia-backed separatists unfolded, these organizations formed volunteer battalions that proved crucial in containing the separatists.
As with many things in Ukraine, the far right's numbers, as well as the extent of Kiev's control over their battalions, remains nebulous. In July, Right Sector's Dmytro Yarosh was able to call up around 5,000 members for a march in Kiev, though how many of the participants were fighters as opposed to party supporters is unclear. Likewise, the Azov Battalion, which has been banned from receiving U.S. training and weapons by Congress, has been nominally under Kiev's control when it comes to fighting separatists; where Azov's loyalty lies when it comes to facing Kiev is an open question.
What is clear is that these groups are capable of sowing immense chaos and carnage, as was proved on Aug. 31, when grenade-wielding thugs from Svoboda killed four Ukrainian National Guardsmen and wounded 138 others in front of the parliament building in Kiev. This attack was far from the first time that the far right has threatened Kiev or spilled blood: On July 11, Right Sector was involved in a deadly shootout with police in the western Ukrainian town of Mukacheve, and members of several battalions have threatened a coup after the fighting in the east is concluded.
Up to this point, more or less, the far right and Kiev have shared a common enemy: Russian-backed separatists in eastern Ukraine. But as the violence in the eastern regions abates, the ultranationalists - including their affiliated (and heavily armed) battalions - are turning their attention inward. Over the past several months, these groups have been increasingly ratcheting up the pressure on Poroshenko, declaring his administration to be an "internal occupation" and calling, as Right Sector put it, for the "new phase" of the revolution.
Kiev and the far right are at a stalemate. Poroshenko doesn't have the power to disband the ultranationalists (the administration's response to the Aug. 31 bloodshed has been restricted to a handful of arrests), but the far-right factions aren't able to openly move on Kiev either. For that, they'll need to have everyday people protesting in the streets. They need another Maidan.
This is why two narratives are currently battling each other in Ukraine - across op-eds, social media, and news conferences. Poroshenko is exhorting his compatriots to stay calm and look to the future. The far right, meanwhile, is exploiting frustration and anger amid economic hardships and urging people to take to the streets.
In September, IMF chief Christine Lagarde wrapped up her visit to Kiev by praising reforms carried out by Ukraine as "astonishing" and urging Poroshenko and Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk to stay the course. From a big-picture perspective, Lagarde is correct: Kiev's accomplishments are remarkable considering that it had inherited a country saddled with debt, paralyzed with corruption, and bleeding from a devastating war with Russian-backed rebels. The fact that Ukraine hasn't imploded is in itself a testament to both the Ukrainian people and Western aid.
But the average Ukrainian doesn't have the luxury of looking at the big picture. Utility tariffs have skyrocketed, as have prices for goods and services and the unemployment rate. The eastern regions are in the middle of a humanitarian crisis, with more than 1.5 million internally displaced people subsisting on the mercy of volunteers and sporadic funding from Kiev's strained coffers. A July poll showed that only 3 percent of the country is satisfied with the pace of change, while Yatsenyuk, the man responsible for carrying out the IMF's reforms, has an approval rating of 11 percent.
Each week brings winter closer, making austerity measures such as reduced social services and raised utility fees bite harder. Meanwhile, the far right's cry will resonate more and more. Perhaps the clearest indicator of this has come from the way in which some of Ukraine's bigger parties have taken up ultranationalist talking points while distancing themselves from Poroshenko. In early September, Oleh Lyashko, the leader of the Radical Party, which officially split from Poroshenko's coalition, denounced the president as Ukraine's biggest criminal. Poroshenko's rival Yulia Tymoshenko went even further, telling the Independent that the administration's unpopular reforms are going to trigger "an uncontrolled uprising that could sweep Ukraine away as a country."
This is exactly what the far right needs. Groups like Svoboda function best when they can mix in with crowds, presenting themselves as fighters against corruption and injustice; when a crowd is gathered, any imprudent move on the government's part will be seen as a move against "the people." Throngs of protesters are the far right's fuel, and once they are in place, the country has no shortage of explosives.
Under the most optimistic scenario, a far-right uprising would greatly destabilize Ukraine; Poroshenko wouldn't be able to continue implementing IMF reforms if he were busy fending off an armed insurrection in the middle of Kiev. At worst, this would set off a chain of events that would rapidly turn the country into a fractured, failed state of 45 million people in the middle of Europe.
To give democratic Ukraine the best chance to survive, Washington must minimize the chances of citizens rising up once winter hits. Statements of solidarity aren't enough. What's needed are food, clothing, medicine - tangible, visible, and immediate relief, all stamped with "Courtesy of Kiev and the United States" - to ensure that the people of Ukraine continue to believe that they have a positive future with the West.
This isn't a novel idea. During the Cold War, the State Department turned it into an art form. From the Berlin Airlift in 1948 to the Russian-language Voice of America broadcasts beamed into the Soviet Union through the 1980s, the United States has a long history of analyzing the situation on the ground, predicting the needs of the population, and acting to win over hearts, minds, and stomachs.
America's current Ukraine policy has mostly neglected this kind of aid. That's a shame. Washington has an opportunity to mitigate what the United Nations describes as an impending humanitarian disaster while combating the destabilizing power of Ukraine's far-right radicals. It's an opportunity that shouldn't be ignored, because if angry, starving people take to the streets of Kiev, the result is likely to be most unpleasant, both for Ukrainian and American interests in the region. Meanwhile, the temperature is continuing to drop.
|
|
#53
Sputnik
October 9, 2015
Ukraine: Dreams That Never Came True
With the guns in Donbass silent for nearly five weeks now the Ukrainians' attention is shifting back towards the ideals of the 2014 Maidan revolution only to see that many representatives of the corrupt regime of former president Viktor Yanukovych have retained their seats in the ministries and security services alike, German media wrote.
What the Maidan protesters demanded was a democratic, open and Western-oriented country where everyone would have equal chances for success, Frank Hofmann, the head of the Kiev bureau of Deutsche Welle, wrote in a comment.
Almost two years on, these demands are still ignored by kleptocratic representatives of the old oligarchic establishment. President Petro Poroshenko took more than a year to finally bring to oath the first detectives of the newly-formed National Anti-Corruption Bureau, Hofmann added.
Meanwhile, increasing reports of new cases of corruption and shady schemes keep flowing in implicating the builders of a new cap over the crippled Chernobyl nuclear reactor and even the country's interior minister.
Many Ukrainians are rightfully proud of their new police in gleaming US uniforms many Maidan activists readily joined.
However, the country still has to wait until November 7 to finally say goodbye to the outgoing police force the old elite so successfully used to line their pockets, Frank Hofmann continued.
Many suspect that despite his public calls to fight the oligarchs, President Poroshenko is in no hurry to send them packing, including the coal and electricity magnate Rinat Akhmetov, whose coalmines are primarily located in Donbass.
As to the Maidan activists, many of them work as volunteers at federal ministries, and old-style politicians, led by Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk, never miss a chance to sing their praises while never allowing them anywhere near the corridors of real power. All this means that the old system of corruption and cronyism hasn't gone anywhere, Frank Hofmann noted.
Small wonder why the number of Ukrainians, especially Maidan activists, who no longer trust the government, is growing fast and chances are high that the rightwing radicals may capitalize on this public discontent during the upcoming local elections.
It looks like it may take Ukraine another Maidan revolution to finally get on track to a democratic future.
"This is the hard reality the government will finally have to wake up to and the European Union would be best advised to actively help the people who want their dream of a democratic and free Ukraine to finally come true," Frank Hofmann wrote in conclusion.
|
|
#54
http://readrussia.com
October 8, 2015
Ukraine's New Neoliberal Necromancer
By Sean Guillory
As converts to the neoliberal faith, Ukraine's government is ever eager for spiritual advice. While the debt standoff in Greece provided opportunity to declare its slavish devotion to austerity, and the recent Yalta European Strategy conference offered "faithful reflection" on "reform," none of this can substitute getting personal spiritual council from the father of supply-side economics, Arthur Laffer.
In mid-September, in a barely noticed move, Ukraine's Ministry of Finance named Laffer as an advisor on tax policy. According to the Ministry's press release, this esteemed economic confidant of Reagan and Thatcher will help Ukraine create a tax system "which should contribute to the increase of investments, economic growth and employment as well as improve the quality of public services for business and thus provide a powerful stimulus for the sustainable economic growth of our country." This statement's vapid syntax should not go elided in a world where the "menace of unreality" dislodges materiality. Yet again, despite its utter bankruptcy as policy and principle, the neoliberal incantation that the interests of the "job creators" are the interest of all remains potent voodoo. That the Ukrainian government is now soliciting one of neoliberalism's most influential necromancers is yet another indication where the Revolution of Dignity is really going.
Many American readers won't recognize Laffer's name even though they've been living under the tyranny of his doctrines for years. Ukrainians are advised to peruse his record to see what kind of services their government just bought. Laffer is most famous for developing the Laffer Curve, a bell curve he scribbled on a cocktail napkin during a steak dinner with Donald Rumsfeld and Dick Cheney in 1974. The Laffer Curve argues that high taxes discourage investment and can bring down government revenue, while low taxes encourage investment and can even increase the state's coffers. The Curve usually accompanies calls for austerity and tax cuts for the rich as the motors for economic growth. Most economists doubt its economic efficacy. Paul Krugman explained the Laffer Curve's dubious history as follows:
"There was never any evidence to support strong supply-side claims about the marvels of tax cuts and the horrors of tax increases; even freshwater macroeconomists, despite their willingness to believe foolish things, never went down that road.
And nothing in the experience of the past 35 years has made Lafferism any more credible. Since the 1970s there have been four big changes in the effective tax rate on the top 1 percent: the Reagan cut, the Clinton hike, the Bush cut, and the Obama hike. Republicans are fixated on the boom that followed the 1981 tax cut (which had much more to do with monetary policy, but never mind). But they predicted dire effects from the Clinton hike; instead we had a boom that eclipsed Reagan's. They predicted wonderful things from the Bush tax cuts; instead we got an unimpressive expansion followed by a devastating crash. And they predicted terrible things from the tax rise after Obama's reelection; instead we got the best job growth since 1999."
What Krugman fails mention is the real purpose of Laffer's alchemy: the tax cuts + austerity = economic prosperity is thinly disguised class warfare from above. In all the years neoliberals have had their economic way, the United States has been a bastion of gross economic inequality.
Yet one need not survey the last thirty years to see the results of Laffer's dogma. Rewind to 2012, when Laffer advised Kansas Governor Sam Brownback to shove his slash-taxes-for-economic-growth snake oil down the Plains State's throat. Brownback, a disciple himself, dutifully complied. Laffer's plan, after all, would serve as a "real live experiment" for the potency of supply-side economics. By 2015, Kansas was stuck with a $600 million budget deficit. When Brownback reproached Laffer on his promise of economic growth, Laffer chided him for his lack of faith and urged patience. "Kansas is doing fine," says Laffer. What was the prescription for this calamity? Austerity. Which is exactly what neoliberals like Laffer like.
As do most of the Clown Car Commandos riding on the Republican presidential ticket. As the Washington Post's Jim Tankersly reported in April:
"As the 2016 GOP primary season takes off, Laffer is more in demand than ever before, with Republican candidates embracing tax-cut-for-the-rich policies even as they bemoan economic inequality. Candidates have been meeting with him in recent weeks, and on Friday in Nashville, he says, his schedule includes Rick Perry at 10 a.m., Ben Carson at noon, Jeb Bush at 1:15 p.m. and Bobby Jindal at 5. Dinner is scheduled with Ted Cruz. He has already met at least once with Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker."
Now you can add the Ukrainians to Laffer's itinerary of worshippers seeking guidance and communion. There's certainly a bit more room in the clown car.
And Laffer's spiritual wisdom only begins with tax policy. He has all sorts of other ideas that would frankly produce laughter if they weren't so utterly devastating for working people. In 2014, he opined on Fox News, "The minimum wage makes no sense whatsoever to me. I mean, honestly, it's just the teenage - black teenage unemployment act and this is the very groups that we need to have jobs, not be put out of work because of the minimum wage." He elaborated on this in his article "How to Fight Black Unemployment" in the Wall Street Journal. There he argued that the best way to alleviate African-American "suffering" is to create "enterprise zones" in America's poverty stricken inner cities. To make these American maquiladoras effective, he called for the elimination of the payroll tax for businesses, the suspension of the minimum wage, the removal of all building codes, regulations, restrictions and requirements that "impede economic growth," and for all profits be taxed at one-third the regular tax rate. He summed it all up with: "Businesses don't move their plant facilities as a matter of social conscience. They do it to make profits for their shareholders. If you want more jobs in our most depressed areas, make those areas more profitable for companies to relocate there. It's as simple as that."
The concrete benefits from serving as cheap labor in poor working conditions for African Americans was left, well, to faith in the inherent benefits of economic growth. Exploitation is all part of the game when it comes to making profits for shareholders. Dignity and other matters of social conscience are merely fetters.
This is the type of "advice" the Ukrainians can expect from "well-known international experts" like Laffer. Khai zhive revoliutsiia!
|
|
#55
US Department of State
Testimony on Ukraine
Victoria Nuland
Assistant Secretary, Bureau of European and Eurasian Affairs
Statement Before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee
Washington, DC
October 8, 2015
As prepared
Thank you Chairman Corker, Ranking Member Cardin, members of this committee for the opportunity to join you today and for the personal investment so many of you have made in Ukraine's democratic, European future. Your bipartisan support, your visits to Ukraine, the assistance you and your fellow members have provided are truly making a difference.
This week we celebrate 25 years since Germany's reunification - the first major step on our journey toward a Europe whole, free, and at peace. Today that journey goes through Ukraine. Across Ukraine, citizens are standing up and sacrificing for the universal values that bind us as a transatlantic community: for sovereignty, territorial integrity, human rights, dignity, clean and accountable government, and justice for all. America helps Ukraine because that country's success is central to our own profound national interest in an ever more democratic, prosperous, stable Europe. Ukraine's aspirations are ours.
In the six months since I last appeared before this committee, Ukraine can be proud of the progress it has made:
* Last spring, the IMF approved an augmented four-year, $17.5 billion economic support program for Ukraine, $6.7 billion of which has already been disbursed;
* The government has proposed and the Rada has passed legislation to reform the energy and agriculture sectors, strengthen the banks, shrink and modernize government bureaucracy, devolve more authority to the regions, and create oversight structures to clean up corruption;
* Last month, Ukraine reached a land-mark debt-relief deal with its creditors, opening the door for more intensive support;
* The September 1st ceasefire in eastern Ukraine is largely holding, the Minsk parties have signed and begun to implement agreements to pull back their heavy weapons, and some IDPs are returning home.
While we welcome this progress, Ukraine still has a long, hard road to travel.
In my remarks today, I will first discuss implementation of the Minsk package of agreements; I will also give an update on the work that Ukraine is doing, with U.S. and international support to reform the country, tackle corruption, and to strengthen democratic institutions; and, finally, I will focus on the tough work ahead to cement Ukraine into Europe and the community of successful democracies.
The Minsk Agreements
The September 2014 and February 2015 package of Minsk agreements remains the best hope for peace, weapons withdrawal, political normalization, decentralization in Eastern Ukraine, and the return of Ukrainian state sovereignty over that part of its border. Yet in the eight months since the February signing of the implementing agreement, Eastern Ukraine has seen almost constant violence all along the contact line, continued weapons shipments from Russia masquerading as humanitarian aid, separatist filibustering and threats at the political negotiating table, and repeated Russian efforts to relitigate basic elements of Minsk.
On September 1st, however, the guns largely fell silent. And on October 2nd , in Paris, President Putin agreed to put a stop to the separatists' threat to hold another round of fake elections. Instead, he committed to Presidents Poroshenko and Hollande and Chancellor Merkel to withdraw heavy weapons, allow full access to the OSCE all the way to the border, and to negotiate modalities for real elections in Donbas under Ukrainian law, safe conditions, and observation by OSCE's ODIHR.
If these commitments are kept- if weapons are pulled back and stored, if the OSCE gets in, and legal, monitored elections are negotiated and held- Ukraine will once again have unfettered access to its own people and its territory in the East. That's what Minsk promises: peace, weapons withdrawal, political normalization, then a return of the border.
As President Obama did with President Putin in New York, we will also keep pushing to complete other unfinished aspects of Minsk- the return of all hostages, including Nadia Savchenko, Oleg Sentsov, and those held in Russia; full humanitarian access for UN agencies, Ukrainian NGOs, and government relief agencies; and the removal of all foreign forces, weapons, and landmines.
We understand why - after almost 2 years of violence, war and lies - many Ukrainian patriots and some in the West doubt Russia and its proxies will ever allow full implementation of Minsk. But Minsk implementation remains a goal worth fighting for because the alternatives are bleak: at best, a frozen conflict in which Donbas becomes an unrecognized gray zone for the foreseeable future; at worst, a return to the war that has already claimed too many Ukrainian lives- and Russian lives, as well.
So we will keep supporting Ukraine as it does its part to implement Minsk. Along with the Normandy powers, France and Germany, we will keep pushing Russia and its proxies to demonstrate equal good faith. As the President and Secretary Kerry have repeatedly said, we will judge Russia and the separatists by their actions, not their words. We will work with the EU to keep sanctions in place until the Minsk agreements are fully implemented. And of course, Crimea sanctions remain in place so long as the Kremlin imposes its will on that piece of Ukrainian land.
Reforms Update
While 7% of Ukrainian territory remains under threat, the other 93% is fighting a different battle: to build a democracy that is closer to its people; an economy where what you know matters more than whom you know; and a society where law rules rather than corruption and greed.
The electoral, judicial, financial, and anti-corruption reforms already put forward by the government and enacted by the Rada are impressive in their scope and political courage.
Here are just a few examples:
* With generous U.S. support, newly vetted and trained police forces are now patrolling the streets of Kyiv, Odesa, Lviv, and Kharkiv, with another three provinces to be covered by year's end. By the end of 2016, every Ukrainian oblast will have them;
* A new National Anti-Corruption Bureau is being stood up and will work with a new special anti-corruption prosecutor once the latter is appointed;
* With U.S., EU, and UK help, new local prosecutors are being hired, old ones are tested and retrained, and all will now submit to periodic performance evaluations to root out corruption and malfeasance;
* Ukraine is closing loopholes in its pension system to help reduce the system's $3.7 billion annual deficit;
* It is working hard to increase energy efficiency, cut subsidies for state-owned gas producers, and establish a market-oriented model;
* And, with the help of the IMF, the government is rebuilding its financial sector, closing insolvent banks and strengthening protection of depositors' rights.
These efforts and more are beginning to bear fruit:
* The latest IMF forecasts released this week predict Ukraine's economy will grow by 2% in 2016.
* Ukraine exported a record-breaking 33.5 million tons of grain in 2014, and in 2015 will increase agricultural exports by 6 %;
* And, Ukraine's foreign reserves have increased to $12.8 billion, up from a low of $5.6 billion in February.
What the U.S. Is Doing
With Congress' unwavering support, the United States has committed to provide over $548 million in assistance to Ukraine since the start of this crisis, in addition to two $1 billion loan guarantees. With continued progress on economic reforms and as conditions warrant, we will ask you to work with us on a third loan guarantee of up to $1 billion. U.S. economic and technical advisors advise almost a dozen Ukrainian ministries and localities. Our $69 million in humanitarian support helps 2.4 million displaced Ukrainians through international relief organizations and local NGOs.
Because there can be no reform in Ukraine without security, $266 million of our support has been in the security sector. This includes sending: 130 HMMWVs, 150 thermal and night vision devices, over 300 secure radios, 5 Explosive Ordnance Disposal robots, and 20 counter-mortar radars.
Just last week, we notified Ukraine that two more life-saving long-range counterfire radar batteries are on the way. And, in November, we will complete a $19 million train and equip program for Ukraine's National Guard and begin training Ukrainian Ministry of Defense forces using $45 million in European Reassurance Initiative funding.
Ukraine has already put this equipment and training to good use. When combined Russian-separatist forces tried all summer to break Ukrainian lines at Maryinka and Starohnativka, they were pushed back again and again by Ukraine's increasingly professional military, and Ukrainian lives were saved.
What Ukraine Still Must Do
Because the best antidote to Russian aggression and malign influence is for Ukraine to succeed as a democratic, prosperous, European state, the Ukrainian government must continue to live up to its promises to its own people and maintain the trust of the international community.
As I said, much difficult work remains to clean up endemic corruption throughout government and society, at every level; to stabilize the economy; break the hold of corrupt state enterprises and oligarchs; and reform the justice system.
Key steps toward these reforms include:
* Procurement and revenue management reform in the gas sector, and unbundling of services along with the restructuring of Naftogaz by Ukraine's deadline of June 2016;
* Like Ukraine's police force, the Prosecutor General's Office has to be reinvented as an institution that serves the citizens of Ukraine, rather than ripping them off. That means it must investigate and successfully prosecute corruption and asset recovery cases - including locking up dirty personnel in the PGO itself;
* The newly created Inspector General's Office within Ukraine's prosecution service must be able to work independently and effectively, without political or judicial interference;
* And, the government must appoint the NABU Anti-Corruption Prosecutor ASAP in order to start investigating these crimes.
Ukraine is well situated to provide products and services to Europe and Eurasia, but must improve the business climate by dismantling thousands of duplicative functions and transparently privatizing approximately 1800 state-owned enterprises, and do more to recapitalize and repair its banking system. Clean governance and business practices that root out corruption are essential to attracting more foreign investment and development opportunities.
Ukrainians also need a justice system that cannot be bought, one that will deliver verdicts, uphold the rule of law, and stop injustice, which was a key demand of the Maidan protests. Currently, only 5% of the Ukrainian population completely trust the judiciary. Inspiring confidence will require passing the constitutional amendments to limit judges' immunity, improve judicial ethics and standards, and rigorously investigate judicial misconduct and enforce disciplinary rules and dismissals.
What the International Community Must Do
While Ukraine works through these tough challenges, the United States, Europe, and the international community must keep faith with Ukraine and help ensure that Russia's aggression and meddling can't crush Ukraine's spirit, its will, or its economy before reforms take hold.
We must challenge the false narrative that nothing can or will change in Ukraine. To fight disinformation not only in Ukraine and Russia, but across Russian-speaking communities in Europe, we are joining forces with our partners in the EU to support alternatives to state-sponsored, Russian programming. We are also training foreign journalists and civil society actors in the art of fighting lies with the truth.
Mr. Chairman, Mr. Ranking Member, members of this committee, America's investment in Ukraine is about far more than protecting the choice of a single European country.
It's about protecting the rules-based system across Europe and around the world. It's about saying no to borders changed by force, to big countries intimidating their neighbors or demanding a sphere of influence.
I thank this committee for its bipartisan support and commitment to the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine and to a Europe whole, free and at peace.
|
|
