Thursday, December 17, 2020

Brief Picture of Russia and its Prime Minister Leader

See link above.


Related website: PUTIN IN LATIN AMERICA
***Because time doesn't allow me to pay equal attention to the Latin American region, any help consisting of pointful articles and comments is welcome for the development of this website. Anticipated thanks.***

MOST IMPORTANT ARTICLES AND DOCUMENTS

-by Veronica Bicer

Saturday, February 21, 2009

Marian Cozma - Serbia and Kosovo's EU Integration Hero

HOME PAGE
MOST IMPORTANT ARTICLES AND DOCUMENTS



On 8-th of February 2009 Romanian handball player Marian Cozma was killed by a group of gypsies, aka Roma ethnic individuals, in Hungary, Veszprem.

Note that a Serb and a Croat, friends of Cozma, were also wounded.

On 9-th of February 2009, the Serbian and Hungarian Foreign Ministers have met and, on the discussion agenda, included the above-mentioned crime (which, in normal circumstances, wouldn't have had any place in the high-level talks).

On the other hand, it is worthwhile mentioning that since June 25, 2008, Serbia is chairing the Decade of Roma, which is a political commitment by governments in Central and Southeastern Europe to improve the socio-economic status and social inclusion of Roma (gypsy citizens) within a regional framework.

2008-2009 is the year when Serbia holds the presidency of this forum.

Serbia's goal (backed by the US) is to join the EU in 2009. The US will also try to push Kosovo in the EU, whether its independence is recognized or not:

"History suggests more than one scenario in which Kosovo and Serbia can both move toward EU membership."

"It is time, however, to get beyond the issue of recognition/non-recognition and do everything possible to speed up the integration of both Kosovo and Serbia into Europe, whether they normalize relations between each other or not."

"In the end, that goal of EU integration should be front and center, not the issue of recognition. In another interview, this time with SEETV, Lagendijk got it right again when he said, “That is the most important message that I would like to convey: Both Serbia and Kosovo one day should be members of the European Union and one should not be able to block the other from entering the European Union.”
"

http://www.tol.cz/look/TOL/article.tpl?IdLanguage=1&IdPublication=4&NrIssue=309&NrSection=2&NrArticle=20397

Allegedly, Serbia has a plan to provide more assets for the financing of all projects relating to the inclusion of the Roma in the system of social trends.

This "smart plan" will be used as a pretext for pushing Serbia (and later for Kosovo) into the EU.
According to the scenario, the EU will find itself unable to survive without Serbia on its side, which is a "specialist" in gypsy issues and which could help the EU to solve the multiple Roma problems that popped up over night in the Union, particularly in Italy, Hungary and Romania.

Recently the "gypsy problem" in Kosovo was highlighted by the international press and the EU stresses reforms on Kosovo, which consist of efforts to improve ties with the Serb minority and the Gypsy population.

The conclusion is that:

Marian Cozma was killed in order to provide a flashy video linked to the "gypsy problem", video which has the potential to push Serbia and Kosovo into the EU.

After seeing the video, naturally, people are now outraged, they demand death to the gypsies, so the EU, with the help of Serbia, which drafted that magic plan within the Decade of Roma, will allegedly do anything to integrate gypsies into the European society.

Whether or not Marian Cozma is indeed dead, we don't know for certain.

What we might find out instead is that, in exchange for this "wonderful gypsy Serb plan", Serbia and later Kosovo will receive the EU membership.

-Veronica Bicer


RELATED QUOTES AND ARTICLES:

The Veszprém stabbing over the weekend appeared on the agenda of a Hungarian-Serbian foreign ministerial meeting – Kinga Göncz and Vuk Jeremic sign co-operation agreement between their ministries.

Serbian Foreign Minister Vuk Jeremic said in Budapest on Monday that Serbia’s central strategic priority in 2009 is to speed up it accession to the European Union, adding that Hungary is fully backing Serbia on this path.



http://www.mfa.gov.hu/kum/en/bal/actualities/visits_and_events/GK_Jeremic_090209.htm

Kosovo: One year on

Kosovo celebrates its first birthday today. But independence has not proved a miracle cure for this international headache. If anything, the situation is now worse.

And this week a further vulnerable group was brought to attention: the Roma population, which is suffering under the general lack of communication. They are currently in lead-contaminated camps but are not being dealt with by the Serbs running the north.


http://www.inthenews.co.uk/infocus/features/in-depth/kosovo-one-year-on-$1268967.htm


DECADE OF ROMA – INTERNATIONAL MANAGING BOARD MEETING

19.02.2009."Serbia has made a strategy for the inclusion of the Roma, the action plan and budget

Since June 25, 2008, Serbia is chairing the Decade of Roma and coordinates the actions of implementing the international initiative to change the position of the Roma in the education, health protection, employment and accommodation from 2005 to 2015. So, the Decade of Roma has started in 2005, on the initiative of the Open Society Fund and the World Bank.


"Our goal is to provide more assets for the financing of all projects relating to the inclusion of the Roma in the system of social trends", said Djelic, while adding that this organization will ask for the formal inclusion in the realization of European projects for the Roma. He repeated that the priorities of Serbia during its one-year chairing of the decade are the following: education and avoiding the discrimination; accommodation and making of the European policy towards the Roma.


http://glassrbije.org/E/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=6274&Itemid=28

Serbia to seek faster EU membership

February 10, 2009 – 12:42 pm

Serbian Foreign Minister Vuk Jeremic said in Budapest on Monday that Serbia’s central strategic priority in 2009 is to speed up it accession to the European Union, adding that Hungary is fully backing Serbia on this path.

The Hungarian prime minister also expressed deep regrets over the incident in Veszprem, in which handball player, Serbian national team member, Zarko Sesum sustained grave fractures of the facial bones in an attack by an as yet unidentified group of persons early on Saturday morning. In the incident, which took place in a bar in Veszprem, Marian Cosma of Romania was stabbed to death and Ivan Pesic of Croatia sustained grave injuries. All three attacked handball players were engaged by the local MKB Veszprem KC.

http://www.serbianna.com/blogs/newspost/?p=1454

EU official stresses reforms for Kosovo

BRUSSELS: The EU's representative in Kosovo said Wednesday the former Serb province must do more to fight organized crime and corruption, and to promote democracy.

Pieter Feith said his top three priorities this year were to push stability, reforms and reconciliation between the majority ethnic Albanian population and the minority Serbs in the north of Kosovo.
The province of Kosovo gained independence last year.

Feith told lawmakers at the European Parliament there was "continued fragility" in Kosovo, notably tensions between the Albanian and Serb populations but also with the ex-Serb province's Gypsy population.

http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2009/02/11/europe/EU-EU-Kosovo.php

‘Gypsy crime’ versus ‘political crime’

Monday, 16 February 2009 The Veszprém murder made it clear that protection rackets remain a problem in Hungary. Secondly, and more emphatically, it demonstrated that relations between ethnic Hungarians and their fellow Gypsy citizens are at breaking point.

“Gypsy crime” was denounced, rather than inadequate public safety. The murderers of the Veszprém handball idol Marian Cozma and their relatives earned the hatred and the thirst for revenge of the majority of society, not only because of their crime, but also because they are Gypsies.

http://www.budapesttimes.hu/content/view/10978/230/

Decade of Roma Inclusion 2005-2015


http://www.romadecade.org/

Serbian Decade Presidency 2008-2009

http://www.romadecade.org/index.php?content=176

Less Talk, More Action

page 1 of 2
by TOL20 February 2009

History suggests more than one scenario in which Kosovo and Serbia can both move toward EU membership.

This week Kosovo celebrated one year of self-declared independence. As expected, cries of jubilation rang out from Pristina while words of defiance flowed forth from Belgrade. The Kosovars proudly pointed to the stability that has largely reigned over the country – a surprise to many – while critics lamented the lack of progress in so many vital areas of economic and social development. Nearly everyone put their spin on the issue of recognition, with naysayers pointing out that only 54 of the United Nations’ 192 members had recognized Kosovo, while boosters stressing that the vast majority of the European Union (plus the United States) were among the 54. It is time, however, to get beyond the issue of recognition/non-recognition and do everything possible to speed up the integration of both Kosovo and Serbia into Europe, whether they normalize relations between each other or not. One politician who got the message right over the past few weeks was Joost Lagendijk, a Dutch member of the European Parliament and the EP's rapporteur for Kosovo. In an interview with the Serbian newspaper Dnevnik, he said, “It is not realistic to expect Serbia to recognize Kosovo any time soon, but Serbia, Kosovo, and the EU should not be wasting time in integrating Belgrade and Pristina into the EU.” Yet some analysts and European politicians still insist that recognition of Kosovo be a condition of Serbia's EU bid. Accession should be off the agenda, they say, until Belgrade concedes the independence of Kosovo. That approach is completely divorced from reality. Even more moderate, pro-EU forces in the Serbian government will not budge on the issue of recognition, nor can one expect them to in the near future. It is a genuine, not fabricated issue, and the Serbs have real grievances, no matter whether one considers them justified or not. Cooperating with The Hague on arresting war criminals is one matter, but agreeing to recognize what many consider a breakaway province is something completely different.

Less Talk, More Action page 2 of 2

TWO-STATE SOLUTIONS“We must look for a creative diplomatic solution which would not hurt anyone, and would work to everyone’s benefit,” Lagendijk continued in the interview. “The idea of a solution according to the principle of two Germanys, where, despite not recognizing one another, the two sides committed not to interfere with the international activities of the other, could be the basis for an agreement for the two sides that would be rubber-stamped by the EU.” There are many other prominent examples of countries entering Western institutions with major territorial disputes still outstanding, including Turkey and Greece’s accession into NATO and, more recently, Cyprus’s successful application to join the EU. Spain and the United Kingdom continue to disagree about the status of Gibraltar, with Madrid claiming sovereignty over this British territory and London insisting that it will not enter into talks with Spain without the consent of the local government and people. Yet life goes on, and, since 2004, the people of Gibraltar have participated in elections for the European Parliament as part of the South West England constituency.Lagendijk also said some lessons could be learned from Ireland and the way it has constitutionally handled the issue of Northern Ireland.The time is ripe to seriously consider such solutions instead of unrealistically hoping that pressure on Serbia will change the situation. The same goes for the stalwarts within the EU who refuse to recognize Kosovo (Spain, Greece, Cyprus, Romania, and Slovakia). A non-binding, European Parliament resolution on 5 February called on those countries to fall in line. They have remained defiant, however, and it is a waste of time and energy to pressure them to cave in. A difference of opinion on such a critical issue as a territory declaring independence, with all the ramifications on international law and setting a precedent, is not without value. And longer term, as EU integration accelerates for both Kosovo and Serbia, the non-recognition stance should in any case become less and less tenable. In the end, that goal of EU integration should be front and center, not the issue of recognition. In another interview, this time with SEETV, Lagendijk got it right again when he said, “That is the most important message that I would like to convey: Both Serbia and Kosovo one day should be members of the European Union and one should not be able to block the other from entering the European Union.”

http://www.tol.cz/look/TOL/article.tpl?IdLanguage=1&IdPublication=4&NrIssue=309&NrSection=2&NrArticle=20397&ST1=ad&ST_T1=job&ST_AS1=0&ST_LS1=-1&ST2=body&ST_T2=letter&ST_AS2=0&ST_LS2=-1&ST3=text&ST_T3=aatol&ST_PS3=1&ST_AS3=0&ST_LS3=0&ST_max=3

Czech presidency outlines three EU priorities for Kosovo
06. February 2009. 09:26
Source: Kosovo Compromise
The indivisibility of territory, decentralisation and participation at regional integrations are three EU priorities regarding Kosovo, Czech Minister of European Affairs Alexander Vondra said on behalf of the Czech EU Presidency
The indivisibility of territory, decentralisation and participation at regional integrations are three EU priorities regarding Kosovo, Czech Minister of European Affairs Alexander Vondra said on behalf of the Czech EU Presidency on Wednesday during a debate on a draft resolution on Kosovo proposed by Dutch MEP Joost Lagendijk. In his address to the European Parliament in Strasbourg, Vondra stressed the issue of Kosovo's regional cooperation and participation in the main European processes and stressed his expectation that the European Union would some day bring Kosovo closer to the stabilisation and association process. He also stressed that numerous challenges were to be overcome by that date, because it would be difficult for the European Union to achieve unity on Kosovo. The Czech minister said that the division on the status of Kosovo within the European Union in no way diminished the key goals of long-term stability. "Our main challenge in the next few months will be the full engagement of EULEX", Vondra said. He stressed the situation in northern Kosovo, voicing his expectation that it would be difficult in the next few months and that it would be an object of constant EU attention. On behalf of the European Commission, the MEPs were addressed by Commissioner for Consumer Affairs Meglena Kuneva, who quoted several EC programmes of assistance and stressed the special concern over the position of Roma in the lead-polluted camp in Kosovska Mitrovica.

http://www.emportal.rs/en/news/serbia/78151.html

INTERVIEW-Serbia pins Kosovo hopes on court, president says
Mon Feb 16, 2009 3:24pm EST

By Aleksandar VasovicBELGRADE, Feb 16 (Reuters) - Serbia is pinning its hopes for better relations with Kosovo on an international court ruling, but will never recognise Kosovo's independence, Serbian President Boris Tadic said on Monday.Tuesday is the first anniversary of Kosovo's declaration of independence -- a declaration bitterly opposed by Serbia, which sees the region as the cradle of its religious and national identity.Serbia last year asked the International Court of Justice in The Hague to rule on the legality of Kosovo's secession. But a ruling could take years, and would not be binding."The only way for us to enter talks about the future status of Kosovo and a compromise solution is the court's ruling," Tadic told Reuters in an interview.Recourse to the court implies Serbia would accept its ruling, however it turned out. But Tadic nevertheless restated a position that remains a political imperative in Serbia:"Serbia will never take a single action that implies Kosovo's independence," he said.Kosovo is patrolled by NATO peacekeepers and administered by EU and United Nations missions, 10 years after its conflict between Serbs and Albanians ended in 1999, when NATO bombing forced Serbian troops to end a crackdown on Albanians.More than 200,000 Serbs and other non-Albanians have fled Kosovo since, fearing reprisal attacks by their Albanian neighbours. Most are still in Serbia."Serbia wants to see the return of normal life in Kosovo," Tadic said. "The protection of human and minority rights there is below an acceptable level and we haven't seen many (Serb) returnees."The United States, 22 of 27 EU members and a number of other countries have recognised Kosovo as an independent state but others, including U.N. Security Council members Russia and China, have not.Tadic said Serbia would not block Kosovo's accession to international financial agencies on condition the territory was represented there by the U.N. Mission in Kosovo (UNMIK).The International Monetary Fund (IMF) recognised Kosovo's independence last year and said it would consider its membership "in due course". Kosovo has also applied for membership of the World Bank.Tadic, a pro-Western politician, said Serbia would not hasten the submission of its candidacy to the European Union, reflecting a new approach after EU officials told Belgrade not to rush its application."I am a practical man ... full EU membership is more important than formal application," he said.The Netherlands is opposing the unfreezing of an EU trade deal with Serbia until it arrests and hands over former Bosnian Serb General Ratko Mladic to the U.N. war crimes tribunal in The Hague, which wants him on genocide charges. "We don't know where he (Mladic) is now. Serbia will boost operations of its law enforcement agencies and use its economic resources to arrest Mladic," Tadic said. (Reporting by Aleksandar Vasovic; Editing by Kevin Liffey)

http://www.reuters.com/article/latestCrisis/idUSLG118812

WHO urges Kosovo to close lead-contaminated camps
The Associated Press
Published: January 31, 2009

PRISTINA, Kosovo: A World Health Organization official says Kosovo must close down lead-contaminated camps in the tiny Balkan country's industrial north where about 100 Gypsy families live.
WHO regional director Dorit Nitzan says tests have shown levels of lead contamination are "severe" though they are falling.
Nitzan said Saturday the area should be declared hazardous for humans, and its residents should be moved.
The makeshift camps are located near a smelter that is part of the Trepca mining complex in the ethnically divided town of Mitrovica.
The Gypsies, also known as Roma, have lived in the camps since their homes were torched just after Kosovo's 1998-99 war with Serb troops. Kosovo declared independence from Serbia last year.

http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2009/01/31/europe/EU-Kosovo-Roma-Camps.php

Kosovo: One year on
Tuesday, 17 Feb 2009 00:00

Deadlock Economic woes are making the current situation on the ground especially pronounced. Unemployment is hovering just short of the 50 per cent mark, shockingly high for any western European country.

Crime levels remain high. Infrastructure is yet to recover. And this week a further vulnerable group was brought to attention: the Roma population, which is suffering under the general lack of communication.

They are currently in lead-contaminated camps but are not being dealt with by the Serbs running the north.

The reason for all this is the lack of a strong central government.

The majority, ethnic Albanians, may run the government but their authority has been eroded by Serbs establishing their own local authorities. Municipalities in Serb-majority areas, especially, have effectively taken over at the local level. A leadership vacuum is the result.

http://www.inthenews.co.uk/infocus/features/in-depth/kosovo-one-year-on-$1268967.htm

Wednesday, January 07, 2009

Ukraine: Putin in Europe or outside of it?

HOME PAGE

MOST IMPORTANT ARTICLES AND DOCUMENTS

In short: On Ukraine gas situation, there are two opposite opinions:

1. The gas chaos was created in order to oust Yushchenko, and so, in 2009 Ukraine will get closer to Russia.

2. Gas was cut in order to justify the further and more rapid construction of South and Nord Stream gas pipelines, which will bypass Ukraine.

Taking a look not further than in Georgia, we will see that Putin is on his straight way to legalize his increased military presence in Abkhazia and South Ossetia.

Maybe this is not the best comparison, but I used it in order to underline the increased Russian military presence in its own neighbourhood.

My feeling is that Putin's European dream is at the very best in stand by. After Merkel, Sarkozy and Berlusconi, one by one took Putin's European hopes away, I think that now it's time for Putin to clean up the relics of his European plan: Ukraine, which he was willing to sacrifice in the eventuality of the materialization of his European plan.

I believe that Nord and South Stream are lost causes, at least for the time being. As long as Europe is led by American puppets, Nord and South gas pipelines, which practically signified Putin's entrance in the Western Europe, will freeze.

Nor there is any European warmth as far as Russia concerns in this very moment.

So, I incline towards the "Yushchenko out" version.

In 2009 he will be ousted and probably replaced with Timoshenko, who is a solution of compromise, another (smoother) compromise between Putin and Bush SR, she being rather a moderate than a deep anti-American, something between pro-American Yushchenko and pro-Russian Yanukovich.

A turn to the left of Ukraine is not meant to make even the anti-Americans happy. It is a severe sign of coldness in Russia-US relations. Russia will be practically outside Europe, while the US, inside of it, won't have energy to feed it. An Iranian war will loom.

~Veronica Bicer

RIA NOVOSTI SAYS:


Yanukovych, Tymoshenko equal chance of becoming president - poll
17:51

24/ 12/ 2008

KIEV, December 24 (RIA Novosti) - Ukraine's prime minister and the leader of the opposition pro-Russian Party of Regions have an equal chance of winning next years' presidential elections, according to a poll published on Wednesday.


The Public Opinion-Ukraine Foundation said that 30% of respondents indicated they would vote for opposition leader Viktor Yanukovych and Yulia Tymoshenko during the second round of presidential elections.


Media speculation reported that Ukraine would hold early elections after the impeachment of incumbent president, Viktor Yushchenko. The president has dismissed the reports as rumors.
More respondents said they would vote for Yanukovich than Tymoshenko, 20.7% against 17.9%, respectively, during the first round of voting.


All other election hopefuls lag far behind the two poll leaders. The poll was conducted December 7-20 in Ukraine among a sample of 2,000 respondents with a statistical margin of error of 2.2%.


On some aspects of Ukrainian nationalism
16:22

06/ 11/ 2008

(Mark Almond for RIA Novosti) - Four years ago, the Western media celebrated the victory of Viktor Yushchenko in the long-drawn out Ukrainian presidential elections as the dawn of a new age of prosperity and democracy in the country.


Western strategists saw the so-called Orange Revolution in Ukraine as confirming the trend of Georgia's Rose Revolution in 2003 for former Soviet republics to seek integration in Western structures like NATO and the EU to the exclusion of Russia.


Although they condemned nationalism as backward-looking in their own societies, in 2004, many Western commentators presented the Orange revolutionaries' Ukrainian nationalism as a positive force. It was supposed to be the engine for Ukrainian progress towards the Western global model.


Today, Ukraine's economy is in deep crisis. Integration with the West has brought recession leaving steel mills and coal mines idle and wages unpaid. As the credit crunch and economic downturn in the West sours even American faith in the blessings of unbridled globalism, all that remains of the Orange project in Ukraine is nationalism. But nationalism in a time of economic crisis is a very rancid ideology.


Even before the current crisis, the Orange revolutionaries of 2004 had fallen out over how to divide the spoils of office and how far to sacrifice the national interest to NATO membership.


The bitter personal rivalry between President and his prime minister, Yulia Timoshenko - the key Orange revolutionaries in 2004 - also reflects a deep divide over Ukraine's future economic and strategic orientation.


As Ukrainian industry grinds to a halt, the country's quarrelling former Orange revolutionaries face a brutal choice. Should they put ideological purity first and pursue the mirage of Western integration for a poverty-stricken population regardless of the Ukrainian people's wishes, or should they put their country's economic well-being first?


Timoshenko is accused of populism by the President's media backers. And it is true that the Ukrainian prime minister has curried support with the voters by backing economic and social measures which help them. But in a democracy it is usually the candidate with populist policies who wins most votes. As ex-National Bank chief, Yushchenko gives the impression that the key voters in his version of Ukrainian democracy are bankers and oligarchs. Maybe they are, but that is not the democracy promised by the Orange revolutionaries in 2004.


With early parliamentary elections looming, to be followed by presidential polls next year, President Yushchenko's popularity has sunk to the single digits. Other post-Soviet presidents have bounced back from such unpopular levels, but hardly by using model democratic means. In 1996, for instance, Boris Yeltsin's backers in the new Russian oligarch class used their media monopoly to re-elect Yeltsin despite the deep poverty of most Russians then by playing up the fear of a Communist comeback.


Today in Ukraine, Yushchenko is trying to play the same game. Using anti-Russian nationalism he has tried to rally the Ukrainian speakers to his side. He tried to cut off access to Russian television channels, popular with Ukrainian as well as Russian-speakers so that only nationalist voices would be heard. Ironically in order to create the kind of slick modern nationalist propaganda, Yushchenko's supporters have had to import expert propagandists from Russia!


Russian journalists who worked for media oligarchs like Boris Berezovsky and Gusinsky in 1996to boost Yeltsin are now in Kiev to revitalise Yushchenko's popular image.


Things were very different then. In 1996 the grim Soviet past was still tangible in Russia. Yeltsin's propagandists could play on the reality that his only alternative was the unrepentant Communist, Zyuganov. In Ukraine, twelve years later, even with a media monopoly, Yushchenko would face a very different scenario.

His main political rivals made their careers after 1991 and have fewer connections with the old nomenklatura than he has. Having built up Yulia Timoshenko as the heroine of an independent post-Communist Ukraine during the Orange revolution in 2004, Yushchenko cannot discredit her patriotic credentials without undermining the Orange myth which is the basis of his own rise to the presidency.
Worse still Yushchenko's failure to clarify how he came to be so disfigured in September, 2004, has come back to haunt his credibility. Then his poisoning was widely claimed to be a sinister Russian plot, but now ex-ministers like David Zhvania suggest it was food poisoning not a criminal act that made Yushchenko's pock-marked face the image of the Orange Revolution and gained him enormous sympathy.


Yushchenko's personal political crisis comes from presiding over an economic crisis compounded by his naive acceptance of every Western consultants' self-interested advice. Then he has added attempts at media control by decree to deny the problems, which has compounded his failure to live up to his promise of a new openness in government.


The Western media, including Western-sponsored outlets in Ukraine present attempts to block Russian television not as censorship but as a blow for Ukrainian independence! What viewers in Ukraine is ignored so long as NATO's geo-political interests are served. American government-funded stations like Voice of America and Radio Liberty are allowed to broadcast independent news on Ukrainian channels but not Russian stations.


Under the guise of promoting a free media market in countries like Ukraine Western taxpayers fund propaganda not only against other countries like Russia but also on behalf of one candidate in the country's political spectrum. Something illegal in the United States itself.
Television is tremendously potent propaganda medium. But cruel economic reality may well prove stronger.


As the economic model promoted by Viktor Yushchenko and his Western sponsors wallows in depression, Ukrainians may ask whether the Orange Revolution marked the rebirth of their country or the last gasp of ideologically-driven politicians. After all, for seven decades Kiev's political class followed the Kremlin's lead blindly. Under Yushchenko it was the White House which laid down the ideological path for Kiev to follow. The coming months will decide whether Ukrainians will finally break the shackles imposed by dogmatic models - Communist before 1991 and so-called capitalist since 2004. Electing politicians who put Ukrainians' rational economic interests ahead of ideology or foreign sponsors' geo-political ambitions will be a huge step forward for Ukraine's well-being. But will such politicians get access to Ukrainian media?
Mark Almond is a Lecturer in History at Oriel College, Oxford, and a Visiting Professor in International Relations at Bilkent University, Ankara.


The opinions expressed in this article are the author's and do not necessarily represent those of RIA Novosti.

http://en.rian.ru/analysis/20081106/118163593.html

Monday, December 08, 2008

Greece Turns Communist

HOME PAGE

MOST IMPORTANT ARTICLES AND DOCUMENTS






Greece is important for Putin, being both an EU and NATO member.
If communist, it can therefore become the Trojan horse in the EU, more than it already is.

For sure Greece can postpone NATO's MAP (Membership Action Plan) for Macedonia.

Important politically, religiously and being also engaged in many pipeline projects with Russia, such as South Stream and Burgas-Alexandroupoli , if turning left, Greece is a good gain for Putin.

Burgas-Alexandroupoli oil pipeline is rival with the US - backed - Kosovo - linked AMBO oil pipeline.

~Veronica Bicer

QUOTES:

Officials said they expect more demonstrations and unrest in Athens as students and the Greek Communist Party are expected to hold protests throughout the day. With a 24-hour general strike called for Wednesday, many expressed fears that the demonstrations could last for days.
Karamanlis' government faced a series of protests from labor groups and students in recent months. Reports said that Karamanlis, whose government rules with a slim majority, may be forced to call early elections.

Public unrest has grown with the conservative government's austerity measures, with unions regularly demonstrating against privatizations, pension reforms and the cost of living.

-DEUTSCHE WELLE

http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,,3858663,00.html

a membership action plan will be extended to Macedonia, as soon as its name dispute with Greece is settled.

http://voanews.com/english/2008-12-03-voa42.cfm

Burgas-Alexandroupoli oil pipeline

The Burgas-Alexandroupoli pipeline is an oil pipeline that will be used to transport Russian and Caspian oil from the Bulgarian Black Sea port of Burgas to the Greek Aegean port of Alexandroupoli. The pipeline will be an alternative route for Russian oil bypassing the Bosporus and the Dardanelles. Its construction will begin in June of 2009, and is estimated to be completed by the beginning of 2011.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burgas-Alexandroupoli_pipeline

AMBO pipeline

AMBO pipeline is a planned oil pipeline from the Bulgarian Black Sea port of Burgas via the Republic of Macedonia to the Albanian Adriatic port of Vlore.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AMBO_pipeline

Name dispute lands Greece, Macedonia in court

November 18, 2008

ATHENS, Greece (CNN) -- An ongoing name dispute between Greece and Macedonia is to be referred to the International Court of Justice.

Greek officials said on Tuesday they were prepared to defend themselves in court after Macedonia filed a complaint claiming Athens had blocked its bid to join NATO.

The lawsuit marks the latest diplomatic wrangle in the 17-year-old name dispute between Greece and the former Yugoslavian republic.

Macedonia had hoped to join the military alliance earlier this year, but Greece's objections to its northern neighbor's choice of name blocked those aspirations at an alliance summit in April.

Greece wants Macedonia to relinquish its name, which it says is Greek. It also insists that Macedonia's use of the name suggests territorial aspirations on a region of the same name in northern Greece.

In lodging Skopje's complaint with the International Court at The Hague on Monday, Macedonian Foreign Minister Antonio Milosevski said Greece's veto at the April NATO summit was in violation of a 1995 agreement between the two countries.

The agreement, known as the interim accord, aimed to improve relations between the two states, allowing Macedonia to join international organizations under a provisional name -- the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia -- until the U.N. could mediate a resolution over the name dispute.

The U.N.'s highest judicial organ, the ICJ, said Monday it had received Skopjes' suit. It was not immediately clear, however, when the case would be heard and how long a verdict would take.

Even so, senior officials in Athens said Tuesday that diplomats preparing to defend Greece's positions expected a long and drawn-out legal procedure that could further imperil Macedonia's aspirations of joining international organizations.

"This was a scenario we were expecting," said George Koumoutsakos, spokesman for the Greek foreign ministry. "We are ready to defend our positions, but this will be a long and drawn-out legal procedure and throughout its course, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia will remain outside the international organizations it wants to join."

Koumoutsakos said Macedonia's suit was a "tactical move" intended to block ongoing UN mediations aimed at resolving the name dispute.

"It has done everything possible to obstruct the ongoing negotiating process," the spokesman told the state-run NET television network.

Relations between Greece and Macedonia have worsened since NATO's April summit, and a flurry of negotiations brokered by a special U.N. mediator have failed to yield any result on a compromise name.

Earlier this year, a U.N. mediator proposed "Northern Macedonia" as a compromise solution, but negotiations floundered over related issues on how outsiders should refer to the language and nationality of the people in Macedonia.

Wedged between Greece, Albania, Bulgaria and Kosovo, Macedonia was the only former Yugoslav republic to win independence in the 1990 without bloodshed.

-CNN

http://edition.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/europe/11/18/macedonia.dispute/?iref=mpstoryview

Tuesday, December 02, 2008

Putin Doesn't Want Any Pipeline

HOME PAGE
MOST IMPORTANT ARTICLES AND DOCUMENTS

Putin doesn't want to actually build any pipeline designed to fuel any other country with Russian gas or oil

(To be periodically updated)

According to the latest news, it looks like Putin doesn't actually want to build any pipeline: neither the South Stream gas pipeline, nor the Northern European gas pipeline, nor any additional one other than the existing pipelines. Let alone the Trans-Siberian pipeline, which was an illusion created to Japan from the very beginning.

He keeps enticing everybody with the phantom pipelines, he keeps using them as political leverage (indeed, he now uses the phantom pipelines to get a renewed partnership agreement with the EU).

The idea, however, is that the phantom pipelines look like pure diplomatic leverage and not realities to count on. Putin doesn't seem eager to fuel any more gas, nor oil on new pipelines, other than the existent ones.

With socialist Tarja Halonen pushed from behind by Russia to question the Northern European Pipeline, allegedly for environmental reasons, and using any pretexts at hand, such as the price of natural gas and even the financial crisis, Putin tries to postpone the finalization of these pipelines indefinitely.

Russia's most precious treasure is its natural resources. Russians must live many years from now on selling these resources, so the less they sell now, the more they will have left in the future.

The articles below come to support somehow my opinion:

Putin Questions Baltic Pipeline

With the price of natural gas falling, the Russian Prime Minister suggests Gazprom won't go it alone building the controversial Nord Stream pipeline.

Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin has questioned the construction of the Nord Stream pipeline for the first time since the signing of the agreement with Germany to establish the gas delivery network, as gas is set to become cheaper along with the drop in oil prices.

Two days ahead of the EU-Russia summit, Mr Putin said he would scrap a planned pipeline that would carry Gazprom gas under the Baltic Sea to Germany if Europe didn't show enough commitment. His remarks suggest the pipeline might be too expensive for Gazprom to build, especially since the price of gas is set to drop significantly.

"Europe must decide whether it needs this pipeline or not," Mr Putin told Finnish Prime Minister Matti Vanhanen on Wednesday (12 November) at a meeting in Moscow.

"If you don't, we will build liquefaction plants and send gas to world markets, including to European markets. But it will be simply more expensive for you," he added.

His remarks come ahead of the EU-Russia summit in Nice on Friday, when EU leaders are set to announce the resumption of talks with their eastern neighbour on a strategic partnership agreement, suspended after the Russian-Georgian conflict.

Joachim Pfeiffer, energy-policy spokesperson for German Chancellor Angela Merkel's Christian Democratic Union, said in a statement that while Germany still supports the pipeline, "We won't insist on the Nord Stream project if it doesn't make business sense."

Moscow has so far never questioned the viability of the , km-long submarine pipeline, despite construction costs rising year after year, and now estimated to total €7.4 billion, according to the Suddeutsche Zeitung.

The German daily points out that the financial crisis has hit Moscow badly and that the price of oil, the driver of Russian growth, has dropped by 50 percent since the summer, leaving Gazprom highly indebted.

Mr Putin's calls for Europe to make up its mind about Nord Stream refers to geopolitical and environmental concerns raised by several EU member states. Even in Germany, the project sparked multiple controversies.

The agreement between then president Vladimir Putin and Chancellor Gerhard Schroder was signed during the latter's last weeks in office, with Mr Schroeder later hired later as a member of the Nord Stream board.

The Baltic states and Poland strongly oppose the project, concerned they would be cut off from existing gas infrastructure with Russia, as Moscow would probably channel most of the gas deliveries through the direct pipeline to Germany.

Sweden also opposes the project due to environmental concerns, echoed by MEPs, who have called for a new investigation into the pipeline's impact on the environment.

Finland, one of several EU states that has a say in approving the project, will conduct an environmental review of the plan next year, Mr Vanhanen said after the meeting with his Russian counterpart on Wednesday.

Missile quid pro quo

Ever since the decision of EU foreign ministers to resume talks with Russia, Moscow has softened its stance towards member countries. It has dropped plant import restrictions against Poland and postponed an increase in timber tariffs.

Even President Dmitri Medvedev's discussion of placing missiles in its Kaliningrad outpost the second day after the US elections has proven to be a short-term tactical gambit.

In an interview with Le Monde on Thursday, Mr Medvedev said he was not going to deploy the short-range missiles in Kaliningrad unless the US goes ahead with its planned missile defense shield in Poland and the Czech Republic.

"We are ready to give up our decision to deploy missiles in Kaliningrad if the new US administration, after having analysed the real utility of the system in responding to 'rogue states' decides to abandon its anti-missile system. The first reaction of the US shows that the new administration is reflecting upon it. We are ready to negotiate a 'zero-option'," he said.

- by BusinessWeek

Related articles:

Russian PM Putin signs order to build Baltic Pipeline System-2
Nord Stream gas project important to EU - European Commission
Sweden requests additional information on Nord Stream project
Nord Stream to give Finland environmental report results in 2009

Pipelines:

Baltic Pipeline System
Druzhba pipeline
Caspian Pipeline Consortium
Sever Pipeline

Nord Stream Gas Pipeline (Northern European Gas Pipeline)

South Stream Gas Pipeline
Blue Stream
Trans-Adriatic Pipeline
Turkey-Greece pipeline
Greece-Italy pipeline


MAPS:

Baltic Pipeline System


Nord Stream


Russian Oil and Gas Pipelines to Europe


South Stream


Nord and South Stream

Monday, December 01, 2008

The new Romanian PM and the South Stream Gas Pipeline

(Draft)

HOME PAGE
MOST IMPORTANT ARTICLES AND DOCUMENTS



Mircea Geoana is going to be the new (leftist) Romanian PM. His job as new PM is to sign for the Russian-based project, the gas pipeline South Stream.

See:

Schroeder: Rusia nu are în vedere includerea României în proiectul South Stream

BUCUREŞTI / 13:42, 12.11.2008

Rusia nu are în vedere includerea României în proiectul gazoductului South Stream, deşi în România există discuţii privind necesitatea implicării în acest proiect, a declarat, marţi, la Bucureşti, fostul cancelar al Germaniei Gerhard Schroeder, într-o conferinţă de presă.

"Nu am nicio informaţie din interior privind includerea României în South Stream, dar de ce nu? Am fost informat că în ţara voastră este o discuţie că s-ar putea să aveţi nevoie de el (gazoductul South Streasm, n.r.), dar asta nu este discuţia mea", a spus Schroeder.

Cancelar al Germaniei pentru două mandate consecutive, între 1998 şi 2002, Gerhard Schroeder este, în prezent, Preşedintele Comitetului de Acţionari al conductei de gaze Nord Stream şi consilier al grupului elveţian de presă Ringier. El se află în România pentru a participa la o conferinţă internaţională pe teme energetice.

Schroeder a adăugat că nu se opune proiectului Nabucco, dar pentru a avea resurse de gaze acest proiect trebuie să includă printre furnizori şi Iranul, chiar dacă SUA se opune. Totodată, proiectele susţinute de Rusia, Nord Stream şi South Stream, au necesarul de gaze, în timp ce Nabucco nu.

"SUA este strict împotriva implicării Iranului, asta trebuie rezolvat. Dacă se rezolvă, Nabucco va fi lucrativ. Nu sunt împotriva Nabucco, de ce aş fi? Dar o conductă de gaze trebuie să aibă şi gaze pe care să le transporte", a adăugat fostul cancelar al Germaniei.

Schroeder a menţionat că între UE şi Rusia există o dependenţă mutuală, Europa având nevoie de energie din Rusia, iar Rusia având nevoie să vândă petrolul şi gazele pe pieţele europene.
În opinia lui, este necesar accesul companiilor europene pe piaţa energetică rusă.
"Rusia este un furnizor de încredere", a spus Schroeder.

Preşedintele PSD, Mircea Geoană, prezent la conferinţa de presă susţinută de Schroeder, a spus că Iranul este o sursă de gaze pentru Nabucco, iar în opinia sa noua administraţie a SUA va încerca să menţină preţul petrolului la un nivel redus, pentru a limita profiturile pe care Iranul le obţine din exporturile de petrol.

Totodată, Geoană crede că administraţia SUA va relua discuţiile mai apropiate cu Rusia într-o coaliţie mai largă faţă de Iran, văzut ca potenţial deţinător de arme atomice.

Hillary Clinton - Secretary of State

HOME PAGE
MOST IMPORTANT ARTICLES AND DOCUMENTS



The good news is that my previous analysis was not flawed.

The American Orange Revolution: Hillary Clinton set to be the 44-th President of the US

Hillary Clinton is now the US' Secretary of state, which is nothing else but the US' foreign policy leader.

Obama Names Campaign Rival Hillary Clinton as His Secretary of State

According to Wikipedia,

"the United States Secretary of State is the head of the United States Department of State, concerned with foreign affairs. The Secretary is a member of the President's Cabinet and the highest-ranking cabinet secretary both in line of succession and order of precedence."

So, from now on, lady Clinton will deal with foreign affairs, the most important department of the American state, function which involves face to face meetings with the most important foreign leaders. For sure she will be helped by her husband, the ex-president Bill Clinton, who, in his turn, will be helped in taking decisions by his tennis partner and distant relative, Bush SR.

So, it turns out that my previous analysis was very close to the truth. Hillary Clinton is indeed the connection between the so-called democratic leadership and Bush SR.

What I missed is the new scheme according to which the real leaders vanish in the background, shadowed for the public eye by colourful puppets Obama-Medvedev type.

What helped me guess who will be the most important person in the new democratic US' administration was data which I gathered in time, relying on first hand information from the international media, such as the fact that Bill Clinton is a distant relative of George Bush Jr., the fact that Bill Clinton is a tennis partner of Bush SR and that Bush SR was the president ex-head of the CIA, the most prominent American political figure after Ronald Reagan, being at the same time his most loyal disciple.

It was relatively easy to have a clue on how the things work and who are in fact the individuals who lead the US for real. The things fit. It was a judgement in all of it, which could be logically followed, relying on the information from the international official media.

However, with the instauration of the black man Obama in the highest position of the US' state (a completely unknown and rather hilarious apparition) and with the instauration of Medvedev in the highest position of the Russian state (a serious man, but who seems to have little political genius), a new trend in the international politics is stealthily implemented: the real leaders are pushed in the shadows, making room for plain puppets to occupy the highest positions in the state.

The result will be felt in a few years. What happens in the high political circles will become more and more hidden from the public eye. In a few years we won't be able to know anymore who is the most important person who pulls the highest strings of the state in general and of the secret services in particular.

The high political business will be a completely opaque circle, working in the background, while in the foreground the puppets nominated just to play a part, will make the news.

In this context, when the two key names such as Bush SR and Putin are nowadays, will be unknown, since their high-ranking meetings will quit making the news, it will be harder and harder to make a decent political analysis.

We will remain just maneuverable sheeps, deprived of any basic political knowledge. The most curious ones will have to analyse just the events that occurred and won't be able to foresee, as they did in the past, relying on the timing of the events that occurred quite in the aftermath of the highest-ranking meetings.

Monday, November 03, 2008

Why Obama?

HOME PAGE: http://putinfreakshow.blogspot.com/

MOST IMPORTANT ARTICLES AND DOCUMENTS:
http://putinfreakshow.blogspot.com/2006/12/most-important-articles-and-documents.html

Quick answer: Because he has a Muslim background.

Omaba studied in a Muslim school for two years, in Indonesia.

According to CNN, Omaba himself admits that:

"Obama has noted in his two books, "Dreams From My Father" and "The Audacity of Hope," that he spent two years in a Muslim school and another two years in a Catholic school while living in Indonesia from age 6 to 10."

http://edition.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/01/22/obama.madrassa/

So, probably CIA hopes that Obama could warm up the frozen relationship between the US and the Arab countries. Practically they see Obama as a possible ambasador there, a diplomatic hope.

This could be the explanation as why a black man will become the president of the US.

If true, the scheme is somewhat lame.

Hoping to arrange colour revolutions in Iran (without the accord of the Russian Federation) is something utopian.

And in case that the US and Russia haven't reached an accord on Iran, if the US will continue its policy of brutal invasion in the Arab countries, Obama will be seen as a traitor and hated even more than if he had been white.

Obama scheme could eventually work only if the US has established a prior agreement with the Russian Federation on Iran, for instance, because Iran is the biggest stake ahead.

In this case, Obama's face could look "human" to the Iranian people and the US could eventually gain the acceptance of the population in the Arab countries.

The same apllies to Iraq.

If I haven't been completely wrong in my previous analysis about the Bush SR- Clinton connection, Hillary Clinton might have an important function in Omaba's cabinet and be the connection with Bush SR through the intermediation of her husband Clinton.

"Barack Obama and Bill Clinton campaign together for first time"

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/uselection2008/barackobama/3283289/Barack--Obama-and-Bill-Clinton-campaign-together-for-first-time.html

Monday, September 22, 2008

Putin sells out Pakistan and Israel in exchange of the recognition of Abkhazia and South Ossetia

HOME PAGE: http://putinfreakshow.blogspot.com/

MOST IMPORTANT ARTICLES AND DOCUMENTS:
http://putinfreakshow.blogspot.com/2006/12/most-important-articles-and-documents.html

Here are the articles that make the connection:

South Ossetia, Abkhazia get pact

19/09/2008

MOSCOW (RIA Novosti) - Russia signed friendship and cooperation treaties with South Ossetia and Abkhazia on Wednesday, promising them military and economic support.
Russia recognized the breakaway Georgian regions as independent states last month after a brief armed conflict with Georgia, which attacked South Ossetia on August 8.
Russian President Dmitry Medvedev signed the documents with Abkhaz President Sergei Bagapsh and South Ossetian President Eduard Kokoity in the Kremlin.
Medvedev said after the signing ceremony that Russia will not permit any new Georgian acts of aggression against Abkhazia and South Ossetia, and is ready to intervene militarily.
"No one should be in any doubt - we will not permit new reckless military acts," he said.
Under the treaties, Russia has pledged to help the two republics to protect their borders, and their signatories have granted each other the right to set up military bases in their respective territories.
The treaties also formalized economic cooperation between Russia and the republics, and allowed dual citizenship for Russian, Abkhaz and South Ossetian residents. Russia agreed to unify its transportation, energy, and communications infrastructure with the two republics.
"The sides will be striving for the highest level of economic integration and will actively develop trade and economic cooperation, taking measures to unify energy and transportation systems as well as systems of communication and telecommunication," the treaties said.
South Ossetia and Abkhazia have so far only been recognized by Russia and Nicaragua. Belarus has pledged to follow suit in the near future, and Venezuela has voiced support for Russia's recognition of the two republics.
The two republics broke away from Georgia following the collapse of the Soviet Union in the early 1990s through wars that claimed thousands of lives.
Bagapsh said Abkhazia and South Ossetia plan to apply for membership in the Russia-Belarus Union State and the Collective Security Treaty Organization. "We will send membership applications to these structures and we hope they will be accepted," he said.

http://mnweekly.ru/news/20080919/55347589.html

Olmert quits - Livni seeks coalition in Israel

(09-22) 04:00 PDT Jerusalem --

Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert resigned Sunday, brought down by a string of corruption probes, while Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni struggled to assemble a coalition that would allow her to succeed him without facing new elections.


Olmert had promised this summer to step down as soon as a new leader for his party, Kadima, could be chosen. Livni narrowly won that vote last week, and on Sunday, Olmert submitted a letter to President Shimon Peres that formally sets in motion the process of choosing a successor. Livni has already begun meeting with politicians from rival parties, trying to build a majority in the 120-member Knesset, or parliament.
Olmert's coalition had dwindled over the past year, and most analysts say Livni faces a challenge gathering the support she needs to govern. If she does not succeed within six weeks, Israel probably will have to hold general elections in early 2009. Benjamin Netanyahu, leader of the opposition Likud party, is the current favorite in that race, with Livni close behind.
The fate of U.S.-backed peace talks initiated under Olmert could be at stake. Livni has been Israel's primary negotiator and has pledged to continue the discussions if she assumes power, but Netanyahu has been a staunch critic of the talks.
By submitting his resignation Sunday, Olmert becomes the caretaker prime minister until a new government can be formed.
The end of his tenure comes nearly three years after then-Prime Minister Ariel Sharon suffered a stroke, thrusting his deputy, Olmert, into power. Olmert was later elected to a full term, scheduled to end in 2010.
He led Israel through an inconclusive but damaging war with the Lebanese movement Hezbollah in summer 2006. Last year, he relaunched long-dormant peace talks with the Palestinians. But despite great fanfare at the kickoff ceremony in Annapolis, Md., in October, the negotiations have appeared to gain little traction.
Olmert, the former mayor of Jerusalem, also was dogged throughout his tenure as premier by allegations of corruption. New accusations surfaced in the spring, when New York businessman Morris Talansky told investigators he had given Olmert more than $150,000 over the years, much of it in cash-stuffed envelopes. Investigators later found evidence that Olmert had double-billed charities and government agencies for plane flights and hotel stays.
The police recommended on Sept. 14 that Olmert be indicted on charges of bribery, breach of public trust, money laundering and fraudulent receipt of goods. Prosecutors have not said whether they plan to follow through with the case.
Even if Olmert is not indicted, political analysts say his tenure will not be remembered fondly by most Israelis, who see him as emblematic of a generation of politicians who appear to care more about personal profit than public service.
"The legacy of Olmert is corruption," said Yaron Ezrahi, a political scientist at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/09/22/MNPO13287S.DTL


At least 53 killed in hotel blast in Pakistan

18:56

21/ 09/ 2008

ISLAMABAD, September 21 (RIA Novosti) - At least 53 people were killed and another 226 injured in a suicide bomb attack on the Marriott hotel in Pakistan's capital on Saturday, Pakistani officials said on Sunday.
A suicide truck bomber attacked the Marriott hotel, a place favored by foreigners, on Saturday evening, starting a fire that swept through the building. The attack occurred just hours after Pakistan's new President Asif Ali Zardari pledged tough measures to root out terrorism.
The Czech ambassador to Pakistan, Ivo Zdarek, was among several foreigners who died in the deadly attack, Pakistani officials said.
The blast destroyed the entire front section of the hotel and left a crater of up to 6 meters (20 feet) in front of the hotel's gates.
No organization has yet claimed responsibility for the deadly blast. However, Pakistan's Interior Ministry blamed Al-Qaeda-linked Taliban militants for the hotel bombing.

http://en.rian.ru/world/20080921/117003915.html


Bhutto's widower Zardari sworn in as Pakistan's president
13:46

09/ 09/ 2008

MOSCOW, September 9 (RIA Novosti) - Asif Ali Zardari, the widower of assassinated former prime minister Benazir Bhutto, was sworn in as Pakistan's president on Tuesday.
The new leader faces intense pressure to tackle rising Islamist extremism and deep economic troubles.
Zardari, 53, was sworn in by the country's top judge at a ceremony in the presidential palace, broadcast on national TV.
The ceremony was attended by Afghan President Hamid Karzai, who has criticized Pakistan for failing to bring Taliban militants based near the Afghan border under control.
Zardari won a parliamentary vote on Saturday, and replaces former army general Pervez Musharraf, who resigned as president on August 18 to avoid impeachment by the ruling government coalition.
Zardari's Pakistan People's party had led the coalition to victory in the February election.
The new leader, whose wife was shot dead in December 2007 during a campaign rally in Rawalpindi, has said he also expects to be targeted by extremists.
He is due to give a news conference later on Tuesday.

http://en.rian.ru/world/20080909/116639150.html

Wednesday, September 10, 2008

Large Hadron Collider - The Modern Bin Laden

HOME PAGE: http://putinfreakshow.blogspot.com/

MOST IMPORTANT ARTICLES AND DOCUMENTS:
http://putinfreakshow.blogspot.com/2006/12/most-important-articles-and-documents.html

Everybody heard of the Large Hadron Collider experiment, made today, 10-th of September 2008.

Details in Wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Large_Hadron_Collider



First of all, it is needless to point out the striking coincidence: The Large Hadron Collider (LHC) experiment was launched quite on 10-th of September, while America was commemorating 7 years from the 9-11 terrorist attacks.

Following a logical train of thoughts, it looks like someone out there wanted to distract the attention of the crowds from the 9-11 events, towards the scary machine.

Certainly if this kind of experiment was going to be done for real, it would've been done quietly, not on a populated continent like Europe, but rather deep inside the oceans or at the frozen poles.

Just like the famous American journey on the Moon and the 9-11 "terrorist" demolition of the New York twin towers, the "Large Hadron Collider" (LHC) experiment has been aired "live" on the TV channels of the World.

Quoting from RIA Novosti, what was presented as happening today is just a test prior to the inauguration of the "destructive" machine which might "give rise to a chain reaction that could destroy our planet".

RIA NOVOSTI:

"The collider is to be inaugurated on October 21," said Alexander Vodopyanov, of the Joint Institute for Nuclear Research (Dubna)."This means at least one test-run of proton beams around the accelerator ring will be conducted prior to inauguration."

http://en.rian.ru/world/20080805/115771418.html

This statement reads that LHC is not just an isolated experiment, but rather a long term project.
But whether or not the Large Hadron Collider device exists physically is just a figure of speech, as long as its sole purpose is a propagandistic one.

Many have long complained about the reckless universal policy, by which climate change is ignored and even encouraged due to the lack of legislation which could help reduce gas emissions.
Others are concerned with the near future of humanity, when fossil fuels will be just good memories.

In order to soothe these concerns, the global political thinkers of the planet haven't considered for a single moment thinking of a concrete program for reducing the waste of the non-renewable fuels, but they opted instead for improving the image of the old-fashioned Bin Laden.

The image of "terror" has therefore been switched from the bearded man with the stick (Bin Laden) to the complicated tubular machinery called "The Large Hadron Collider".

This big step further in the lie fabrication industry proves that the political thinkers of the planet have finally grasped that while almost every person has easy access to relatively high technology such as a mobile phone or a web camera nowadays, the image of the bearded man with the stick who terrorises the whole planet with his bare hands is severely running out of both time and credibility.

Hence, pressed by the public requests to update this scenario, the political scenarists wrote "The Large Hadron Collider" - a novel meant to divert people's attention from the real problems which aren't scheduled being ever solved, but rather disguised and hidden from the public eye.

Due to the freshly launched story of the miraculous device, the shortage of the non-renewable fuels will fall on the second place on common people's list of global concerns, while the blame for the climate change will be switched from the exponential consume of fossil fuels, upon the monstruous device. Never mind the commemoration of the 9-11 victims, date when people will rather "commemorate" the test of the "destructive machine".

The consequences of this alleged "experiment" are indeed unpredictable, but not in the hilarious sense that a black hole will swallow the whole Universe.

The purpose of the LHC story might be just to shadow the 9-11 events and to diminish their importance on each 9-11 September, the top secret device might slowly become the main official blame for the climate change, or it might become a a pretext for actually launching incognito strikes, nuclear or of any other nature.

Although its purpose seems to be rather to distract people's attention from the climate change than to be used as a pretext for launching preemptive strikes, my prediction is that the concept of terrorism will be slowly left aside and, in time, it will be replaced with the "LHC" concept.

=============================================================

UPDATES:

I was apparently wrong separating Bin Laden from the LHC, but the image that I have attached seems to be correct. No, the notion of "terrorists" won't disappear. It will be BIN LADEN who will screw up the LHC and who will cause the "black hole" which will cause in its turn the intensification of the global warming.

The weakness in this terrorist-LHC joint venture is that very few believe in Bin Laden anymore.

If it will cross politicians' mind to say that Bin Laden attacked the LHC, there will be three groups of people:

1. One who believes in Bin Laden and believes also in LHC, who will swallow every lies.

2. One who believes in LHC but doesn't believe in Bin Laden anymore and who will accuse politicians of claiming that LHC is screwed and who will say that it was screwed from the very beginning and that now politicians want to hide this by blaming the unsuccess of the LHC experiment on terrorists.

3. And one who doesn't believe in both Bin Laden and the LHC and who will say that everything was staged from the very beginning, that there's no LHC actually and that everything that is being sold to us as LHC is pure distraction from the realities of this planet such as global warming.

Just look what a silly page they sell us, babbling about computers hacking and such:



ARTICLES:

TELEGRAPH.UK:

Hackers infiltrate Large Hadron Collider systems and mock IT security

Last Updated: 4:01pm BST 12/09/2008

Hackers have mounted an attack on the Large Hadron Collider, raising concerns about the security of the biggest experiment in the world. By Roger Highfield.

As the first particles were circulating in the machine near Geneva where the world wide web was born, a Greek group hacked into the facility, posting a warning about weaknesses in its infrastructure.

Calling themselves the Greek Security Team, the interlopers mocked the IT used on the project, describing the technicians responsible for security as "a bunch of schoolkids."However, despite an ominous warning "don't mess with us," the hackers said they had no intention of disrupting the work of the atom smasher.

"We're pulling your pants down because we don't want to see you running around naked looking to hide yourselves when the panic comes," they wrote in Greek in a rambling note posted on the LHC's network.

The scientists behind the £4.4 billion "Big Bang" machine had already received threatening emails and been besieged by telephone calls from worried members of the public concerned by speculation that the machine could trigger a black hole to swallow the earth, or earthquakes and tsunamis, despite endless reassurances to the contrary from the likes of Prof Stephen Hawking.

The website - http://www.cmsmon.cern.ch/

- can no longer be accessed by the public as a result of the attack.

Scientists working at Cern, the organisation that runs the vast smasher, were worried about what the hackers could do because they were "one step away" from the computer control system of one of the huge detectors of the machine, a vast magnet that weighs 12500 tons, measuring around 21 metres in length and 15 metres wide/high.

If they had hacked into a second computer network, they could have turned off parts of the vast detector and, said the insider, "it is hard enough to make these things work if no one is messing with it."

Fortunately, only one file was damaged but one of the scientists firing off emails as the CMS team fought off the hackers said it was a "scary experience".

The hackers targeted the Compact Muon Solenoid Experiment, or CMS, one of the four "eyes" of the facility that will be analysing the fallout of the Big Bang.

The CMS team of around 2000 scientists is racing with another team that runs the Atlas detector, also at Cern, to find the Higgs particle, one that is responsible for mass.

"There seems to be no harm done. From what they can tell, it was someone making the point that CMS was hackable," said James Gillies, spokesman for Cern. "It was quickly detected."

"We have several levels of network, a general access network and a much tighter network for sensitive things that operate the LHC," said Gillies.

"We are a very visible site," he said, adding that of the 1.4 million emails sent to Cern yesterday, 98 per cent was spam.

The hacking attempt started around the time that the giant machine was about to circulate its first particles, under the spotlight of the world's media.

On Wednesday afternoon, as the world held its breath as the machine sparked up, CMS team members were scouring computers at the machine for half a dozen files uploaded by the hackers on September 9 and 10.

"We think that someone from Fermilab's Tevatron (the competing atom smasher in America) had their access details compromised," said one of the scientists working on the machine. "What happened wasn't a big deal, just goes to show people are out there always on the prowl."

The CMS team studied the files inserted by the hackers carefully before deleting, in case a "backdoor" had been installed, a means of access to the computer that bypasses security.

The system the hackers managed to access was CMSMON, which monitors the CMS software system as the vast detector takes data, during collisions between particles to study the energies and physics in the immediate aftermath of the Big Bang, which created the universe.


Cern relies on a 'defence-in-depth' strategy, separating control networks and using firewalls and complex passwords, to protect its control systems from malicious software, such as denial-of-service attacks, botnets and zombie machines, which can strike with a synchronised attack from hundreds of machines around the world.


However, there have been growing concerns about security as remote or wireless access, notebooks and USB sticks offer new possibilities for a virus or worms to enter the network, not to mention hackers and terrorists who might be interested in targeting computers to shutdown the system.


More than 110 different control systems are used at Cern. These systems monitor, supervise and safeguard Cern's accelerators, experiments and infrastructure - from buildings, electricity and heating to access control, radiation protection and safety.


To refine security methods Cern set up a working group called Computing and Network Infrastructure for Controls. One document written by the group said: "Recent events show that computer security issues are becoming a serious problem also at Cern."


However, the team said yesterday that it did not want to comment on security at the international facility.


A few years ago, Stanford University in California announced that a number of high-performance academic computer centres had been attacked by hackers lured by the phenomenal power of the grid - pools of computing power linked by dedicated high-speed networks.

Beyond shutting down the machines or stealing or deleting data, one likely malicious use of such power is to crack passwords.


In 2003, hackers broke into ScotGrid, a network of 150 machines based at the University of Glasgow. They intercepted the password of a remote user based in Geneva and used it to gain access to ScotGrid. They ran scripts that tried to reconfigure the machine to steal more passwords.

The commissioning of the giant machine is making extraordinary progress.
Now that the team has managed to get beams of particles circulating stably, they must be "captured" so that the particles stay in bunches.


This has now been done with the anticlockwise beam, circulating a beam for full half an hour. Commissioning, said Gillies, "is going incredibly fast."

They now hope to capture the second clockwise beam. "To give you a feel for how well these guys are doing, what happened on Wednesday was days one to four of main commissioning."

This latest step "is really a more significant achievement than Wednesday's fun and games," comments Dr David Sankey of the Rutherford Appleton Laboratory, Oxfordshire.


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/main.jhtml?xml=/earth/2008/09/12/scicern312.xml&page=3

TIMES ONLINE:

Hackers claim there’s a black hole in the atom smashers’ computer network

September 13, 2008

Hackers have broken into one of the computer networks of the Large Hadron Collider (LHC).

A group calling itself the Greek Security Team left a rogue webpage describing the technicians responsible for computer security at the giant atom smasher as “schoolkids” — but reassuring scientists that they did not want to disrupt the experiment.

The hackers gained access to a website open to other scientists on Wednesday as the LHC passed its first test, sending its protons off on their dizzying journey through time and space, close to the speed of light.

The work of the scientists was not derailed and insiders scoffed at claims that the hackers were “one step away” from the systems controlling the experiment itself. The engineering team completed four days of scheduled work in the first 24 hours but what physicists are really waiting for is the big bang machine’s first collisions.

Apart from being wide of the mark from a scientific point of view, fears that the LHC might bring the world to an end this week were in any case premature because it was never going to smash any particles so early on.

This week’s successful start-up means that that should now happen sooner than expected, perhaps as early as the first week in October.

Doomsayers take note: there is still a slim chance that a microscopic (and harmless) black hole will be created, but only once the accelerator starts colliding protons together at close to its maximum energy.

The hackers appear to have targeted the computer system of the Compact Muon Solenoid Experiment, one of the four detectors that will be analysing the progress of the experiment.

James Gillies, a spokesman for CERN, the European Laboratory for Network Collision, home of the LHC, said: “We don’t know who they were but there seems to be no harm done. It appears to be people who want to make a point that CERN was hackable,” he added.

CERN officials are now confident that the collider will have started experiments to generate new physics well before world leaders visit on October 21 to inaugurate the project.

Many countries will send their heads of state or government to the event: President Sarkozy of France, President Couchepin of Switzerland and President Köhler of Germany have the date in their diaries, and either President Medvedev of Russia or Vladimir Putin may attend.

The British Prime Minister, however, has apparently decided to skip the opportunity to be publicly associated with black holes.

Responding to a query about whether Gordon Brown would be there to celebrate the passing of the Apocalypse, Downing Street told The Times “to call back nearer the time”.

Describing the CERN team’s progress, Mr Gillies said: “There is a 31-day schedule before the first high-energy collisions, and on Wednesday they did Days 1 to 4.”

On Wednesday night, one beam was circulated around the LHC’s ring about 300 times, and on Thursday, the anti-clockwise beam was fired around the accelerator for half an hour so it could be “captured” and made to travel in neat, compact pulses.

Protons make about 11,000 laps per second, which means 20 million circuits have been achieved. The next crucial step is likely next week, when the captured beams will be fired in opposite directions, and crashed into each other inside the four huge detectors.

A couple of weeks later is the real moment of truth.

The LHC’s superconducting magnets will be fired up to 70 per cent of maximum power, producing proton beams with an energy of 5 teraelectronvolts (TeV) — 5,000 billion electrovolts — and crashing them together.


“That’s where the new physics starts,” Dr Gillies said. It is possible that scientists will start accumulating the evidence that could prove supersymmetry, the hypothesis that all particles have a twin.

The plan next year is to ramp it up to its maximum energy of 7TeV. The accelerator will then be providing results that should shed light on some of the central questions in physics.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/science/article4744329.ece

Saturday, August 30, 2008

The American Orange Revolution: Hillary Clinton set to be the 44-th President of the US

HOME PAGE: http://putinfreakshow.blogspot.com/

MOST IMPORTANT ARTICLES AND DOCUMENTS:
http://putinfreakshow.blogspot.com/2006/12/most-important-articles-and-documents.html

We already see that what happens on the American political stage is not a battle between Republicans and Democrats anymore, but rather a battle between Democrat Hillary Clinton and Democrat Barack Obama.

It was all a matter of words. Hillary Clinton suspended her electoral campaign on 7-th of June, which doesn't mean that she ended it. She left room for resuming it anytime.

Hillary's speech, where she was dressed in an orange suit vs. Omaba's wife blue suit, come to confirm my old hunches that Hillary Clinton is set to be the 44-th president of the United States.

Hillary Rodham Clinton's orange pantsuit vs Michelle Obama's blue dress!

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/thedishrag/2008/08/hillary-clinton.html

HILLARY CLINTON:

MICHELLE OBAMA:


Aside of the colour matter, Hillary's speech hasn't actually brought any good to Obama, where she was careful enough to make him sound inexperienced and so, unfit for the job.

If we just make a parallel between the Ukrainian Revolution, where Yushchenko was orange and Yanokovich was blue, we will simply realize that blue is the colour of the losers, while orange is the colour of the winners.

Needless to say that, back in 2004, the Romanian presidential elections came up with the same colours.

SEE IMAGE FROM UKRAINE:

http://asapblogs.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/2007/05/26/ukraine_526.jpg

With Bush allegedly bringing the country in an economic crisis (see the orchestrated housing problem created in order to deteriorate Republican Mc. Cain's image), Hillary was set to win crowds' hearts and the US presidential elections.

Hillary Clinton is Bill Clinton's wife, while Bill Clinton is a far relative of Bush Jr. and therefore a relative of Bush SR too.

Here is the confirmation, published in 2004 by RIA Novosti:

BILL CLINTON'S LIFE TO BE PUBLISHED IN RUSSIAN

There are many interesting facts in the book. Mr Clinton, whose royalties ran into $10 million, lived from hand to mouth in his student days, spending only $1 a week on food. In his youth, he seriously thought of becoming a musician or doctor. But he chose politics because he thought it was an easier profession. He is also a distant relative of President George Bush Jr. (they have common ancestors 13 generations back).

http://en.rian.ru/onlinenews/20040722/39765685.html

Bush SR was the head of the CIA and also Reagan's most valuable disciple. He was the one who changed the World's configuration, together with Gorbachev, on the Gorky ship back in 1989.

He is the most important and capable political figure in the US and so, as long as he is in still in his mental faculties, he will lead America from the shadows, using whoever he trusts as a dull puppet with no political powers, meant to represent him in front of the crowds.

He used "cousin" Clinton for 8 years, then he used his son for another 8 and now he will use "aunt" Hillary.

He cannot afford to break the continuity of his work, neither he can afford to waste time.

He is very old, so he will hold on power now while he is still able.

He is in a rush to finish what he has started 20 years ago, reason why Hillary won't be president in 2016, neither in 2012, but right now, because Bush SR needs her.

Bush SR got well with his relative Clinton who made the war in Yugoslavia. The things are going quite well between the two and they will continue to go fine as long as Hillary is a Disney puppet meant to just send Bush SR's messages to the world.

Tuesday, August 19, 2008

World Energy Consumption

HOME PAGE: http://putinfreakshow.blogspot.com/

MOST IMPORTANT ARTICLES AND DOCUMENTS:
http://putinfreakshow.blogspot.com/2006/12/most-important-articles-and-documents.html

OIL (OFFICIAL DATA):

Energy Information AdministrationOfficial Energy Statistics from the U.S. GovernmentPetroleum Basic Statistics
Total World Petroleum Consumption (2005)
83,607,000 barrels/day
http://www.eia.doe.gov/basics/quickoil.html
World Proved Reserves of Oil
Oil (Billion Barrels): 1,119.615

http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/international/reserves.html

---> RESERVES: 1,119,615,000,000 barrels / CONSUMPTION: 83,607,000 barrels per day / 365 days = 36 years
===========================================
GAS (OFFICIAL DATA):

Natural Gas (Trillion Cubic Feet): 6,380.625
http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/international/reserves.html
World Dry Natural Gas Consumption, Most Recent Annual Estimates, 1980-2007(Billion Cubic Feet)World Total = 104,425
http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/international/RecentNaturalGasConsumptionBCF.xls
---> RESERVES: 6,380,625 billion cubic feet / CONSUMPTION: 104,425 billion cubic feet per year = 61 years
===========================================
URANIUM (UNOFFICIAL DATA):

Today annual requirements to fabricate fuel for current power reactors amount to about 67,000 tonnes of uranium.
According to the authoritative “Red Book” produced jointly by the OECD’s Nuclear Energy Agency and the UN’s International Atomic Energy Agency, the world’s present known economic resources of uranium, exploitable at below $80 per kilogram of uranium, are some 3.5 million tonnes.
This amount is therefore enough to last for 50 years at today’s rate of usage.
http://www.uic.com.au/WNA-UraniumSustainability.pdf
============================================

Timescale for Depletion of Fossil Energy Resources (UNOFFICIAL DATA):

Based on current projections, within something like 75 years, the world will have used up
all the world’s extractable coal, all the world’s extractable oil, all the world’s extractable natural gas, and all the world’s extractable uraninum-235.

http://www.av8n.com/physics/fossil-resources.htm

=============================================

CHARTS:

World Wood Consumption
http://greengoldforestry.com/images/article-images/world-wood-consumption.png

World Oil Consumption
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Oil_depletion_per_country.jpg

World gas consumption:
http://www.planetforlife.com/images/gasconsume.jpg

World Water Consumption
http://www.fao.org/docrep/003/t0800e/t0800e16.jpg

World Uranium Reactor Requirements:
http://www.uic.com.au/graphics/UprodWorld.gif

World Energy Consumption:
http://people.hofstra.edu/geotrans/eng/ch8en/conc8en/img/worldfossil.gif

Sunday, June 29, 2008

South Stream Gas Pipeline

HOME PAGE: http://putinfreakshow.blogspot.com/

MOST IMPORTANT ARTICLES AND DOCUMENTS:
http://putinfreakshow.blogspot.com/2006/12/most-important-articles-and-documents.html


I will try to gather some material first, because I need to find time in order to make a thorough analysis on this gas project.


SOUTH STREAM - NABUCCO MAP:











Saturday, June 28, 2008

Renewable Energy Consumption and Electricity Preliminary 2006 Statistics

HOME PAGE: http://putinfreakshow.blogspot.com/

MOST IMPORTANT ARTICLES AND DOCUMENTS:
http://putinfreakshow.blogspot.com/2006/12/most-important-articles-and-documents.html















Energy Information Administration
Official Energy Statistic from the U.S. Government

Renewable Energy Consumption and Electricity Preliminary 2006 Statistics

Renewable energy’s market share stood at almost 7 percent in 2006, slightly greater than for 2005 (Table 1 and Figure above.

http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/solar.renewables/page/prelim_trends/rea_prereport.html

Within 15 years, renewable energy could be generating enough electricity to power 40 million homes and offset 70 days of oil imports.

http://www.solarenergy.org/resources/energyfacts.html

Only 7.5 percent of total U.S. energy consumption came from renewable sources in 1998. Of that total, 94 percent was from hydropower and biomass (trash and wood incinerators). (U.S. Energy Information Administration)

http://www.solarenergy.org/resources/energyfacts.html

Meanwhile, World Population: As of June 21, 2008, the world's population is believed to be 6,704,845,726.

Moreover,

Global energy demand to grow 50%, U.S. agency predicts

WASHINGTON: Global energy demand will grow by 50 percent over the next two decades with continued heavy reliance on environmentally troublesome fossil fuels, especially coal and oil, the U.S. government predicted Wednesday.

http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/06/25/business/25energy.php




========================================================





Energy Information Administration
Official Energy Statistic from the U.S. Government
Renewable Energy Consumption and Electricity Preliminary 2006 Statistics


Overview

Preliminary data indicates that total renewable energy consumption increased 7 percent between 2005 and 2006 (Table 1). In contrast, total U.S. energy consumption declined 1 percent, mainly due to decreased consumption of fossil fuels (including decreased natural gas consumption in the residential sector and decreased coal and petroleum consumption in the electric power sector).[1]

Renewable energy’s market share stood at almost 7 percent in 2006, slightly greater than for 2005 (Table 1 and Figure 1). Total renewable consumption stood at 6.844 quadrillion Btu. Consistent with historical patterns, the electric power sector consumed the majority (56 percent) of renewable energy (Table 2). The industrial sector consumed 28 percent, with the transportation and commercial sectors using the remainder. Hydroelectric conventional power had the largest absolute year-to-year change at 186 trillion Btu, but this represented only a 7 percent increase, while biofuels[2] consumption increased by 164 trillion Btu or 28 percent, and wind increased by 80 trillion Btu or 45 percent.

Following are topics of special interest for renewable energy during 2006.


The Role of Renewable Energy Consumption in the Nation’s Energy Supply, 2006

Source: Table 1 of this report.
(entire report also available in printer-friendly format) 0.5MB
Table Title
Formats
PDF
EXCEL
ES1.
Renewable Energy Profile, 2006


1.
U.S. Energy Consumption by Energy Source, 2002-2006


2.
Renewable Energy Consumption by Energy Use Sector and Energy Source, 2002-2006


3.
Electricity Net Generation From Renewable Energy by Energy Use Sector and Energy Source, 2002-2006


4.
U.S. Electric Net Summer Capacity by Energy Source, 2002-2006


5.
Total Renewable Net Generation by Energy Source and State, 2005


6.
Total Renewable Net Generation by Energy Source and State, 2006


7.
Total Renewable Net Summer Capacity by Energy Source and State, 2005


8.
Total Renewable Net Summer Capacity by Energy Source and State, 2006


Figure Title
Formats
PDF
HTML
1.
The Role of Renewable Energy Consumption in the Nation’s Energy Supply, 2006


Biofuels[back to top]
Ethanol production increased about 25 percent from 3.9 billion gallons in 2005 to 4.9 billion gallons in 2006.[3] A number of factors contributed to this growth:

Continued replacement of methyl tertiary butyl ether (MTBE) by ethanol as a gasoline additive.
Strong world oil demand and higher crude oil prices, which have raised the price of gasoline and thus the demand for, and price of, ethanol as a substitute.

Federal tax laws that provide incentives, such as the 51 cent per gallon tax credit available to blenders for each gallon of ethanol blended into gasoline.

The Energy Policy Act of 2005, which mandates annual renewable fuel use in gasoline at 7.5 billion gallons by 2012.
At 2006 production levels, ethanol accounted for nearly 4 percent of U.S. finished motor gasoline production.[4] While this had a significant impact on the energy sector, the impact on the agricultural sector may have been greater.

The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) estimates that 14 percent of corn use in the 2005/2006 crop year went for production of ethanol up from 11 percent in the 2004/2005 crop year and 6 percent in 1999/2000.[5] Furthermore, the price of corn hit nearly $4 per bushel during 2006, the highest price seen in the last two decades and considerably higher than the average price of $2.40 seen over that twenty-year-period.[6] Increased ethanol production in the U.S., coupled with increased demand from Asian countries for meat from corn-fed livestock, is contributing to the increased demand for corn.

Meanwhile, the Renewable Fuels Association reported early in 2007 that the number of ethanol plants operating in the United States increased from 95 in January of 2006 to 110 in January 2007, with 76 plants under construction or expanding at that time.[7] Ethanol production capacity increased by almost 1.2 billion gallons per year for a total capacity of nearly 5.5 billion gallons per year online in January 2007.

Consumption of ethanol in the transportation sector, which also includes the impact of trade and stock changes, increased from 334 to 448 trillion btu between 2005 and 2006 (Table 2). This included an expanding share of consumption of imports, largely from Brazil.[8]

Biodiesel production, currently a far smaller component of biofuels production than ethanol, was about 91 million gallons in 2005, based on data from the USDA Commodity Credit Corporation. The Commodity Credit Corporation ended its program and its data collection on March 31, 2006. While private estimates of biodiesel production for 2006 called for a steady increase, no verifiable alternative data source has been found to replace the discontinued Commodity Credit Corporation data.[9]

Renewable Electricity Generation and Capacity[back to top]

In 2006, hydroelectric conventional generation increased to 288 billion kilowatthours, the highest level since 2003 (Table 3). However, 2006 output was not as high as levels seen during the high water years of the later 1990’s. Furthermore, hydroelectric generation actually declined substantially in the Southeast, only to be more than offset by gains in the Northwest.

Wind generation increased to 26 billion kilowatthours, up from 18 billion kilowatthours in 2005. This moved wind’s share of the renewable generation market from just 5 percent to 7 percent in one year. Altogether, renewable energy provided 9 percent of total U.S. generation in 2006.[10]

By state, the largest increases in renewable generation were for hydroelectric conventional power in California and the northwestern states: Idaho, Oregon and Washington (Tables 5 and 6). Hydroelectric conventional power accounted for 18 billion kilowatthours of the 27 billion kilowatthours increase in renewable generation. However, the increase in wind generation was also notable. Wind increased 8 billion kilowatthours between 2005 and 2006, spread across a number of states.

Total U.S. net summer capacity for all energy sources increased by 10,049 megawatts in 2006 to 988,069 megawatts, while renewable capacity expanded to 101,383 megawatts total and accounted for 2,637 megawatts or 26 percent of the national increase (Table 4). Wind capacity increased more during 2006 than any other renewable generation source with 2,413 megawatts of new capacity. This exceeds the increase of 2,251 megawatts during 2005.

The three states with the largest increases in wind capacity were Texas, Washington, and California, in order of capacity increase (Tables 7 and 8). Texas alone added 943 megawatts. All other renewable energy sources accounted for just 225 megawatts of the 2006 capacity increase. Hydroelectric conventional capacity remained essentially flat at 77,629 megawatts, increasing only 88 megawatts.

Wind Energy[back to top]

By the end of 2006, wind net summer capacity stood at 11,119 megawatts, or about 2 ½ times its level in 2002 (Table 4). Texas, with 2,698 megawatts of capacity in 2006, overtook California as the Nation’s leader in wind capacity (Table 8). Fifteen states reported net increases in wind capacity. Total wind generation increased by 45 percent year to year. For 2007, the American Wind Energy Association reported the industry was on track to install over 3,000 megawatts of wind capacity.[11]

The following are factors driving this growth in wind energy:

Federal Renewable Production Tax Credit (PTC). This directly affects the economics of projects that can take advantage of the credit. The PTC provides a 1.9 cent per kilowatthour tax credit (adjusted for inflation) for electricity generated in the first ten years of the life of the project to new projects beginning operation by the end of 2008, when the current PTC expires.[12]

Renewable Portfolio Standards and State Mandates. The North Carolina Solar Center maintains the Database of State Incentives for Renewables & Efficiency (DSIRE), which contains summary information on renewable portfolio standards by state (see: http://www.dsireusa.org/) .

While the objectives and conditions of renewable portfolio standards (RPS) and state mandates vary widely among the some 24 states reported by DSIRE to have them, some of the stricter ones (e.g., a mandatory RPS with a renewable generation requirement well above recent levels) are already providing an impetus to renewable development.[13] Differences in RPS provisions include variations in: what renewable energy sources will be counted; whether power can come from existing renewable capacity or must be from new capacity; what percentage of generation must be renewable and by when; how much of a challenge meeting that requirement will be for an individual state depending on the goal to be accomplished and the base from which the state starts; whether the provisions are mandatory or voluntary, or mandatory with conditions (such as a ceiling on cost increases); and whether renewable energy credits, as established by many RPS programs, will be traded.

Higher Natural Gas Costs. Although the cost of natural gas may not be the single deciding factor in choosing to build a wind plant, the average cost of natural gas received by electric power plants has been in an upward trend over the last decade.[14] While the average cost of $6.92 per million Btu (nominal dollars including taxes) in 2006 was lower than the cost for 2005, it remained quite high by historical standards. Because wind power has no fuel costs, higher electricity prices, driven by higher natural gas and other fossil fuel costs, do improve wind’s competitive position and make investment in wind more profitable, particularly as developers speculate that the trajectory of future natural gas costs may rise further.

Global Warming. Concerns over the potential impact of global warming have resulted in some states and regions establishing commitments to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. To illustrate, seven northeastern states formed the Northeastern States Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI) with the nation’s first multi-state cap-and-trade system for carbon. Also, California, Oregon and Washington have banded together to form the West Coast Governors Global Warming Initiative to reduce global warming.[15] Development of wind power to meet electricity demand can help states and localities meet these commitments.
The following states led the growth in wind capacity:

Texas. With 943 megawatts of new capacity, Texas led the nation in expanding wind capacity. In 2006, Texas brought online the second and third phases of the existing mammoth Horse Hollow Wind Energy Center, bringing total project capacity up to 736 megawatts and likely making it the largest wind farm in the world.[16] The project lies on 47,000 acres in Taylor and Nolan counties and employs 291 GE 1.5 megawatt turbines and 130 2.3 megawatt Siemens turbines.In 1999, Texas adopted a renewable portfolio standard that required 2,000 megawatts of new renewable capacity be installed by 2009 in addition to the existing 880 megawatts. Texas has already met that requirement. In August 2005, realizing the 2009 goal would easily be met, Texas increased the mandate to 5,880 megawatts by 2015 (or about 5 percent of the state’s electricity demand). New additions of wind capacity in Texas have contributed to the state’s meeting these goals. The 2005 legislation also streamlined the ability of the state Public Utility Commission to order transmission lines to meet this goal.

Washington. Washington was second in wind capacity additions with 428 megawatts coming online during 2006, which brought Washington’s total non-hydro renewable capacity up to almost 1,200 megawatts. New capacity included the 200-megawatt Big Horn project in Klickitat county and the 229-megawatt Wild Horse project in Kittitas county.In recent years Washington has committed to reducing greenhouse gas emissions and increasing renewable electricity generation. In September 2003, Washington’s governor joined with the governors of California and Oregon to announce the West Coast Governors’ Global Warming Initiative to reduce global warming. Later in 2004, the governors issued detailed recommendations on how this might be accomplished. Following these efforts, Washington’s voters passed a renewable energy standard (included in ballot Initiative 937) in November 2006.[17] It calls for electric utilities that serve more than 25,000 customers to obtain 15 percent of their electricity from new renewable sources by 2020. Further, in February 2007 the governor issued an executive order which sets a goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions in the state of Washington to 1990 levels by 2020. New wind projects in 2006 and any that follow will contribute to the state’s meeting these related commitments.

California. This state was an early leader in the development of renewable energy for electricity generation in the U.S. It had 16 percent of the Nation’s renewable electric capacity in 2006, and notably an even greater share – 24 percent – of nonhydro renewable capacity. Although California added just 212 megawatts of wind capacity (including the Shiloh I Wind Project) to its 2005 base of over 2000 megawatts of wind capacity, it may be expanding renewable capacity (including wind) even more in the future to meet its commitments described below.California’s current renewable portfolio standard requires retail sellers of electricity to purchase 20 percent of their electricity from renewable sources by 2010.[18] In addition, the governor signed Assembly Bill 32, the Global Warming Solution Act, into law in September 2006.[19] This Act caps California’s greenhouse gas emissions at 1990 levels in 2020. Renewable energy is considered part of a broad-based solution. The speed of its development will depend in part on how fast issues such as the availability of adequate transmission capacity can be settled.

Data Revisions[back to top]

Starting with EIA’s March 2007 Electric Power Monthly and continuing with this and other reports, EIA has revised its methodology for classifying energy sources as renewable, and its estimates of renewable waste energy beginning in 2001. EIA’s definition of renewable energy is “Energy sources that are naturally replenishing but flow limited. They are virtually inexhaustible in duration but limited in the amount of energy that is available per unit of time. Renewable energy sources include: biomass, hydro, geothermal, solar, wind, ocean thermal, wave action and tidal action.”[20] Using this definition, EIA decided to revise renewable energy by excluding tires (whose natural rubber content is the smaller part of the total content) and the nonrenewable share of municipal solid waste (MSW).[21]

Details of EIA’s analysis that revised MSW consumption are found in the EIA report, Methodology for Allocating Municipal Solid Waste to Biogenic and Non-Biogenenic Energy (Washington, DC, May 2007).[22] In brief, most of the information EIA collects on MSW comes from the Form EIA-906, “Power Plant Report,” and the Form EIA-920, “Combined Heat and Power Plant Report.” However, power plants report only the total amount of MSW consumed and the average heat content. No distinction is made on the EIA surveys between renewable and nonrenewable components of MSW, so EIA had to develop a methodology to approximate the split.

The Environmental Protection Agency reports some information on the material composition of MSW on a periodic basis for various years in its report, Municipal Solid Waste in the United States: Facts and Figures. Associating this information with the appropriate heat content for each material category in MSW, EIA divided MSW into its biogenic and non-biogenic portions. In 2005, the split on a thermal basis was about 56 percent biogenic (or renewable) and 44 percent non-biogenic (or non-renewable). Implementing this approach lowered the estimate of renewable energy consumption by about 135 trillion btu in 2006 compared to what it would have been using EIA’s prior methodology. EIA also expanded the level of detail in many renewable tables so the estimates of MSW biogenic and landfill gas can be seen separately.

At the same time, EIA made a correction to classifying tires. Since only a minor portion of tires is made of natural rubber (considered to be renewable) and the larger share is non-renewable, EIA removed energy from tires from the other biomass category, following the EIA’s definition of renewable energy. Implementing this change lowered renewable energy consumption by about 50 trillion btu in 2006.

Finally, unrelated to waste energy classification, EIA redistributed small portions of fuel ethanol consumption to the commercial and industrial sectors from the transportation sector, though the total remained unchanged, and revised its estimates from 1989 forward. The distribution is based on each sector’s share of motor gasoline supplied.[23]

http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/solar.renewables/page/prelim_trends/rea_prereport.html

Thursday, June 26, 2008

Arctic again

HOME PAGE: http://putinfreakshow.blogspot.com/

MOST IMPORTANT ARTICLES AND DOCUMENTS:
http://putinfreakshow.blogspot.com/2006/12/most-important-articles-and-documents.html

There is no oil in the Arctic, but pure military interests.

The article below proves that:

Russia prepares for future combat in the Arctic

16:38 24/ 06/ 2008
MOSCOW, June 24 (RIA Novosti) - Russia must be ready to fight wars in the Arctic to protect its national interests in a region that contains large and untapped deposits of natural resources, a high-ranking military official said in an interview published Tuesday.

"After several countries contested Russia's rights for the resource-rich continental shelf in the Arctic, we have immediately started the revision of our combat training programs for military units that may be deployed in the Arctic in case of a potential conflict," Lt. Gen. Vladimir Shamanov, who heads the Defense Ministry's combat training directorate, told the Krasnaya Zvezda (Red Star) newspaper.

Under the Law of the Sea, coastal states can declare an Exclusive Economic Zone stretching 200 nautical miles (370 km) from the shore, but this area can be extended if it is a part of the country's continental shelf or shallower waters. Some Arctic shelves extend for hundreds of miles, creating the possibility of overlapping territorial claims.

Last August, as part of a scientific expedition, two Russian mini-subs made a symbolic eight-hour dive beneath the North Pole to bolster the country's claim that the Arctic's Lomonosov Ridge lies in the country's economic zone. A titanium Russian flag was also planted on the seabed. Russia first claimed the territory in 2001, but the UN demanded more evidence.

The expedition irritated a number of Western countries, particularly the U.S. and Canada.

The general said wars "are won or lost long before they start" and combat training was crucial for the success of any future military operations.

"The Americans, for example, recently conducted the Northern Edge 12-day large-scale exercise in Alaska, involving about 5,000 personnel, 120 aircraft and several warships," Shamanov said, adding that Russia could not ignore such a show of military force near vital Arctic regions.

He said the Defense Ministry would drastically change its approach to the combat training of highly-professional military units in the Leningrad, Siberian and Far Eastern military districts, which could participate in potential conflicts in the Arctic.

He also said two expert groups in his directorate were closely studying combat training models based on computer-assisted combat simulations that have been adopted by some foreign militaries.
"We may propose to the defense minister setting up a company-level fully computerized training center at one of the former testing sites," the general said.

Russia's General Staff is planning to determine the new composition and size of the Armed Forces by the beginning of July.

Meanwhile, the Defense Ministry has already announced plans to expand the presence of the Russian Navy in the world's oceans, including the Arctic, and extend the operational range of submarines deployed in the northern latitudes.

http://en.rian.ru/russia/20080624/111915879.html

SEE ALSO MY PREVIOUS ANALYSIS:

The Battle for the Arctic Resumes

http://putinfreakshow.blogspot.com/2008/04/battle-for-arctic-resumes.html

The Dark Side of the Arctic Mission

http://putinfreakshow.blogspot.com/2007/08/dark-side-of-arctic-mission.html

Saturday, May 03, 2008

Poland and the Nuclear History of the Cold War

HOME PAGE: http://putinfreakshow.blogspot.com/

MOST IMPORTANT ARTICLES AND DOCUMENTS:
http://putinfreakshow.blogspot.com/2006/12/most-important-articles-and-documents.html


RUSSIA ANTI-MISSILE MAP (click to enlarge)

Introduction:

Freed by the 9-11 September 2001 events that allowed the US to quit observing the international law, namely the AMB Treaty, the US now practically instigates Russia to start a nuclear war.

The 9-11 events were purportedly staged in order to allow the US to quit the AMB Treaty and to develop attack plans against Russia.

True that Russia has made the first steps towards such situation, by placing its ballistic missiles in Iran, but this move was made for security reasons, in order to protect Iran against further US' military invasions, which would've jeopardized Putin's plans of taking control over the World gas reserves, in his attempt to establish the so-called "gas OPEC".

Unlike Iran, Arctic is an ideal place for firing Russian ballistic missiles against the US, while the US has a single plan for Poland: pointing its nukes against Russia.

Very similar to a chess game, the US plans to encircle the Russian Federation and to make it unable to react.
Concretely, the US' plans to place in Poland medium-range ballistic missiles aimed at Russia, which will find Russia in a position of not having time to react properly. A single nuclear missile fired from Poland at the Russian Federation could have devastating effects.

Therefore, if the US will deploy its missile shield in Poland, the only option Russia seems to have is to point its ballistic missiles against Poland and to launch a preeptive strike against the US' military facilities placed there, thing that would eventually traduce in the start of a nuclear war.

Another option is to place its missiles close to the US (in Latin America or in the Arctic region), so as to be able to hit the US' territory with approximately the same precission the US could hit Russia from Poland.
Yet, since the US is in offensive and therefore it is prone to attack, this last option doesn't seem viable, for simple security reasons.

Nuclear Treaties

The US' withdrawal from the ABM Treaty


The 9-11 events, which took place in September 2001, have brought a majour shift in the World policy.

It's not just that they permitted to the US the invasion of Iraq in March 2003. Actually that was a minor gain.

The majour stake was elsewhere, namely: the ABM (Anti-Ballistic Missile) treaty.

In the aftermath of the 9-11 events, the US practically evaded the international law, by quitting the above-mentioned treaty, thing that untied the nuclear hands of the United States and allowed them to place ballistic missiles in Europe.

On December 14 2001, Bush announced:

"Today, as the events of September 11 made all too clear, the greatest threats to both our countries (the US and Russia) come not from each other, or from other big powers in the world, but from terrorists who strike without warning or rogue states who seek weapons of mass destruction."

Following this masked belligerent statement, the US pulled out from the ABM Treaty, in June 2002.

In response, on June 14 2002, one day after the U.S. withdrew from the ABM Treaty, Russia announced that it would no longer consider itself to be bound by the provisions of the START II Treaty, which banned the use of MIRVs on ICBMs and is hence often cited as the De-MIRV-ing Agreement.

A MIRVs (multiple independently targetable reentry vehicle) is a collection of nuclear weapons carried on a single intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) or a submarine-launched ballistic missile (SLBM). Using a MIRV warhead, a single launched missile can strike several targets or fewer targets redundantly.

An ICBM is a long-range ballistic missile (greater than 5,500 km or 3,500 miles), typically designed for nuclear weapons delivery and able to carry one or more nuclear warheads.
The MIRVs are the trump card of the Russian military, being able to evade any current missile defence systems, by overwhelming them.

SORT Treaty

Subsequently, Putin proposed the SORT (Strategic Offensive Reductions Treaty), which bypassed the START II treaty that was banning the MIRVs, in order to try to soften the harsh blow that Russia suffered in the aftermath of the US' withdrawal from the ABM Treaty and, therefore, to find means of defense.

SORT treaty was signed by Presidents George W. Bush and Vladimir Putin at Moscow Summit on May 24, 2002.

According to SORT, both Russia and the US will reduce operationally deployed strategic nuclear warheads to 1,700-2,200 by 2012, when the treaty expires and may be extended by agreement of the Parties, or superseded earlier by a subsequent agreement.

But SORT hasn't yet entered into force and hence, the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty will eventually become pointless because there will be no limits on strategic offensive and defensive weapons.

Start I Treaty

START-I (Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty) is an agreement between the United States of America and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) on the Reduction and Limitation of Strategic Offensive Arms.

The treaty was signed by the United States and the USSR and barred its signatories from deploying more than 6,000 nuclear warheads atop a total of 1,600 ICBMs, submarine-launched ballistic missiles and bombers.

But START expires in December 2009 and if it's not extended, nor SORT ratified, there will be no control on the existent number of nuclear warheads.

START II Treaty:

The treaty was officially bypassed by the SORT treaty, agreed to by Presidents George W. Bush and Vladimir Putin at their summit meeting in November 2001, and signed at Moscow Summit on May 24, 2002.

Both sides agreed to reduce operationally deployed strategic nuclear warheads to 1,700-2,200 by 2012, according to SORT Treaty.

On June 14, 2002, one day after the U.S. withdrew from the ABM Treaty, Russia announced that it would no longer consider itself to be bound by START II provisions.

START II, the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty, which was signed by United States President George H. W. Bush and Russian President Boris Yeltsin on January 3, 1993, banned the use of MIRVs on ICBMs and is hence often cited as the De-MIRV-ing Agreement.

The INF Treaty

The Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF) was an 1987 agreement between the United States and the Soviet Union.

Signed in Washington D.C. by U.S. President Ronald Reagan and General Secretary Mikhail Gorbachev on December 8, 1987, it was ratified by the United States Senate on May 27, 1988 and came into force on June 1 of that year.

The treaty is formally titled The Treaty Between the United States of America and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics on the Elimination of Their Intermediate-Range and Shorter-Range Missiles and is still in force.

The INF Treaty stipulates that nuclear and conventional ground-launched ballistic and cruise missiles with intermediate ranges, defined as between 500-5,500 km (300-3,400 miles) are banned, hence that no country on the globe is allowed to use such weapons.

Practically, according to the provisions of the INF Treaty, the US is not allowed to use short and medium-range missiles in Poland, so that is why the military hardware that they plan to install there is called "missile shield".

By calling it this way, they evade the provisions of the INF Treaty, because the anti-ballistic missiles are regulated by the ABM Treaty, which the US premeditatedly quit in the aftermath of the 9-11 September events.

In 2007, the Russian president Vladimir Putin said that "the United States unilaterally withdrew from the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty in 2002, paving the way to the deployment of its missile shield in Europe".

Since it feels threatened by the deployment of US' ballistic missiles pointed against it, Russia could quit the INF Treaty and resume its production of short and medium-range ballistic missiles pointed against Europe, in order to try to defend itself from an eventual American attack launched from Poland, but various reasons hinder it doing such move.

If Russia quits the INF Treaty, not just the Russian Federation takes avantage of this move, but also the US, which will place its short and medium-range missiles very close to Russia's border, where NATO is now.

Another point is that Russia used the INF Treaty as a bargaining chip in various situations.
When former U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld proposed to his Russian counterpart, Sergei Ivanov, that his country join the United States' initiative to replace ICBM nukes with conventional warheads, the latter advised him to consider withdrawing from the INF Treaty.

Rumsfeld's Proposal

Donald Rumsfeld, former US Secretary of Defense, asked Russia to support a US' proposal to use intercontinental ballistic missiles whose nuclear warheads would be replaced with conventional warheads, to attack terrorists.

ICBMs

ICBMs (Intercontinental ballistic missiles or long-range missiles) are a special category of missiles and are not regulated by the INF Treaty, which still bind both the US and the Russian Federation.

The INF Treaty deals only with short and medium-range ballistic missiles and hence, the long-range ballistic missiles (ICBM's) are exempt from that.

According to the INF Treaty, the US is not allowed to use short and medium-range ballistic missiles, let alone to place them in a third country such as Poland. Results that a viable option for the US are the ICBMs, which have a special regime and which are more advanced from a technological point of view.

There are just seven countries that own ICBMs: the US, the Russian Federation, France, China, India, Israel and North Korea.

Sharing ICBMs with non-nuclear states (such as Poland) seems a difficult task, especially taking into consideration the provisions of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).

The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT)

The The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) hinders the US, if not legally, at least morally, of deploying its ICBMs in Poland.

Poland is now a NATO member.

NATO interpreted nuclear sharing to be legal under the NPT, but according to the current understanding of most non-NATO parties to the NPT, NATO nuclear sharing probably violates Articles I and II of the Treaty.

Article I of the NPT prohibits nuclear weapon states that are parties to the NPT from sharing their weapons with non-nuclear states:

"Each nuclear-weapon State Party to the Treaty undertakes not to transfer to any recipient whatsoever nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices or control over such weapons or explosive devices directly, or indirectly; and not in any way to assist, encourage, or induce any non-nuclear-weapon State to manufacture or otherwise acquire nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices, or control over such weapons or explosive devices."

Article II contains a parallel commitment on the part of non-nuclear states parties not to receive them:

"Each non-nuclear weapon State Party to the Treaty undertakes not to receive the transfer from any transferor whatsoever of nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices or of control over such weapons or explosive devices directly, or indirectly; not to manufacture or otherwise acquire nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices; and not to seek or receive any assistance in the manufacture of nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices."

The concept of nuclear sharing is ambiguous, concerning the violability of the international law.

"Both the Non-Aligned Movement and critics inside NATO believe that NATO's nuclear sharing violates Articles I and II of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), which prohibit the transfer and acceptance, respectively, of direct or indirect control over nuclear weapons.

"The U.S. insists its forces control the weapons and that no transfer of the nuclear bombs or control over them is intended "unless and until a decision were made to go to war, at which the [NPT] treaty would no longer be controlling", so there is no breach of the NPT.

However the pilots and other staff of the "non-nuclear" NATO countries practice handling and delivering the U.S. nuclear bombs, and non-U.S. warplanes have been adapted to deliver U.S. nuclear bombs which involved the transfer of some technical nuclear weapons information.

Even if the U.S. argument is considered legally correct, some argue such peacetime operations appear to contravene both the objective and the spirit of the NPT". - Wikipedia.

Therefore, It's true that the US is not legally banned to share nuclear weapons with the NATO members, but the move of deploying ICBMs in Poland would bring serious consternation amongst the European Union member states and not only, destroying irremediably the image of the United States around the World.

Under these circumstances, Rumsfeld resorted to a diplomatic trick, namely the above-mentioned proposal that he made to the former Russian minister of defense, Sergei Ivanov: to replace the nuclear warheads on ICBMs with non-nuclear warheads, allegedly in order to attack terrorists.

Russians, however, never believed him, because non-nuclear independently targetable warheads are the best way to disguise nuclear warheads.
In other words, if the U.S. or Russia should launch such a missile, no one would know for sure what sort of warhead - nuclear or conventional - it was carrying.

As a result, Rumsfeld's proposal was bluntly refused, Russia using the INF Treaty as a bargaining chip.

The consequences of the US' withdrawal from the ABM Treaty:

Therefore, since Russia refused Rumsfeld's proposal of replacing nuclear warheads on ICBMs with conventional warheads, the only choice the US now has is to rely on the ABM Treaty.

The US quit the ABM in the aftermath of the 9-11 September events, which the US carefully planned just in order to be able to bypass the international law and to deploy its ballistic missiles in Europe, pompously and soothingly called "missile shield designed to protect against attack by rogue states".

But since this is just a missile shield and not a ground-based missile launch control center, how is the US going to bypass the INF Treaty and to deploy ballistic medium-range missiles aimed against Russia, since a missile shield, by definition, is supposed to have just a defensive character?

RIA Novosti tries to enlighten us on the matter:

"Any medium-range missile defense system would have to be tested using the appropriate type of missiles, but both the United States and Russia destroyed their medium-range missiles as part of the INF Treaty (Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces). Hence, Russia must start serious talks with the Americans on an ABM system.
– RIA Novosti"

Since the US quit the ABM treaty, it is allowed to place anti-ballistic missiles in a third country.

And as RIA Novosti states, in order to be tested, a medium-range missile defense system require USING the appropriate type of missiles, hence allows the US to practically deploy in Poland nuclear missiles which can hit Russia, bypassing the INF Treaty and shooting medium-range missiles carrying nuclear warheads.

Aside of the Arctic response, Russia could now choose a symmetrical option of placing its medium-range ballistic missiles in a Latin American country, such as Venezuela or Cuba (Russia had nuclear facilities in Cuba before, topic known as the "Cuban Missile Crisis").

In any case, the move of redeploying medium-range ballistic missiles in Latin America would not only sound belligerent, but also wouldn't help Russia much, as the great US' capability to strike Russia from Poland leaves the Russian Federation without reaction.

Orbital Interceptors:

Until now, we talked only about ground-launched ballistic missiles, which the US is allowed to use since it quit the ABM Treaty.

But there is one more serious issue: the space-launched missiles.

The US is much more advanced than Russia as far as the technology of orbiting space-based lasers concerns and which was regulated by the provisions of the ABM Treaty, until the US withdrew from the treaty it in the spring of 2002.

The decision by George W. Bush to withdraw from the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty spurred research beneficial to orbiting space-based lasers as part of a global missile defense shield.

Pulling out of the ABM treaty does not tie directly into moving ahead with space-based laser weaponry.

However, according to SPACE.com sources, this action sets in motion ballistic missile defense research and technology work that can advance the day of orbiting lasers.

The US actually proposed to deploy orbital missile interceptors in place of the European missile defense system.

The disadvantage of the orbital weapons is that, unlike ground-bases facilities, they can't be repaired or upgraded anytime, yet this orbital program is another headache for Russia, because Russian military is just trained to disable orbital weapons, but the Russian army doesn't have its own missile defense system based on orbital missile interceptors.

Conclusion:

Russia doesn't have many options now that it witnessed its isolation from Europe and, therefore, it must keep Iran tight in its hands, Iran being its trump card.

The US is strong military, yet not as strong as to be able to defeat Russia in an instant.

And while the US' military technology is probably more advanced than the Russian one, Russia and its allies, mainly Iran, yet own the energy, which is the key to the European Union gate.

Despite the uncomfortable situation it found itself in, with its national security threatened, Russia must act wise and negotiate with the US, in order to press it to ratify the SORT and to push for the further extension of the START I treaty.

And even though the US doesn't seem to hesitate when it comes to achieving its goals, dipolmacy having little effect on its decisions, a policy of bargain and blackmail would have the desired effect of making the US to revise its position.

A belligerent stance of Russia would only lead to more problems, because Russia is still handicapped military, after the shock that it suffered after the USSR collapsed two decades ago.

~Veronica Bicer

See also:

ORBITAL MISSILE INTERCEPTORS:

http://putinfreakshow.blogspot.com/2006/04/orbital-missile-interceptors.html


REFERENCES:

Five steps for preventing a new Cold War

http://en.rian.ru/analysis/20070723/69487893.html

Signing of Czech-U.S. radar deal delayed - Czech Foreign Ministry

http://en.rian.ru/world/20080428/106099226.html

Missile defense - back to the sixties

http://en.rian.ru/analysis/20080410/104778874.html

Two missile defense systems for Europe

http://en.rian.ru/analysis/20080408/104106486.html

CNN.com - U.S. quits ABM treaty - December 14, 2001

http://archives.cnn.com/2001/ALLPOLITICS/12/13/rec.bush.abm/

Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Ballistic_Missile_Treaty

Anti-ballistic missile

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-ballistic_missile

ABM Treaty Withdrawal Likely to Boost Space-Based Laser Work

http://www.space.com/news/sbl_011218.html

INF treaty

http://www.state.gov/www/global/arms/treaties/inf1.html

Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intermediate-Range_Nuclear_Forces_Treaty

Nuclear Sharing in NATO: Is it Legal?

http://www.ieer.org/sdafiles/vol_9/9-3/nato.html

Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START I)


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategic_Arms_Reduction_Treaty

Missile Technology Control Regime


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Missile_Technology_Control_Regime

Nuclear sharing

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_sharing

HAGUE CODE OF CONDUCT AGAINST BALLISTIC MISSILE PROLIFERATION (HCOC)

http://cns.miis.edu/pubs/inven/pdfs/icoc.pdf

International Code of Conduct against Ballistic Missile Proliferation

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Code_of_Conduct_against_Ballistic_Missile_Proliferation

Donald Rumsfeld as the serpent

http://en.rian.ru/analysis/20060830/53313650.html

Should Russia quit the treaty on medium- and short-range missiles?

http://en.rian.ru/analysis/20070411/63460805.html

U.S. military space lobby proposes orbital missile defense system


http://en.rian.ru/analysis/20080410/104777902.html

Intercontinental ballistic missile

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ICBM

Multiple independently targetable reentry vehicle

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MIRV

Should Russia quit the treaty on medium- and short-range missiles?

http://en.rian.ru/analysis/20070411/63460805.html

Why terminate the INF Treaty?

http://en.rian.ru/analysis/20071207/91436776.html

No final decision to quit INF treaty - FM Lavrov

http://en.rian.ru/russia/20070216/60863642.html

Russia may unilaterally quit INF Treaty - General Staff

http://en.rian.ru/russia/20070215/60795303.html

NATO extension, an end in itself


http://en.rian.ru/analysis/20080331/102574381.html

Russia hails Sarkozy nuclear missile plan

http://en.rian.ru/russia/20080321/101960177.html

Sarkozy’s INF good intentions

http://en.rian.ru/analysis/20080325/102156804.html

Collective security: dusting off old cliches

http://en.rian.ru/analysis/20071217/92769318.html

Defense budget: nuclear or conventional?

http://en.rian.ru/analysis/20071119/88732218.html

Russia can offer low-cost response to U.S. missile system

http://en.rian.ru/russia/20080212/99033702.html

Asymmetrical Iskander missile systems

http://en.rian.ru/analysis/20071115/88281798.html

Russia, U.S. call on all countries to join INF Treaty-1

http://en.rian.ru/russia/20071025/85515703.html

Russia to compensate for INF losses with Iskander missile system

http://en.rian.ru/russia/20071114/88066432.html

MIM-104 Patriot

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MIM-104_Patriot

ABM verbal commitments are not very meaningful

http://en.rian.ru/analysis/20080319/101739730.html

Washington's initiative may untie the Iranian knot

http://en.rian.ru/analysis/20071024/85270321.html

Russia and the United States adamant on ABM in Europe

http://en.rian.ru/analysis/20071010/83352549.html

Cuban Missile Crisis

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuban_Missile_Crisis

Other nuclear treaties:

Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty

Non-Proliferation Treaty

Threshold Test Ban Treaty

START II

SALT I and II


==========================================================
 

| Home | Fashion | Global Politics | The Black Sea | Poetry | Party | Endocrinology | News | Comments |Contact| Archive |