Putin – Schroeder meeting: the Northern European Gas pipeline
Putin – Schroeder meeting: In two years Russia hopes to deliver gas to Germany though the Northern European Gas pipeline and hence to tie up Germany to Russia by economic screws.
Fearing Merkel’s pro-US rule, Putin seeks to arrange in a hurry his energetic business with Germany, through Schroeder’s mediation.
In May, after the 60-th anniversary of the defeat of Nazism, Putin and Bush SR seem to have played the cards on Angela Merkel, as pro-US Merkel agreed to now oppose Turkey’s EU membership, thing that favours Russia and which could highlight a bargain between the two ex-spies.
~Vera
See the articles related to this topic at the links below:
Russia could build new gas pipeline to Germany
15:05
24/ 08/ 2005
MOSCOW, August 24 (RIA Novosti) - Russia is looking into extending Gazprom's North European gas pipeline to Germany, Russian President Vladimir Putin said Wednesday.
"We are now looking into building a branch of the pipeline, which should go straight from Russia to northern Germany," Putin said at an interview with German TV channel Zweites Deutsches Fernsehen (ZDF), which was published on the Russian government's official website.
Gazprom recently begun building the Northern-European natural gas pipeline (NEG), and plans to complete the first 100 km through the Boksitogorsky area in the Leningrad region within six months.
Under the NEG project, a total of 568 km of pipelines will be built on and under land, and 1089 km under the Baltic Sea. The pipeline will begin transporting gas in two years' time, and should reach its planned capacity of 55 billion cubic meters per year in 2009. The total cost of the project is currently estimated at $5.7 billion.
Gazprom's decision to build the pipeline is linked to the company's development of the South Russian gas field.
The pipeline will pass through Russia's Vyborg region, go under the Baltic Sea, and emerge in Greifswald, in Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, Germany. Offshoots may then be built under the Baltic Sea to link the pipeline with Russia's Kaliningrad region, Finland, Sweden, Denmark, and the UK.
The NEG pipeline will not use any other countries for transit, which will lower transport costs and make it more reliable for export.
Merkel aide seeks more EU integration
By Judy Dempsey International Herald TribuneSATURDAY, AUGUST 27, 2005
BERLIN The man expected to play a major role in shaping foreign policy if Angela Merkel is elected chancellor of Germany on Sept. 18 says he wants a stronger and more-integrated Europe that will not compete with the United States but work with it.
Such an ambitious agenda will not be easy to achieve for Wolfgang Schäuble, the veteran Christian Democratic foreign policy expert whom Merkel brought into her mini-cabinet.
The European Union is in disarray over the defeat of the European constitution in France and the Netherlands. There are still big misgivings among some European leaders over the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq. And many have yet to be convinced that the administration of President George W. Bush will find its way back to supporting a multilateralist agenda.
Fresh from a visit to Moscow, where he met with Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, Schäuble said in an interview Thursday in his Berlin office that Germany's national interests had not really changed since reunification in 1990.
"It is the world that has changed," said Schäuble, who will be 63 on election day. "The fundamentals are more or less the same. Germany's interests and foreign policy are anchored on a European position and a trans-Atlantic partnership, both going hand in hand and not in competition with each other."
Chancellor Gerhard Schröder, however, has repeatedly used the national card for domestic reasons in ways that undermined the twin pillars of Germany's foreign policy - closer European integration and a strong trans-Atlantic relationship. By breaching the EU's rules on strict budget deficits, he helped to destroy the Stability and Growth Pact, which set limits on deficits. "That was very, very damaging," Schäuble said.
Some observers here say that by playing the antiwar and anti-American card during the 2002 campaign that secured his victory, Schröder sharpened the divisions in Europe over the war. His policies were soon supported by President Jacques Chirac of France and President Vladimir Putin of Russia, with whom Schröder developed a close relationship.
Schäuble says he has no doubt that "this triangular relationship involving Berlin, Paris and Moscow was a dangerous development. It was very dangerous for the small countries in Europe because they perceived it as an axis and you can understand why. We want good relations with Russia, but we do not want those relations to be misunderstood."
The one big foreign policy issue on which the Bush administration and Merkel do not see eye to eye is Turkey. Washington considers Turkey to be an important strategic ally and has repeatedly urged the EU to start accession talks as soon as possible. Merkel, unlike Schröder, who has been a consistent supporter of Turkey's joining the EU, insists it should be given a "privileged partnership."
BERLIN The man expected to play a major role in shaping foreign policy if Angela Merkel is elected chancellor of Germany on Sept. 18 says he wants a stronger and more-integrated Europe that will not compete with the United States but work with it.
Such an ambitious agenda will not be easy to achieve for Wolfgang Schäuble, the veteran Christian Democratic foreign policy expert whom Merkel brought into her mini-cabinet.
The European Union is in disarray over the defeat of the European constitution in France and the Netherlands. There are still big misgivings among some European leaders over the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq. And many have yet to be convinced that the administration of President George W. Bush will find its way back to supporting a multilateralist agenda.
Fresh from a visit to Moscow, where he met with Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, Schäuble said in an interview Thursday in his Berlin office that Germany's national interests had not really changed since reunification in 1990.
"It is the world that has changed," said Schäuble, who will be 63 on election day. "The fundamentals are more or less the same. Germany's interests and foreign policy are anchored on a European position and a trans-Atlantic partnership, both going hand in hand and not in competition with each other."
Chancellor Gerhard Schröder, however, has repeatedly used the national card for domestic reasons in ways that undermined the twin pillars of Germany's foreign policy - closer European integration and a strong trans-Atlantic relationship. By breaching the EU's rules on strict budget deficits, he helped to destroy the Stability and Growth Pact, which set limits on deficits. "That was very, very damaging," Schäuble said.
Some observers here say that by playing the antiwar and anti-American card during the 2002 campaign that secured his victory, Schröder sharpened the divisions in Europe over the war. His policies were soon supported by President Jacques Chirac of France and President Vladimir Putin of Russia, with whom Schröder developed a close relationship.
Schäuble says he has no doubt that "this triangular relationship involving Berlin, Paris and Moscow was a dangerous development. It was very dangerous for the small countries in Europe because they perceived it as an axis and you can understand why. We want good relations with Russia, but we do not want those relations to be misunderstood."
The one big foreign policy issue on which the Bush administration and Merkel do not see eye to eye is Turkey. Washington considers Turkey to be an important strategic ally and has repeatedly urged the EU to start accession talks as soon as possible. Merkel, unlike Schröder, who has been a consistent supporter of Turkey's joining the EU, insists it should be given a "privileged partnership."
Russia's Putin to briefly visit Germany on September 8
KAZAN, Aug 26 (Prime-Tass) -- Russian President Vladimir Putin will pay a short working visit to Germany on September 8 by invitation of German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder, the Kremlin said Friday.
The visit would come just 10 days ahead of earlier national election called by Schroeder.
The agenda of the meeting includes bilateral economic ties including energy cooperation and international issues, said Alexei Gromov, the president's press secretary.
Putin currently chairs the meeting of Russia's State Council in Kazan, the capital of the constituent republic of Tatarstan. The State Council is a large advisory body to the president consisting of Russian governors and other officials.
Putin to visit Germany next month
BERLIN, Aug. 26 (Xinhuanet) -- Russian President Vladimir Putin will pay a working visit to Germany on Sept. 8, a news release of the German government said Friday.
During the short stay here, Putin will meet German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder to discuss bilateral trade and economic cooperation. They will focus on the energy sector, social and humanitarian projects. Urgent international issues are also ontheir agenda, the release said.
Russia is looking into extending Gazprom's North European gas pipeline from Russia straight to northern Germany, Putin said on Wednesday in an interview with German TV channel Zweites Deutsches Fernsehen (ZDF).
The pipeline will pass through Russia's Vyborg region, gounder the Baltic Sea, and emerge in Greifswald, in Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, Germany.
It will not go through any other countries, thus saving transport costs and make it more reliable for export.The Gazprom company has recently begun building the Northern-European natural gas pipeline (NEG), and plans to complete the first 100 kilometers through the Boksitogorsky area in theLeningrad region within six months.
Under the NEG project, a total of 568 kilometers of pipelines will be built on and under land, and 1089 kilometers under the Baltic Sea. The pipeline will begin transporting gas in two years'time, and should reach its planned capacity of 55 billion cubicmeters per year in 2009. The total cost of the project iscurrently estimated at 5.7 billion US dollars.
Poll shows German opposition holding on to lead over Schroeder govt
BERLIN - A poll on Friday showed Germany’s conservative opposition holding on to a solid lead ahead of Sept. 18 elections, despite a slight gain for Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder’s Social Democrats.
The survey by the Infratest dimap institute for ARD television put support for opposition leader Angela Merkel’s Christian Democrats at 42 percent, unchanged from a week earlier. The pro-business Free Democrats, their preferred coalition partner, also was unchanged at 7 percent.
Schroeder’s party gained one point to 31 percent, while its government partner, the Greens, were stable at 8 percent.
The survey showed support for the Left Party, an alliance of ex-communists and Social Democrat defectors angered by Schroeder’s labor market and welfare state reforms, unchanged at 9 percent.
Schroeder launched his drive for new elections, a year ahead of schedule, after his party in May suffered a disastrous defeat in a state vote.
The chancellor argued that he needed a new mandate for his reforms. His party has gained four points over the past five weeks in the Infratest dimap poll, but has failed to erode significantly the opposition’s double-digit lead.
Germany’s highest court removed the last barrier to the early vote on Thursday, rejecting complaints from two government lawmakers.
Infratest dimap expert Richard Hilmer told ARD that flooding in solidly conservative Bavaria this week would have no influence on the election result.
In 2002, Schroeder was helped to a narrow win by his decisive handling of floods in the formerly communist east and by his vehement opposition to military action in Iraq.
“As Germany’s strongest state economically, Bavaria is not dependent on the federal government’s crisis management in the same way as the east,” Hilmer said.
The poll of 1,000 Germans was carried out Tuesday and Wednesday. The margin of error was plus or minus 3.1 percentage points.
Sunday, August 28, 2005
Friday, August 26, 2005
“Independent” political websites: A more insidious way of Propaganda?
~by Veronica Bicer
Globalresearch: A website in search for the truth?
--------------------------------------------------
A good example, although less striking than others, is Michel Chossudovsky, the owner of the above mentioned website, and his analysis on London terrorist attacks.
You can read Michel Chossudovsky’s article at the link:
The tactics is to bring up as many names as you can, allegedly key figures, whose history is "well known" by the author, meant to “unveil” the political mystery of the topic.
Here it goes:
Chossudovsky’s writing reads: Giuliani (and other small fries) were in London at the time when the terrorist attack occurred.
So? It's interesting that Chossudovsky fails to mention that Bush and Putin alike, not to mention other important heads of G8 states, were in Britain as well at that very time.
As far as I know, one doesn't need the major or the head of state's presence in the neighborhood, so to be able to place a bomb in a previously established place (see Giuliani’s alleged presence in London).
What Chossudovsky fails to mention are facts, deals that have indeed been concluded by Britain following the terrorist attacks, he preferring to structure his article around a completely speculative timely coincidence and nothing more.
One thing worthy to be remembered is Putin's late sudden good will, as far as Britain's investments in Russia concern.
Another is the Russian sub, allegedly saved by Brits who were afterwards over-praised by Putin and will be awarded, with pomp, by the Russian authorities, who didn’t appear to bear much shame for what happened.
The sub accident was followed yesterday by a successful war game that (logically, taking into account the presence of Putin himself on board of the Tu-160 bomber), had to have been prepared far previously of the sub’s sinking, and which, amongst others, boosted Putin’s image and has made the public opinion to completely forget about the sunk sub.
Goal attained! The "invincible" Russian military will soon attend war games with Britain.
The article below is just an example of Putin's good will, adding that Putin has just released TNK BP from some important amounts of money the oil company owed to the Russian state.
TNK-BP board decides to spend $270 million to develop Verkhnechonsk field
IRKUTSK, August 17 (RIA Novosti, Alexander Batalin) -
The board of Russian-British oil giant TNK-BP has decided to allocate $270 to bring the Verkhnechonsk (Irkutsk region, Siberia) oil and gas field into experimental-industrial production, a company press release said.
The experimental-industrial production project will continue up until 2008.
It involves developing infrastructure on the site and boring 20 wells into the ground, 13 of which will be used for pumping oil out of the reservoir and the other seven for pumping water, steam, or gas mixtures into the reservoir to raise reservoir pressure and aid extraction.
This project has been made possible by the Russian government's decision at the end of last year to begin building a pipeline from eastern Siberia to the Pacific Ocean.
TNK-BP considers its main goal to be to synchronize preparations of the Verkhnechonsk oil and gas field with Transneft's plans for constructing the first stage of a pipeline to Skovorodino (on the Chinese border).
This will allow for supply of eastern Siberian oil to Russian consumers by 2008-2009, as well as to countries in the Asia-Pacific region.
Concluding Remarks
One should not at this stage of the investigation draw hasty conclusions regarding Putin's presumptive involvement in the terror attack on the London underground, just because Putin now makes some favours to a joint Russian-British oil company and neither we should suddenly ascertain that Putin has arranged the London attacks just because it happened that some British rescued his crew just weeks after, while he rushed to state that he will promote navy collaboration with Britain and that the two states will hold military exercises in 2006, Russia planning to buy British military equipment.
The issue cannot, however, be dismissed, the only certain thing being for now that the British authorities are perfectly aware and certainly involved in what happened in the London subway, being still unclear on who of the two World poles (the US or Russia) stroke the political deal with the British authorities so to make them order to the secret services to physically perpetrate such a bloody action.
More generally, the issue of this kind of attacks ALWAYS having a political PURPOSE, leads to the conclusion that the secret services of the planet have carefully planned them in advance.
The so-craved "investigation" required by Michel Chossudovsky will never be made, we all knowing very well that the independent public has no other role but to be the unpaid and often murdered actors playing, some without their knowledge, some just against their will, a global "terrorist" play.
This morbid play, in essence, does nothing else but to help the US to hide its invasionist bloody face under gross "Islamic" lies.
And if the actions of the Russian president that followed the London attacks could be a simple counteraction trying to defend Russia from further eventual US-UK harmful alliances, it is not complicated at all to portray a murderer in colours pleasant to his supporters' eyes.
In the lines above I proved that it's not very difficult to turn a question into a thesis, allegedly bringing arguments meant in fact to secretly favour your political preferences.
Relying on speculations only, one can distort the public opinion and inoculate, with premeditation, the propagandistic agenda of the ones whom he secretly and perversely backs.
This wouldn’t be quite a problem though, if the above mentioned website wouldn’t be pretentiously called “Globalresearch” and where the other player (Russia) of the bipolar World War we are now witnessing is carefully ignored and almost never appears in Chossudovsky's writings but is just systematically associated with the "lame duck" of the planet.
Is Russia such a small World player that it is not even worth mentioning by a website that claims researching Globalization?
What does Michel Chossudovsky attain by purportedly ignoring Russia's successes, if not to stealthily deliver to the skeptical public who venerates him and sees in his website the last chance to find out the truth, the manufactured conclusion that Bush is a murderer, but a successful one after all, at the same time easing our souls from the burden of qualm and making us believe that the World War is actually not as bad as it seems, Bush having no rivals.
Which will be the reaction of the public, especially of the one who hopes to benefit from Bush’s reckless aggressive policy?
Probably this: Let him be then, if he is able to safely ensure us the consumerist life we are so addicted to!
Ethically speaking, this is not only a very mean approach of the matter, crafty inoculated to the large public by Chossudovsky and other "independent" virtual political gurus, but also a very dangerous one, practically supporting and, moreover, promoting Bush's invasionist plan, by playing a tricky psychological game on the skeptical ones, meant to alter and ultimately to eradicate the small amount of desire for truth, remained untouched by the TV brainwashing machine. ~ Vera
Globalresearch: A website in search for the truth?
--------------------------------------------------
A good example, although less striking than others, is Michel Chossudovsky, the owner of the above mentioned website, and his analysis on London terrorist attacks.
You can read Michel Chossudovsky’s article at the link:
The tactics is to bring up as many names as you can, allegedly key figures, whose history is "well known" by the author, meant to “unveil” the political mystery of the topic.
Here it goes:
Chossudovsky’s writing reads: Giuliani (and other small fries) were in London at the time when the terrorist attack occurred.
So? It's interesting that Chossudovsky fails to mention that Bush and Putin alike, not to mention other important heads of G8 states, were in Britain as well at that very time.
As far as I know, one doesn't need the major or the head of state's presence in the neighborhood, so to be able to place a bomb in a previously established place (see Giuliani’s alleged presence in London).
What Chossudovsky fails to mention are facts, deals that have indeed been concluded by Britain following the terrorist attacks, he preferring to structure his article around a completely speculative timely coincidence and nothing more.
One thing worthy to be remembered is Putin's late sudden good will, as far as Britain's investments in Russia concern.
Another is the Russian sub, allegedly saved by Brits who were afterwards over-praised by Putin and will be awarded, with pomp, by the Russian authorities, who didn’t appear to bear much shame for what happened.
The sub accident was followed yesterday by a successful war game that (logically, taking into account the presence of Putin himself on board of the Tu-160 bomber), had to have been prepared far previously of the sub’s sinking, and which, amongst others, boosted Putin’s image and has made the public opinion to completely forget about the sunk sub.
Goal attained! The "invincible" Russian military will soon attend war games with Britain.
The article below is just an example of Putin's good will, adding that Putin has just released TNK BP from some important amounts of money the oil company owed to the Russian state.
TNK-BP board decides to spend $270 million to develop Verkhnechonsk field
IRKUTSK, August 17 (RIA Novosti, Alexander Batalin) -
The board of Russian-British oil giant TNK-BP has decided to allocate $270 to bring the Verkhnechonsk (Irkutsk region, Siberia) oil and gas field into experimental-industrial production, a company press release said.
The experimental-industrial production project will continue up until 2008.
It involves developing infrastructure on the site and boring 20 wells into the ground, 13 of which will be used for pumping oil out of the reservoir and the other seven for pumping water, steam, or gas mixtures into the reservoir to raise reservoir pressure and aid extraction.
This project has been made possible by the Russian government's decision at the end of last year to begin building a pipeline from eastern Siberia to the Pacific Ocean.
TNK-BP considers its main goal to be to synchronize preparations of the Verkhnechonsk oil and gas field with Transneft's plans for constructing the first stage of a pipeline to Skovorodino (on the Chinese border).
This will allow for supply of eastern Siberian oil to Russian consumers by 2008-2009, as well as to countries in the Asia-Pacific region.
Concluding Remarks
One should not at this stage of the investigation draw hasty conclusions regarding Putin's presumptive involvement in the terror attack on the London underground, just because Putin now makes some favours to a joint Russian-British oil company and neither we should suddenly ascertain that Putin has arranged the London attacks just because it happened that some British rescued his crew just weeks after, while he rushed to state that he will promote navy collaboration with Britain and that the two states will hold military exercises in 2006, Russia planning to buy British military equipment.
The issue cannot, however, be dismissed, the only certain thing being for now that the British authorities are perfectly aware and certainly involved in what happened in the London subway, being still unclear on who of the two World poles (the US or Russia) stroke the political deal with the British authorities so to make them order to the secret services to physically perpetrate such a bloody action.
More generally, the issue of this kind of attacks ALWAYS having a political PURPOSE, leads to the conclusion that the secret services of the planet have carefully planned them in advance.
The so-craved "investigation" required by Michel Chossudovsky will never be made, we all knowing very well that the independent public has no other role but to be the unpaid and often murdered actors playing, some without their knowledge, some just against their will, a global "terrorist" play.
This morbid play, in essence, does nothing else but to help the US to hide its invasionist bloody face under gross "Islamic" lies.
And if the actions of the Russian president that followed the London attacks could be a simple counteraction trying to defend Russia from further eventual US-UK harmful alliances, it is not complicated at all to portray a murderer in colours pleasant to his supporters' eyes.
In the lines above I proved that it's not very difficult to turn a question into a thesis, allegedly bringing arguments meant in fact to secretly favour your political preferences.
Relying on speculations only, one can distort the public opinion and inoculate, with premeditation, the propagandistic agenda of the ones whom he secretly and perversely backs.
This wouldn’t be quite a problem though, if the above mentioned website wouldn’t be pretentiously called “Globalresearch” and where the other player (Russia) of the bipolar World War we are now witnessing is carefully ignored and almost never appears in Chossudovsky's writings but is just systematically associated with the "lame duck" of the planet.
Is Russia such a small World player that it is not even worth mentioning by a website that claims researching Globalization?
What does Michel Chossudovsky attain by purportedly ignoring Russia's successes, if not to stealthily deliver to the skeptical public who venerates him and sees in his website the last chance to find out the truth, the manufactured conclusion that Bush is a murderer, but a successful one after all, at the same time easing our souls from the burden of qualm and making us believe that the World War is actually not as bad as it seems, Bush having no rivals.
Which will be the reaction of the public, especially of the one who hopes to benefit from Bush’s reckless aggressive policy?
Probably this: Let him be then, if he is able to safely ensure us the consumerist life we are so addicted to!
Ethically speaking, this is not only a very mean approach of the matter, crafty inoculated to the large public by Chossudovsky and other "independent" virtual political gurus, but also a very dangerous one, practically supporting and, moreover, promoting Bush's invasionist plan, by playing a tricky psychological game on the skeptical ones, meant to alter and ultimately to eradicate the small amount of desire for truth, remained untouched by the TV brainwashing machine. ~ Vera
Although Sri Lanka and Bangladesh seem sold to the US, yet the Tsar looks great for a third term
Sri Lanka and Bangladesh seem sold to the US, this way Bush hoping to encircle India.
See maps:
I don't know what does China have to say in the equation, but definitely it has something, if "the explosions came at a time when Prime Minister Khaleda Zia was away in China on a five-day visit focussing on trade".
See also this: China, U.S. unite against India
However, with China's involvement in Myanmar, where the US sings songs for long, this belief strengthens. But as we pretty well know, China does not do anything for the US out of an excessive "good will", but rather tightened on the screw. A Chinese textiles ban on the US market has been vehiculated lately in the media:"China needed to keep vital export markets open, principally in the US".And yet, about India, China's neighbour and Russia's refreshed Asian partner, it is not very clear: is India pressured by the US and China to accept its fate of being encircled?Is India playing a smart double game aimed to satisfy both the US and Russia's interests, even if somehow ignoring the Chinese ones? Or rather is it Putin playing now for almost 6 years, not fulminatingly successful but neither faulty, his game of compromise?Has Putin, at a short phone talk with Bush SR, managed to convince the old Texan that, while Russia pushes for key strategic alliances with the two Asian giants - India and China -, Bangladesh and India's surrounding islands are more than nothing in the US' diary?
Although excessively pro-American, this is an interesting article as well:
And to comment it a bit, if we may say that "closer China-Russia collaboration DO reflect current weakness" (I would like to add: in regard with the EU-Russia stalled deal ! ), then it can be ascertained pretty safely that the US' indulgence in "taking what it can get" - India's surrounding islands - and making huge efforts for Mongolia, doesn't reflect much US' success in Asia either.Maintaining the weak balance of force is not enough for the yet so vulnerable Russia. But, aside of the pending EU, where he hasn't quite succeeded, for the moment at least, (his efforts being seriously hampered by Bush SR' threats in May this year), Putin has done pretty much by now for a decent shape of the World map. However, although most of Putin's actions unfolded in less than two years, since he magnificently indeed succeeded to jail Khodorkhovsky, the couple of years left until his second term in the Kremlin will end seem insufficient for bringing Russia back on the strong straight path of the early USSR times. Inherently prolonging the process of Russia's rise, the unforeseen complications that automatically derive from the US' responses to Russia's political challenges complicatedly formulated by Putin, demand the lack of gaps in the Russian political life, therefore requesting Putin's inimitable diplomatic game and hence his longer stay in the Kremlin. ~Vera
See maps:
I don't know what does China have to say in the equation, but definitely it has something, if "the explosions came at a time when Prime Minister Khaleda Zia was away in China on a five-day visit focussing on trade".
See also this: China, U.S. unite against India
However, with China's involvement in Myanmar, where the US sings songs for long, this belief strengthens. But as we pretty well know, China does not do anything for the US out of an excessive "good will", but rather tightened on the screw. A Chinese textiles ban on the US market has been vehiculated lately in the media:"China needed to keep vital export markets open, principally in the US".And yet, about India, China's neighbour and Russia's refreshed Asian partner, it is not very clear: is India pressured by the US and China to accept its fate of being encircled?Is India playing a smart double game aimed to satisfy both the US and Russia's interests, even if somehow ignoring the Chinese ones? Or rather is it Putin playing now for almost 6 years, not fulminatingly successful but neither faulty, his game of compromise?Has Putin, at a short phone talk with Bush SR, managed to convince the old Texan that, while Russia pushes for key strategic alliances with the two Asian giants - India and China -, Bangladesh and India's surrounding islands are more than nothing in the US' diary?
Although excessively pro-American, this is an interesting article as well:
And to comment it a bit, if we may say that "closer China-Russia collaboration DO reflect current weakness" (I would like to add: in regard with the EU-Russia stalled deal ! ), then it can be ascertained pretty safely that the US' indulgence in "taking what it can get" - India's surrounding islands - and making huge efforts for Mongolia, doesn't reflect much US' success in Asia either.Maintaining the weak balance of force is not enough for the yet so vulnerable Russia. But, aside of the pending EU, where he hasn't quite succeeded, for the moment at least, (his efforts being seriously hampered by Bush SR' threats in May this year), Putin has done pretty much by now for a decent shape of the World map. However, although most of Putin's actions unfolded in less than two years, since he magnificently indeed succeeded to jail Khodorkhovsky, the couple of years left until his second term in the Kremlin will end seem insufficient for bringing Russia back on the strong straight path of the early USSR times. Inherently prolonging the process of Russia's rise, the unforeseen complications that automatically derive from the US' responses to Russia's political challenges complicatedly formulated by Putin, demand the lack of gaps in the Russian political life, therefore requesting Putin's inimitable diplomatic game and hence his longer stay in the Kremlin. ~Vera
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
