All Bets are otherwise OFF
Hey Eric !
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Beelzebubalicious
Yeah, if you want to face nuclear annihilation, that's your choice....and if Ukraine wants to bind itself to a foreign power and limit its sovereignty, then let it do that...
The President took the whole Carrot :eek:Well now, looks like Ukrainians will no longer have to concern themselves with being annihilated as the former Russian red-headed stepchild (damn, we need a rocket scientist herein to explain ballistic missile trajectory that close to the launch pads).
Quote:
MOSCOW. Feb 13 (Interfax) - Ukrainian President Viktor Yushchenko said in an attempt to allay Russia's concerns that the Ukrainian Constitution rules out the stationing of foreign military bases on the country's territory.
"If the issue is that our neighbor worries about the deployment of a NATO military base, then apparently this issue will never be on the agenda. As you know, the Ukrainian Constitution stipulates that the Ukrainian territory cannot be used for the deployment of foreign military bases," Yushchenko said at a meeting with the Ukrainian diaspora in Russia on Wednesday in Moscow.
"If there are topics sensitive to Russia, we are ready to discuss them. We do not want to damage [Russia's national interests] by our moves," the Ukrainian president said.
Narrative building in Russia
The Problematic Pages
by Leon Aron
To understand Vladimir Putin, we must understand his view of Russian history.
Post Date Wednesday, September 24, 2008
Quote:
On June 18, 2007, a national conference of high school historians and teachers of social sciences was convened in Moscow. The agenda called for the discussion of "the acute problems in the teaching of modern Russian history," and for "the development of the state standards of education." It soon became clear that the real purpose of the gathering was to present to the delegates--or, more precisely, to impress upon them--two recently finished "manuals for teachers." One of them, to be published in a pilot print run of ten thousand, was called Noveyshaya Istoriya Rossii, 1945-2006 GG: Kniga Dlya Uchitelya, or The Modern History of Russia, 1945-2006: A Teacher's Handbook. It was the work of a certain A.V. Filippov, and it was designed to become the standard Russian high school textbook of Russian history, scheduled to be introduced into classrooms this month.
http://www.tnr.com/booksarts/story.h...8-5875a0ce6fb6
Flirting with Stalin.
Quote:
"Dear friends! The textbook you are holding in your hands is dedicated to the history of our Motherland… from the end of the Great Patriotic War to our days. We will trace the journey of the Soviet Union from its greatest historical triumph to its tragic disintegration."
http://www.prospect-magazine.co.uk/a...s.php?id=10356
Gazprom’s Destabilization Plan for Ukraine and Southeast Europe
This report from the Eurasia Daily Monitor of the Jamestown Foundation was pretty interesting. It's titled:
Gazprom’s Destabilization Plan for Ukraine and Southeast Europe
The USG is putting more attention and resources into the Crimea and Eastern Ukraine, but I don't know how they can counter the Russians. In the story is a link to another story about riots in Bulgaria. Ukraine may well be next...
Is this a good or a bad example of cooperation?
Mutually beneficent cooperation is an important goal. What do you see the German census to be? From a pure engineering standpoint this is a cool project, but things are rarely that simple…
Nordstream backgrounder by wikipedia
Quote:
Nord Stream (Russian: Северный поток Severnyy potok, German: Nordeuropäische Gasleitung, Polish: Gazociąg Północny; former names: North Transgas and North European Gas Pipeline; also known as the Russo–German gas pipeline or the Baltic Sea gas pipeline) is a planned natural gas pipeline from Russia to Germany by the company Nord Stream AG. The name of Nord Stream refers usually to the offshore pipeline between Vyborg, Russia, and Greifswald, Germany, but sometimes it may have wider meaning, which includes the onshore pipeline in Russia and further connections in Western Europe.
The project, which is promoted by Russia and Germany, is seen as controversial both for environmental concerns and national security risks in some countries such as Poland and the Baltic states, which favour overland pipelines across their countries' territories.
Nordstream Company Website
Quote:
Nord Stream will transport up to 55 billion cubic metres of gas each year. This is enough to supply more than 25 million households.
Nord Stream is more than just a pipeline. It is a new channel for Russian natural gas exports, and a major infrastructure project which sets a new benchmark in EU-Russia cooperation.
Gerhard Schroder backgrounder by wikipedia
Quote:
Gerhard Fritz Kurt Schröder (help·info) IPA: [ˌɡeɐ̯haɐ̯t fʁɪʦ kʊɐ̯t ˈʃʁøːdɐ] (7 April 1944) is a German politician, and was Chancellor of Germany from 1998 to 2005. A member of the Social Democratic Party of Germany (SPD), he led a coalition government of the SPD and the Greens. Before becoming a full-time politician, he was a lawyer, and before becoming Chancellor he was Minister-president of the German state of Lower Saxony. Following the 2005 federal election, which his party lost, after three weeks of negotiations he stood down as Chancellor in favour of Angela Merkel of the rival Christian Democratic Union.
Spiegel on cold war legacies of mistrust
Quote:
Die schwedische Regierung rügt das deutsch-russische Unternehmen Nord Stream und könnte somit für Verzögerungen des geplanten Ostseepipeline-Projekts sorgen. Nord-Stream-Chairman Gerhard Schröder ist nicht amüsiert: Denn hinter den Umweltauflagen verbergen sich weit tiefere Ängste der Skandinavier.
Quote:
My translation…
“The Swedish Government has criticized the planned Baltic sea pipeline Nord Stream, a German-Russian undertaking, and can provide reasons why. Nord Stream’s Chairman Gerhard Schroder is not amused: Behind the environmental concerns are deeply buried Scandinavian fears. “
Dilligner Hutte company website. Pipeline material
Excellents point's Fuch's
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fuchs
Strange. Why should one need to "counter" the Russians?
Cooperation should still be in the repertoire of foreign policy.
The Russians/Gazprom do now EXACTLY what a rational economist in charge would do:
1) Don't give your goods away to someone who didn't buy them.
2) Don't sell your goods at a tiny fraction of their worth.
Why indeed? Supply and demand right. And of course it's not unreasonable to expect them to work towards their own interests.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fuchs
The Eastern European non-NATO nations got natural gas for a half or less of the price charged on the Western Europeans. The Ukraine did not negotiate a new contract that satisfied the Russians in time, so they didn't get any deliveries any more. It needs no evil plan for this; rational economic behavior is enough explanation..
True enough on the first part, not quite so sure about the latter
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fuchs
It's understandable that Russia subsidizes close friends like Belarus, but there's no reason for subsidizing Ukraine, a nation that has a Russian minority that's a regional majority in some places and doesn't want to talk about this.
The(first) article is about a small great power game; such things happen all the time in our world and our governments aren't exactly role models for fairness either..
While supporting your friends while sticking it to those who aren't may very well fall in the categories of both rational and well within the realm of "normal" governmental behaviours; still not certain that the particular means in this case match any rational expectations for ends in that it seems to presume that an awful lot of folks are gonna go along with it simply because they have no other choice.
If one considers Surferbeetle's posts above:
OK, Russia has product and the ability to demand an "acceptable" payment for it. They are concerned that should certain countries through which said product would have to flow have disagreement with errr their particular mode of barter or some actions then said supply might be interrupted thereby by costing them more than they might want to pay, both in loss of monetary income as well as any larger actions which might be required in order to get the product flowing again.
So thus the game begins, what to do what to do????
OH If we get an alternate line through a country with whom we believe we can ensure continuous flow regardless what we choose to do elsewhere than it frees us to use both but helps minimize any sort of possible burden should the on land routes go down for any reason.
Here's the gist of my question to you. This may make great sense to Russia, Germany but exactly why in the world would anyone else there in the region who looks to suffer so great a risk from such things(It's not exactly like Russia has tried hiding their intent) choose to rationally accept or help facilitate such a thing. And in such case exactly how rational is it to think that theres not going to be a ton of issues in doing it.
All part of the game right.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fuchs
By the way; the U.S.Americans and the British have in my opinion still no right to criticize Russia for its comparably civil great power games. Great powers who waged a war of aggression should better wait for a decade or two till they criticize others' great power games.
The Russians pursue their interests with great rationality and demonstrated the ability to limit their aims to what's easily achievable. That's a great situation for cooperation. Most of their national interests are justifiable - security against invasion in general and advance of a nearby foreign alliance, for example.
Putin knows about the limits of Russia's abilities (unlike the USA and UK) and this limits the problems that he creates.
We can fall back to containment strategies once Russia recovered as state, society and military from the downfall of the 90's and the sins of the 70's.
While much of what you state carrys truth, it might be important to note that we at least try to learn from our mistakes rather than simply trying to find different ways to pull off the same ol tricks.:D
... this time both Moscow and Kyiv appear to be acting out of utter desperation
"Gas trade is one of the principal tools that Russia uses to increase its leverage on the Ukrainian leadership, seeking to change the country's geopolitical direction."
Quote:
Under the current circumstances, Gazprom is interested in escalating the gas price, seeking to earn top dollar from Ukraine while it is still possible, while Naftohaz, Gazprom's Ukrainian counterpart, appears to be in no position to pay it. In the "dual monopoly" situation, the pricing dispute inevitably leads to a perfect deadlock: one side cuts off the gas while the other shuts down the transit pipe. This happened many times before; the only difference is that now Moscow and Kyiv are acting with particular abandon, being engaged in what appears to be a
"struggle to the death."
Lords Hansard text from 10 OCT 2008
I received a tip to go here, albeit dated information.
Quote:
10.34 am
Lord Truscott: My Lords, I declare my relevant energy and other interests, as stated in the Lords’ Register of Interests and recorded by the Advisory Committee on Business Appointments. I also declare an interest because I have a Russian wife, and as Vladimir Putin's biographer.
Incidentally, as Putin's biographer, I was never one of those who believed that the former president would
10 Oct 2008 : Column 419
quietly ride off into the sunset. Instead, what we now have is a political tandem, with Prime Minister Vladimir Putin firmly in the front seat and President Dmitry Medvedev holding up the rear.
The EU accounts for 81 per cent of Russia's pipeline gas exports and 60 per cent of its oil exports. As supplier and consumer, we are locked in a close mutual embrace. As the noble Lord, Lord Roper, said, production shortfalls and the falling price of oil, now under 85 dollars a barrel—incidentally, at under 70 dollars a barrel the Russian federal budget will be in difficulty—present a major threat, as do the production shortfalls themselves, to Russia's ability to meet its international and domestic commitments.
As a former energy Minister, I have a particular interest in energy matters, and I believe that the noble Lord, Lord Crickhowell, will expand on this theme in his speech. Despite the Government's response to our report, I still believe that we were right in the committee in arguing that pressing Russia for ratification of the energy charter treaty is a waste of time.
Economics worth watching...
From today's Washington Post by Craig Whitlock: E.U. Denies Request for Bailout of E. Europe
Quote:
BERLIN, March 1 -- European leaders Sunday rejected a Hungarian plea for a $240 billion bailout of struggling Eastern European countries, as divisions continued to fester over how to prevent economic ills from spreading across the continent.
Quote:
Hungary's prime minister, Ferenc Gyurcsany, had proposed the massive rescue fund for Eastern Europe last week. On Sunday, he warned that old conflicts could reemerge and that "large-scale defaults" would result if the E.U. did not come to the aid of its newest members, who have spent the past two decades trying to recover from communism.
From the Financial Times by Tony Barber: EU summit pledges aid for eastern states
Quote:
European Union governments vowed on Sunday to conquer the financial crisis and recession gripping their economies by extending help to beleaguered eastern European states on a country-by-country basis and respecting the rules of the single European market.
The fragility of the financial systems in several eastern European countries dominated an emergency summit in Brussels, where leaders of the 27-nation bloc committed themselves to “getting the real economy back on track by making the maximum possible use of the single market, which is the engine for recovery”.
Quote:
Banks in the eurozone have lent $1,250bn to eastern Europe, and Moody’s, the credit ratings agency, warned last month that it might downgrade certain western European banks because of their exposure.
From the WSJ by David Crawford: Austrian Bank Rushes Results
Quote:
VIENNA -- Austria's Raiffeisen International Bank-Holding AG rushed out preliminary results to reassure investors over its exposure in Eastern Europe, where it is cutting back foreign-currency loans to consumers as well as all lending to some industries.
Raiffeisen International Chief Executive Herbert Stepic said the decision to halt lending in Swiss francs and to severely restrict loans in euros and U.S. dollars, which began in late 2008 but hadn't been formally announced, will free clients from the risk of fluctuating exchange rates. As Eastern European currencies have weakened, payments on those loans have become more expensive.
He also said the bank has halted local and foreign-currency lending to businesses in troubled East European industries, such as transportation and steel.
"It is another nail in the region's coffin," said Gabor Ambrus, a London-based Eastern Europe economic analyst with 4cast Ltd. He warned that other foreign banks are likely to withdraw credit as well. Eastern Europe is headed for a severe credit crunch that "will impact the real economy," he said.
Quote:
Mr. Stepic said many rating agencies have misjudged Eastern Europe, whose good infrastructure, educated residents and low wages still mean it has good growth prospects. He said some Eastern European countries have strong economic fundamentals and predicted that those that do end up in financial straits and are members of the European Union can expect a bailout from Brussels.
Analysts tend to unjustly lump all of Eastern Europe in one basket, Mr. Stepic said. He singled out Slovakia, the Czech Republic, Poland, Albania and Kosovo as having bright futures.