The Rise of the Second Soviet Empire

[vector7]

Companion Thread:

• Missile Defense (General thread)

Report: Military Deploys S-400s in Kaliningrad

08 April 2012
Combined Reports


S-400 Launcher (photo: ITAR-TASS)

The military has begun deploying S-400 mobile surface-to-air missiles in Kaliningrad, the Baltic exclave bordered by Poland and Lithuania, Izvestia reported.

Izvestia cited unidentified military officials as saying the missiles arrived Friday, but did not say how many.

The Defense Ministry declined comment on the report.

S-400s, Russia's most advanced surface-to-air missiles, have a range of 120 to 400 kilometers. S-400s are already deployed around Moscow and are planned to be placed in the Pacific Far East this year. The Izvestia report comes amid rising tension between the United States and Russia over Washington's plans for a missile-shield system in Europe, which Russia contends threatens its own defenses.

In a sign of the sensitivity of the issue, state news agency RIA-Novosti late last week released a full version of an April 2 interview with U.S. Ambassador Michael McFaul, saying some of his remarks about missile defense had been "omitted" in the interview's initial publication.

"In the process of video editing, some important remarks by McFaul were omitted, resulting in a brief clip that did not reflect his full response on this topic," RIA-Novosti said on its website. "For the record, RIA-Novosti has published a more complete clip containing McFaul's full remarks."

(AP, MT)

[vector7]

Who would hire trained Russian Military Mercenaries during a revolution capable of defending a new constitutional order against an armed opposition?

Companion Post:

• Report: Russia to form National Guard to answer new challenges abroad

Russia May Consider Establishing Private Military Companies


Russia May Consider Establishing Private Military Companies
© RIA Novosti. Igor Zarembo

00:50 13/04/2012
RIA Novosti military commentator Konstantin Bogdanov

Related News

• Putin Backs Private Defense Company Idea
• Russia to Admit Foreign Investors to Defense Asset Sales - Putin
• Vladimir Putin's report on the government's work in 2011
• A future of small brutal wars

Russia may create private military companies and possibly use them for missions abroad. Prime Minister and President-elect Vladimir Putin mentioned this possibility after he delivered his report on the government’s performance in 2011 to the State Duma. Many countries have such companies, but the issue needs to be carefully considered given the specific circumstances of Russia.

Indirect instruments of government influence

The possibility of using private military companies (PMCs) as a tool of Russian influence abroad was raised by A Just Russia deputy Alexei Mitrofanov.

“I believe that such companies are a way of implementing national interests without the direct involvement of the state,” Putin replied. “Yes, I think we could consider this option.”

What exactly is meant by this, given the wealth of international experience in this area and how could it be implemented in the reality of today’s Russia?

20th century mercenaries

One of the previous attempts to use such “indirect tools of influence” nearly led to the appearance of two semi-piratic states in Africa in the 1960s: copper-rich Katanga, which declared independence from Congo in 1960 and rejoined it only after UN intervention in 1963, and Biafra, which seceded from Nigeria in 1967 and was reincorporated into it in 1970.

The colonial powers, which were leaving Africa at the time, needed an additional instrument for stabilizing the continent. Initially European mercenaries, hired by local governments, were used to fight the guerrillas.

However, they were also hired to overthrow the “wrong” governments, which they did quickly and usually at night, so that the TV crews which arrived at the site in the morning saw only beaming locals armed with heavy weaponry.

Some of these stories ended in embarrassment. Colonel Bob Denard, a French soldier and mercenary who had fought in Katanga, and his group of mercenaries escaped by the skin of their teeth when they tried to overthrow the leftist president of Benin in 1977. But Denard’s other missions, for example in the Comoros, were completed quite successfully.

Mercenaries were based in white-dominated southern Africa, including Rhodesia during Ian Smith’s term as prime minister and South Africa when it was ruled by the Boers. When the international community took harsh measures against the mercenaries, including by adopting the UN Mercenary Convention, the vacuum was filled by private military companies, hired by African governments to ensure “systemic security under difficult conditions.” The best known of these was Executive Outcomes, which operated in South Africa and was dissolved in late 1998 as a legal entity, but not as a community of mercenaries.

By the mid-1990s, PMCs could choose from a vast number of retired military professionals in NATO countries after the end of the Cold War. The number of Soviet servicemen, in particular pilots and engineers, on hire in the air forces of African countries went up sharply, too.

The demand for the services of PMCs increased as conflicts and even local wars flared up on the periphery of the former Soviet zone of influence, and African regimes started fighting over their countries’ meager resources.

Consolidation

Western governments readily used PMCs to resolve a growing number of such problems. The market was dominated by retired U.S. and British colonels, who discreetly worked hand in glove with their governments and security services. Private military companies mushroomed and soon became the key element of the presence of the wealthiest countries in the hot spots around the world.

If the golden age of mercenaries was in the 1960s in Congo, then Iraq and Afghanistan in the 2000s can be considered the platinum age. Mercenaries were paid mind-boggling daily rates of $1,000, $1,500 and more for operations in the conflict zones, approximately seven times more than U.S. military forces with comparable qualifications.

Outsourcing of U.S. mercenaries became especially flagrant during the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. By the end of the 2000s, the bipartisan Commission on Wartime Contracting in Iraq and Afghanistan said in its report to Congress that the ratio of “the contractor workforce” to U.S. military forces in these countries was roughly 1-to-1.

The contractor workforce soon developed close relations with suppliers and service companies, who fought each other over the most lucrative contracts on offer from the new weak Iraqi and Afghan governments.

Western governments find it difficult to conduct operations in the combat zones without “a contract workforce,” which is another word for mercenaries whose losses are of no concern to anyone apart from their direct employers and who can be assigned the most delicate missions. If they are caught red-handed, they are on their own — there is no government flag to protect them.

Private military companies resurfaced in Libya in 2011 in their traditional form – as trained fighters and instructors of the rebels, who still only managed to break the resistance of the pro-Gaddafi forces after six months of NATO air raids and a ground operation led by troops from Britain, Qatar, the UAE and possibly France.

PMCs in Russia

The establishment of private military companies in Russia is a possibility, according to what Putin has said. But there are many nuances bound up in its implementation.

The point at issue is not how to control the “contract workforce,” which will not be officially employed by the state. Control magically becomes possible when the government needs the contract workforce to exert indirect influence on its behalf. After all, PMCs are not private street kiosks or garages.

Much more interesting is the question of what form the PMCs will take in the specific conditions pertaining to Russia. There is a limited market for their services after all and so they will have to rely heavily on major Russian corporations – in other words state energy concerns. They will be hired above all to protect the infrastructure and production areas of these corporations in Russia and abroad.

Another possible area for their deployment could be to help implement Eurasian integration, which is changing the CIS space and increasing Russia’s presence in some unstable post-Soviet republics, primarily in Central Asia but also possibly in the self-proclaimed Caucasus republics of Abkhazia and South Ossetia.

Russian PMCs could be also used in Afghanistan, whose pseudo-stability has closely tied the interests of NATO with those of Moscow.

The deployment of additional troops there may be difficult due to local problems and political losses, but the use of the contract workforce could smooth off some rough edges.

At the same time, PMCs could be a good way to offer retired servicemen new employment opportunities at a time when Russia’s Defense and Interior Ministries are planning to reduce their workforces.

[American Patriot]

hey, science fiction at it's finest.....

[vector7]

Russia's Strategy, Remaking the Union

Politics / Russia Apr 24, 2012 - 08:38 AM By: STRATFOR



The collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991 reversed a process that had been under way since the Russian Empire's emergence in the 17th century. It was ultimately to incorporate four general elements: Eastern Europe, Central Asia, the Caucasus and Siberia. The St. Petersburg-Moscow axis was its core, and Russia, Belorussia and Ukraine were its center of gravity.

The borders were always dynamic, mostly expanding but periodically contracting as the international situation warranted. At its farthest extent, from 1945 to 1989, it reached central Germany, dominating the lands it seized in World War II. The Russian Empire was never at peace. As with many empires, there were always parts of it putting up (sometimes violent) resistance and parts that bordering powers coveted -- as well as parts of other nations that Russia coveted.

The Russian Empire subverted the assumption that political and military power requires a strong economy: It was never prosperous, but it was frequently powerful. The Russians defeated Napoleon and Hitler and confronted the far wealthier Americans for more than four decades in the Cold War, in spite of having a less developed or less advanced economy. Its economic weakness certainly did undermine its military power at times, but to understand Russia, it is important to begin by understanding that the relationship between military and economic power is not a simple one.

Economy and Security

There are many reasons for Russia's economic dysfunction, but the first explanation, if not the full explanation, is geography and transportation. The Russians and Ukrainians have some of the finest farmland in the world, comparable to that of the American Midwest. The difference is transportation, the ability to move the harvest to the rest of the empire and its far away population centers. Where the United States has the Mississippi-Missouri-Ohio river system that integrates the area between the Rockies and the Appalachians, Russia's rivers do not provide an integrated highway to Russia, and given distances and lack of alternative modes of transport, Russian railways were never able to sustain consistent, bulk agricultural transport.

This is not to say that there wasn't integration in the empire's economy and that this didn't serve as a factor binding it together. It is to say that the lack of economic integration, and weakness in agricultural transport in particular, dramatically limited prosperity in the Russian Empire and the Soviet Union. At the same time, the relative underdevelopment of the empire and union made it impossible for them to successfully compete with Western Europe. Therefore, there was an economic motivation within the constituent parts of the empire and the union to integrate with each other.

There could be synergies on a lower level of development among these nations.

Economics was one factor that bound the Russian Empire and Soviet Union together. Another was the military and security apparatus. The Russian security apparatus in particular played a significant role in holding first the empire and then the union together; in many ways, it was the most modern and efficient institution they had. Whatever temptations the constituent republics might have had to leave the empire or union, these were systematically repressed by internal security forces detecting and destroying opposition to the center. It could be put this way: The army created the empire. Its alignment of economic interests was the weak force holding it together, and the security apparatus was the strong force. If the empire and union were to survive, they would need economic relations ordered in such a way that some regions were put at a disadvantage, others at an advantage. That could happen only if the state were powerful enough to impose this reality. Since the state itself was limited in most dimensions, the security apparatus substituted for it. When the security apparatus failed, as it did at the end of World War I or in 1989-1991, the regime could not survive. When it did succeed, it held it all together.

In the Russian Empire, the economic force and the security force were supplemented by an overarching ideology: that of the Russian Orthodox Church, which provided a rationale for the system. The state security apparatus worked with the church and against dissident elements in other religions in the empire. In the Soviet Union, the religious ideology was supplemented with the secular ideology of Marxism-Leninism. The Soviet Union used its security apparatus to attempt a transformation of the economy and to crush opposition to the high cost of this transformation. In some sense, Marxism-Leninism was a more efficient ideology, since Russian Orthodoxy created religious differentials while Marxism-Leninism was hostile to all religions and at least theoretically indifferent to the many ethnicities and nations.

The fall of the Soviet Union really began with a crisis in the economy that created a crisis in the security force, the KGB. It was Yuri Andropov, the head of the KGB, who first began to understand the degree to which the Soviet Union's economy was failing under the growing corruption of the Brezhnev years and the cost of defense spending. The KGB understood two things. The first was that Russia had to restructure (Perestroika) or collapse. The second was that the traditional insularity of the Soviet Union had to be shifted and the Soviets had to open themselves to Western technology and methods (Glasnost). Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev was a reformer, but he was a communist trying to reform the system to save the party. He was proceeding from the KGB model. His and Andropov's gamble was that the Soviet Union could survive and open to the West without collapsing and that it could trade geopolitical interests, such as domination of Eastern Europe, for economic relations without shattering the Soviet Union. They lost the bet.

The Soviet Collapse

The 1990s was a catastrophic period for the former Soviet Union. Except for a few regions, the collapse of the Soviet state and the security apparatus led to chaos, and privatization turned into theft. Not surprisingly, the most sophisticated and well-organized portion of the Soviet apparatus, the KGB, played a major role in the kleptocracy and retained, more than other institutions, its institutional identity. Over time, its control over the economy revived informally, until one of its representatives, Vladimir Putin, emerged as the leader of the state.

Putin developed three principles. The first was that the security system was the heart of the state. The second was that Moscow was the heart of Russia. The third was that Russia was the heart of the former Soviet Union. These principles were not suddenly imposed. The power of the KGB, renamed the FSB and SVR, slowly moved from a system of informal domination through kleptocracy to a more systematic domination of the state apparatus by the security services, reinstituting the old model. Putin took control of regional governments by appointing governors and controlling industry outside of Moscow. Most important, he cautiously moved Russia back to first among equals in the former Soviet Union.

Putin came to power on the heels of the Kosovo war. Russia had insisted that the West not go to war with Serbia, what was left of the former Yugoslavia. Russia was ignored, and its lack of influence left President Boris Yeltsin humiliated. But it was the Orange Revolution in Ukraine that convinced Putin that the United States intended to break Russia if someone like Yeltsin led it. Ukraine is economically and geographically essential to Russian national security, and Putin saw the attempt to create a pro-Western government that wanted to join NATO as Washington, using CIA-funded nongovernmental organizations pushing for regime change, attempted to permanently weaken Russia. Once the Orange Revolution succeeded, Putin moved to rectify the situation.

The first step was to make it clear that Russia had regained a substantial part of its power and was willing to use it. The second step was to demonstrate that American guarantees were worthless. The Russo-Georgian War of 2008 achieved both ends. The Russians had carried out an offensive operation and the Americans, bogged down in Iraq and Afghanistan, could not respond. The lesson was not only for Georgia (which, similar to Ukraine, had also sought NATO membership). It was also for Ukraine and all other countries in the former Soviet Union, demonstrating that Russia was again going to be the heart of Eurasia. Indeed, one of Putin's latest projects is the Eurasian Union, tying together Russia, Kazakhstan and Belarus, a large economic and military part of the former Soviet Union. Add to this Ukraine and the former Soviet Union emerges even more.

Remaking the Union

For Russia, the recreation of a union is a strategic necessity. As Putin put it, the fall of the Soviet Union was a geopolitical catastrophe. Russia needs the economic integration, particularly given the new economic strategy of post-Soviet Russia, which is the export of raw materials, particularly energy. Aligning with states such as Kazakhstan in energy and Ukraine in grain provides Moscow with leverage in the rest of the world, particularly in Europe. As important, it provides strategic depth. The rest of the world knows that an invasion of Russia is inconceivable. The Russians can conceive of it. They remember that Germany in 1932 was crippled. By 1938 it was overwhelmingly powerful. Six years is not very long, and while such an evolution is unlikely now, from the Russian point of view, it must be taken seriously in the long run -- planning for the worst and hoping for the best.

Therefore, the heart of Russian strategy, after resurrecting state power in Russia, is to create a system of relationships within the former Soviet Union that will provide economic alignment and strategic depth but not give Russia an unsustainable obligation to underwrite the other nations' domestic policies. Unlike the Russian Empire or Soviet Union, Putin's strategy is to take advantage of relationships on a roughly mutual basis without undertaking responsibility for the other nations.

In achieving this goal, the U.S. wars in Iraq and Afghanistan were a godsend. Until 9/11, the United States had been deeply involved in peeling off parts of the former Soviet Union such as the Baltics and integrating them into Western systems. With 9/11, the United States became obsessed with the jihadist wars, giving Russia a window of opportunity to stabilize itself and to increase its regional power.

As the United States extracts itself from Afghanistan, Russia has to be concerned that Washington will supplement its focus on China with a renewed focus on Russia. The possible end of these conflicts is not in Russia's interest. Therefore, one piece of Russian external strategy is to increase the likelihood of prolonged U.S. obsession with Iran. Currently, for example, Russia and Iran are the only major countries supporting the regime of Syrian President Bashar al Assad. Russia wants to see a pro-Iranian Syria -- not because it is in Moscow's long-term interests but because, in the short run, anything that absorbs the United States will relieve possible pressure on Russia and give more time for reordering the former Soviet Union.

The crisis in Europe is similarly beneficial to Russia. The unease that Germany has with the European Union has not yet matured into a break, and it may never. However, Germany's unease means that it is looking for other partners, in part to ease the strain on Germany and in part to create options. Germany depends on Russian energy exports, and while that might decrease in coming years, Russia is dealing with the immediate future.

Germany is looking for other potential economic partners and, most important at a time when Europe is undergoing extreme strain, Germany does not want to get caught in an American attempt to redraw Russian borders. The ballistic missile defense system is not significant, in the sense that it does not threaten Russia, but the U.S. presence in the region is worrisome to Moscow. For Russia, recruiting Germany to the view that the United States is a destabilizing force would be a tremendous achievement.

Other issues are side issues. China and Russia have issues, but China cannot pose a significant threat to core Russian interests unless it chooses to invade maritime Russia, which it won't. There are economic and political issues, of course, but China is not at the heart of Russia's strategic concerns.

For Russia, the overwhelming strategic concern is dominating the former Soviet Union without becoming its patron. Ukraine is the key missing element, and a long, complex political and economic game is under way. The second game is in Central Asia, where Russia is systematically asserting its strength. The third is in the Baltics, where it has not yet made a move. And there is the endless conflict in the northern Caucasus that always opens the door for reasserting Russian power in the south. Russia's foreign policy is built around the need to buy time for it to complete its evolution.

To do this, the Russians must keep the United States distracted, and the Russian strategy in the Middle East serves that purpose. The second part is to secure the West by drawing Germany into a mutually beneficial economic relationship while not generating major resistance in Poland or an American presence there. Whether this can be achieved depends as much on Iran as it does on Russia.

Russia has come far from where Yeltsin took it. The security forces are again the heart of the state. Moscow dominates Russia. Russia is moving to dominate the former Soviet Union. Its main adversary, the United States, is distracted, and Europe is weak and divided. Of course, Russia is economically dysfunctional, but that has been the case for centuries and does not mean it will always be weak. For the moment, Russia is content to be strong in what it calls the near abroad, or the former Soviet Union.

Having come this far, it is not trying to solve insoluble problems.

[vector7]

How to restore the Soviet Union

November 22, 2012, 15:28



Against the background of the events taking place in Dagestan, Ingushetia, Kabardino-Balkaria, and now in the Republic of Tatarstan, the stated topic is a bit pretentious. However, such a recovery is not something unattainable and perfectly feasible, if you act consistently.

Today some popularity in Russia has acquired a so-called "customs union", touted as the beginning of union of fraternal peoples. It is believed that this association will promote common economic space. They say, will be a common customs tariff may even - the single currency and ... More of this "and" creators "trend" does not go. Meanwhile, once the Soviet Union and the single currency, even a single space did not prevent decay.

The second direction "of the integration" - the economic expansion of the Russian elite. It also places great hopes. Russian capital, established Russian raw materials trade, seek to acquire a "fraternal" republics of production, which it managed to retain after the collapse of the Soviet Union. The practicality of these measures is questionable, since capital has no nationality. What is the difference, where I came out the Russian oligarch, if he lives in Switzerland and has a passport the UK and the U.S.? In this case, Ivan Ivanov is no different from John Johnson.

Another practical direction "integration" by the Russian authorities - the gas blackmail. Other resources, retention of industry profitability former Soviet republics, except cheap gas, no. However, the only thing you can achieve gas blackmail - forcing sister republics "surrender to the mercy" of Russia (Russian oligarchs) this industry. It is believed that as the Republic lost independence. In vain is - as soon as the so-called "Russian" oligarch gets a piece in the neighboring state gas blackmail begins to turn around to harm for so-called "Russia's interests." Ukraine or Belarus to get low gas prices, they have to pay today to Russian oligarchs own industry. Tomorrow, they will not only receive a relatively low price, but also a pool of lobbying their interests through the heart of the Russian elite. These lobbyists will perform one more function - will not give Russia much climb into national policies, thus upholding the ability to control it yourself.

Another version of integration, debated in public - to "buy" republican elite and push them through the pro-Russian laws and measures. Needless to say, the answer to this will wash out of the bursting of the legislative and executive branches of practical elements and replacing them with terry National idealists? The people will defend their right to independence!

All of the above "measures to rebuild the USSR", in practice, or go nowhere, or cause a reaction opposite to what was intended. The reason for this is that they are carried out in the space of the elite and do not affect weight. While the elites are integrated or disintegrated, the masses of the former Soviet republics, separated from each other is impossible, due to economic reasons, afford communication with former compatriots, away from each other reliably and consistently than the imaginary language barriers and borders are porous. New generations grow up and do not speak Russian at all because they know someone forbids it, but because it does not talk with anyone about anything.

It follows that the only way to achieve real integration of the former Soviet Republics into a single space - integrated not elite and the masses. But how?

"... If private property and capital inevitably divide people, foment ethnic strife and intensify national oppression, collective property and labor just as inevitably bring people together, undermine national hatred and abolish national oppression ..."

"The Immediate Tasks of the Party in the national question. Theses to the Tenth Congress of the RCP (b) approved by the Central Committee of the" truth, № 29, February 10, 1921

Joint work for the common good in a single, centrally managed economy - so once rallied the USSR, that's the only way you can play this process all over again!

Skeptics will argue that a joint work "today" (the magic word to refute any scientific work - "today" is not like "yesterday"!) Enough. That there is a strong divisive factors - religion and culture. Of course, these things affect the relations of nations, but this effect is not so much as try to present. The possibility of co-existence of people with cultural and religious differences - historically proved. Again: if you carefully consider the former ever national conflicts, then a religious household slogans always hidden economic reasons. Typically, they consist in the fact that the more developed a nation oppressed and sought to enslave the less developed.

How to restore the Soviet Union (continued)

November 27, 2012, 18:40

Consolidation of the former republics of the Soviet Union into a single state, despite the elitist fuss sever nations goes. More precisely, we can speak of conception, the embryo of cohesion. Meaning phenomenon called "gastarbayterstvo." In Russia, going to work out all of the former - from Belarus and finishing with Tajikistan. Learn to respect Russian culture and Russian forced to learn to respect their culture. But how do we put this? This is a matter we have put ugly: Migrant workers in Russia most eke out a miserable existence - regardless of whether they are janitors or building pipelines to Gazprom. Wages are lower than in Russian, they are given unfit housing, they work on the bird rights and the constant risk of "throw" their employers. They pull down the labor market in Russia, as the benefits of its slavery to the employer are obvious. All of this is the very economic causes of the conflict on ethnic grounds. And this conflict manifests itself in full growth: the question of "foreign workers" is currently one of the most painful. Interpenetration of cultures and nations on the basis of joint work does not happen, people are not welded into a single unit (as it is in the U.S. with a "white"), and - disconnected (as in the United States with blacks and Indians). As you can see, equality in economic relations, regardless of nationality or culture - not an empty word, but an urgent necessity.

Subordinate and dependent position of "guest workers" on the Russians negates the beneficial effects of a collaborative effort, but if you eliminate the process of attracting "foreign" workers this subordination and dependence, the positive results will not hesitate to show themselves. This is supported by the following. With the current economic situation in Russia, guest workers in demand, usually in hard, low-paying jobs, where they brought the watch and put in inhuman conditions. But if the "aliens" can join the labor process on an equal footing with the Russians - not only does not cause conflict, but also leads to the fact that foreigners are no longer regarded as such and fully accept their own. In this case, the alien himself, from whatever backward state he was quickly pulled to the cultural level of colleagues and matches it without much difficulty.

Certainly eliminate "gastarbayterstvo" as a phenomenon and replace it with the hiring of foreign experts to work on equal terms with the Russians in the current economic environment is impossible. As it is impossible to eliminate this phenomenon, because the economy is favorable, that the Russians were unemployed, while foreigners were working instead for a penny. Thus, persistently brewing, and not only in the context of the problem of reunification of the USSR, but also in the question of the survival of Russia itself, the need to rethink the concept of "benefit."

It should be noted that the problem of the "benefits" and "profitability" in the absence of cheap labor - a problem not only in Russia but the whole world. High-profile bankruptcies of major corporations, which lasted more than a decade, and the flight of capital into China and the so-called financial sector instability and dependence on new loans and new ("investment") remains a real production - all this cries out for the need to find other solutions in the economy: that is, production and distribution. Today the concept of "profitability" and "benefit" directly related to obtaining the owner of production profits. Capital must make capital - gold formula market. But what if the capital produces only debt?

In this case, the dominant role in the economic relationship covered by the state. It has to cover the losses of market participants, fearing social problems, problems related to potezavisimostyu from other states, and just the deficit. But because state revenues is also directly dependent on the fact that it is produced and the growth of production - a situation invariably comes to a standstill. This impasse has helped many countries in Europe, forced to bear the cost of the owners of capital by cutting Social Security and raising taxes on individuals. Once prior to each state there is an urgent need to act as regulator and producer goods distribution. And as soon as the state will implement a similar system at, they would realize that the success of this implementation - in the concentration of production and centralized management. The more concentrated the production is, the less resource-intensive enorgozatratnym and it will be. The easier it will be to develop - by mobilizing resources on the most important areas.

The task of the Workers Party of Russia - to build in our country a single, centrally managed economy among the first in the world, and thus provide for a benefit. This advantage will be all the more significant given that the current Russian economy is the remnants of the Soviet economy, in which the problem of concentration and centralized management has been resolved.

Not limited to the concept of "benefit" and "profitability" in the modern sense, self-extract from nature and create materials, energy, and all things that no economy will have one "cost" - human labor invested in production. The only limitation of growth of an economy will be the possibilities of human labor. Needless to say, these opportunities will also increase as the automation and productivity growth? And criteria of success of such an economy will be one to satisfy the needs of citizens and improving the way of satisfaction.

If Russia will establish at such an economy - need a lot of hands. At some point, unemployment will grow into shortage. And this deficit may be due to overlap of foreign experts, to engage, not as slaves, but as equal companions, colleagues, workers with us for the common good. Let these experts have already decided: whether they will move to us and settle here as citizens of Russia (which is also very good), or create at home, at last, a government that expresses the wish to integrate into a single Russian economy one of its elements .

Other possibilities not recreate the USSR today, that would not talk elitist who want cheap popularity patriots and idealists who talk about the Empire, which, thank God, since 1917 does not exist.

[American Patriot]

I never even heard of the Republic of Tatarstan, does Ron White have ANYTHING to do with this?????

[American Patriot]

At rights meeting, Clinton warns of efforts to ‘re-Sovietize’ in Russia, neighboring countries


(Julien Behal/PA/ Associated Press ) - US Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton smiles during the opening session of the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe meeting in Dublin Thursday Dec. 6, 2012.





By Associated Press, Updated: Thursday, December 6, 4:51 AM

DUBLIN — U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton warned Thursday about a new effort by oppressive governments to “re-Sovietize” much of Eastern Europe and Central Asia, taking particular aim at Russia for its crackdown on democracy and human rights groups just hours ahead of critical talks with that country’s foreign minister.

Clinton’s meeting with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov will focus on the violence in Syria. They’ll be joined in Ireland’s capital by the U.N. mediator for the Arab country, Lakhdar Brahimi, in a three-way attempt to breathe new life into diplomatic efforts to stem the violence.

However, speaking to a group of lawyers and civil society advocates on the sidelines of an international human rights conference, Clinton took aim at what she described as a new wave of repressive tactics and laws aimed at criminalizing U.S. outreach efforts. The trends are indicative of a larger reversal of freedoms for citizens of Russia, Belarus, Turkmenistan and other countries that emerged from the breakup of the Soviet Union two decades ago.

“There is a move to re-Sovietize the region,” Clinton lamented. (ReallY?!?!?!?!?!?! DUH!!!!)

“It’s not going to be called that. It’s going to be called customs union, it will be called Eurasian Union and all of that,” she said, referring to Russian-led efforts for greater regional integration. “But let’s make no mistake about it. We know what the goal is and we are trying to figure out effective ways to slow down or prevent it.”

In a windswept tent outside the Dublin conference center hosting the annual meeting of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, Clinton heard tales of struggle from 11 human rights advocates.

Andrey Aranbaev, an environmentalist from Turkmenistan, accused Western nations of forsaking his compatriots.

“My country Turkmenistan is world-famous for two things: one of the largest gas supplies and gross human rights violations,” he said through an interpreter. “Almost all international actors are talking about Turkmenistan’s gas. But almost no one is talking about the gross human rights violations.”

“Human rights and democracy in Turkmenistan was sold for gas,” Aranbaev added.

Igor Kochetkov of the Russian LGBT Network said Russian authorities were trying to prohibit even the discussion of discrimination based on sexual orientation. And Olga Zakharova, a journalist with Freedom Files in Russia, said even use of social media was becoming more restrictive.

Clinton said she understood the complaints many of them lodged.

“We agree with your assessment that the space for civil society and the protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms is shrinking, and governments are becoming much more aggressive in trying to stifle dissent, prevent the free expression and exchange of views,” she said.
“It’s distressing that 20 years into the post-Soviet era ... so many of the hoped-for indicators of progress are retreating,” Clinton said. “And the impact on individuals and organizations is becoming more oppressive.”

Clinton said there is a concerted effort to eliminate both American and international assistance for human rights advocates.

“We are trying to fight that, but it is very difficult,” she said. “We will have to come up with new ways to support you, since everything we have been doing in some places, most notably Russia, is being criminalized. And the impact is not so great on us, but it’s terrible on you.”

The problem is compounded by America’s limited influence with some governments, she added.

In Belarus, “we have struck out so far,” Clinton said.

Ukraine, she said, is “one of our biggest disappointments.”

And in Turkmenistan, the U.S. raises human rights issues all the time. “We get no response,” she said.

Speaking later to the 57-nation OSCE, Clinton offered more muted criticism of Russia.

She reiterated concerns about a new Russian law that requires organizations and journalists receiving foreign funding to register as “foreign agents,” a move the U.S. believes is designed to stifle internal criticism of President Vladimir Putin’s government. His foreign minister, Lavrov, was in attendance.

For his part, Lavrov proposed Thursday new rules for OSCE election monitoring missions to avoid what he described as double standards in a year that had votes in both Russia and the U.S.

“Hundreds of observers were sent to some places, while only several were sent to others,” he said. “The same facts in various countries, for example early voting, were assessed differently.”
___
Associated Press writer Shawn Pogatchnik contributed to this report.

[American Patriot]

Methinks Kasparpov is pressin' his luck a bit. lol

Kasparov: Russian President Putin Will Not Stay in Power Long

VOA News
December 05, 2012



Russian opposition leader Garry Kasparov says President Vladimir Putin will have more difficulty holding onto power today than he did during his first two terms.

"Under the new Constitution, the term is six years. I think that, taking into account rapid change and the dynamic forces of the situation both internally and abroad, realistically, he has two or three years left. The situation is changing," he said.

Talking to VOA during a visit to Washington this week, the outspoken political activist and former world chess champion said modern technology has increased people's involvement in decision-making, and made it impossible for unwanted government institutions to remain entrenched in power.

Kasparov, the leader of Russia's United Civil Front, was one of the key speakers at a human rights summit in the U.S. capital. He said the United States is often guided by strategic national interests and criticizes regimes for human rights violations selectively.

"After all, this is a result of the fact that for many years, the U.S., motivated by its own interests, supported dictators, like in Pakistan, in Egypt. Or in the case of Gadhafi, where the U.S. didn't quite support him, but they considered Libya important geopolitically and tried not to irritate Gadhafi," he said.

Kasparov said the U.S. government should abandon double standards and restore its moral authority to lead the world in the fight for human rights.

[MinutemanCO]

Say goodbye to Kasparov.

[American Patriot]

I was thinking he was getting a little... ummm, well arrogant with a Commie like Putin. haha

He might make it.

He might not, but know if he doesn't, that Putin had a hand in it.

[American Patriot]

US 'trying to start new Cold War', says Russia

Russia has accused the US of trying to start a new Cold War after Congress passed a law banning Russians linked to serious human rights abuses from entering America.

A tombstone on the grave of lawyer Sergei Magnitsky who died in jail, at a cemetery in Moscow Photo: AP








By Jon Swaine, Washington

9:09AM GMT 07 Dec 2012
Comments


Moscow furiously claimed that the new law, which also bars blacklisted Russians from owning US land and using the banking system, was evidence of a "vindictive desire" to damage Russia's world standing.

"Apparently, Washington has forgotten what year this is and still thinks the Cold War is going on," the Russian foreign ministry said on its official Twitter account. It added that the move would "adversely affect the prospects of bilateral cooperation" between the two powers.

Sergei Lavrov, the foreign minister, later said Russia would respond by introducing its own visa ban for US human rights abuses.

“At my meeting with Hillary Clinton in Dublin I confirmed that we will deny entry [to Russia] to Americans who are certainly involved in human rights violations,” he said after meeting the US Secretary of State and Lakhdar Brahimi, the UN and Arab League envoy to Syria, in Ireland on Thursday.

The so-called Magnitsky Law prompted calls from British critics of Russia for similar action from the Government, amid concerns about the death of an exiled Russian in Surrey. Alexander Perepilichnyy had been assisting a criminal inquiry prompted by the whistleblowing lawyer whom the new US law is named after.

Related Articles

• Russian 'supergrass' linked to suspect in Litvinenko poisoning
  05 Dec 2012
• Two Russian fisherman wanted for suspected cannibalism
  05 Dec 2012

The American law was approved overwhelmingly by the US Senate last night as part of a raft of measures primarily aimed at restoring normal trade relations between Russia and America.
The package replaced a 38-year-old Act that imposed trade sanctions on the Soviet Union for not allowing Jewish Russians and other persecuted minorities to emigrate from the Communist bloc.
The human rights law was named after Sergei Magnitsky, a Russian lawyer who died in a Moscow prison in 2009 after exposing an alleged $230 million (£143 million) tax fraud by Russian police and officials.
Mr Magnitsky, who was working for an American-Russian law firm, claimed to have been tortured. He died after almost a year in custody, a week before he would have had to be released or face trial.
The measure was proposed by John McCain, the veteran Republican senator for Arizona and former presidential candidate. Mr McCain said last night that he was "sending a signal to Vladimir Putin and the Russian plutocracy that these kinds of abuses of human rights will not be tolerated".
Orrin Hatch, a Republican senator for Utah, added after the 92-4 vote: "We should respond to Russia's continued corruption and human rights violations".
Russia was last night mulling retaliation. Alexei Pushkov, the head of the foreign affairs committee in the Duma, the lower chamber of parliament, said similar sanctions could be imposed on US officials linked to human rights abuses.
"It is perplexing and preposterous to hear human rights complaints from the US, where torture and kidnapping are legal in the 21st century," the Russian foreign ministry added in its Twitter onslaught.
Mr Perepilichny, 44, collapsed and died suddenly near his home on an upmarket, heavily protected estate in Surrey on November 10. Police have been struggling to establish the cause of his death.
He had moved to Britain three years ago and had been helping Swiss prosecutors investigate a Russian criminal group suspected of being involved in the widespread fraud exposed by Mr Magnitsky.
A group of senior MPs, including former foreign secretaries David Miliband and Sir Malcolm Rifkind, have been pushing the Government to make official a similar "Magnitsky blacklist" in Britain.
Dominic Raab, a Conservative member of the group, has said Mr Magnitsky was part of a "noble Russian tradition of dissidents who stood up for the rule of law, democratic reform and free speech."
President Barack Obama had hoped to prevent yesterday's passage of the new human rights law, in an effort to avoid enraging Moscow. He insisted that he was already empowered to blacklist Russian human rights abusers by executive order.
Ignoring the Magnitsky measure, Mr Obama last night welcomed the new trade agreement. He said in a statement that he hoped to "ensure that American businesses and workers are able to take full advantage".
It was reported in September that Theresa May, the Home Secretary, had quietly sent a list of 60 Russian officials implicated in the corruption case uncovered by Mr Magnitsky, and to his death in custody, to the Russian embassy in London, banning them from entering Britain.
Government spokesmen declined to confirm the report but said that ministers would not allow foreigners against whom there was evidence of human rights abuses of entering the country.
MPs passed a motion earlier this year calling on ministers to implement a British equivalent of the new US law. However it is believed that Foreign Office officials, also fearing provocation of Mr Putin and the Russian government, are stubbornly blocking any measure that would require the public release of a "blacklist" of banned Russians.

[American Patriot]

Vladimir Putin warns foreigners not to intervene in Russian politics Russian president uses speech to attack 'meddling' in domestic affairs

• Miriam Elder in Moscow
  
• guardian.co.uk, Wednesday 12 December 2012 08.36 EST

Vladimir Putin addresses politicians in the Kremlin's St George Hall. Photograph: Alexander Zemlianichenko/AP



Vladimir Putin haswarned against foreign meddling in Russia's politics in a speech designed to spell out his priorities for the year ahead.


"Direct or indirect meddling in our domestic politics is unacceptable," Putin told a gathering of about 1,000 politicians in the Kremlin's grand St George Hall on Wednesday. "A figure who receives money from abroad for his political work, and thus serves some foreign interest, cannot be a politician in Russia."


The Russian president's comments build on a year-long campaign designed to paint members of the growing opposition to him as agents of the west.
It was a rare moment of attack in a 90-minute speech in which Putin was more calm and subdued than usual. Amid rumours of back trouble, the 60-year-old leader often leaned on the podium as he addressed the crowd.


In the first major gathering in months, the opposition is planning to march on Saturday to Moscow's Lubyanka, the building that was the base of the Soviet-era KGB and now houses its successor, the FSB. Dozens of activists have been arrested and dozens more questioned in a far-reaching campaign designed to strike fear into those who dare protest against Putin.


He used his speech to pay lip service to liberal ideals. "Russia does not and cannot have any political choice but democracy," he said. "I want to say, and even stress, that we share those universal democratic principles taken around the whole world."


The opposition to Putin arose after he announced his intention to return to the presidency after four years as prime minister. Activists complained of widespread fraud in the elections.


Putin acknowledged that something was missing in Russian society, and lay the blame at an absence of moral values: "It's painful for me to talk about this today, but I am required to say this. Today, Russian society has a clear deficit of spiritual principles – mercy, compassion, mutual suffering and support – a deficit of that which through all of history made us stronger, which made us proud."


He called on officials to "strengthen the strong spiritual and moral fabric of society" and to reinstate patriotism in Russian schools.


He urged Russian businesses to be patriotic and called for the "de-offshore-isation" of the Russian economy, referring to the fact that many Russian businesses are owned via shell companies in order to avoid taxes.


Putin attempted to convey that his recently launched anti-corruption campaign was a serious move to clean up the country's notoriously corrupt government. He said politicians and their close relatives should be banned from keeping money in foreign banks or owning shares in foreign companies. As the crowd began to clap, he stepped in to say: "Wait to applaud, you might not like what comes next."

[American Patriot]

well, I can not find the original thread on this guy....

Alexander Litvinenko murder: British evidence 'shows Russia involved'

Hearing ahead of full inquest also hears that Litvinenko was working for MI6 when he was poisoned with polonium-210

• Esther Addley
  
• guardian.co.uk, Thursday 13 December 2012 09.48 EST

Alexander Litvinenki died in a London hospital in November 2006, three weeks after drinking poisoned tea. Photograph: Natasja Weitsz/Getty Images

British government evidence relating to the death of the former KGB officer Alexander Litvinenko amounts to a "prima facie case" that he was murdered by the Russian government, the coroner investigating his death has been told.
Hugh Davies QC, counsel to the inquest, told a preliminary hearing ahead of the full inquiry into his death that an assessment of government documents "does establish a prima facie case as to the culpability of the Russian state in the death of Alexander Litvinenko".
Litvinenko died in a London hospital in November 2006, three weeks after drinking tea which had been poisoned with the radioactive isotope polonium-210.
The director of public prosecutions announced in May 2007 that it would seek to charge Andrei Lugovoi, a former KGB officer, with the murder, prompting a diplomatic crisis between the UK and Russia, which refused a request for the suspect be extradited to Britain to face trial. Lugovoi denies the charge.
Lawyers for the dead man's widow Marina told the hearing that Litvinenko had been "a paid agent and employee of MI6" at the time of his death, who was also, at the British secret service's instigation, working for Spanish intelligence providing information on Russian state involvement in organised crime.
In a dramatic submission, Ben Emmerson QC told the coroner, Sir Robert Owen, that the inquest would hear evidence that the murdered man had been working for the British secret services under the direction of a dedicated handler who used the pseudonym of Martin.
While he was dying in hospital, Emmerson said, Litvinenko had given Martin's number to a Metropolitan police officer and, without disclosing his MI6 connection, suggested the police follow up. He said Litvinenko had also had a dedicated phone that he used only for phoning Martin.
"Martin will no doubt be a witness in this inquiry," Emmerson said.
The inquest would also hear evidence that Lugovoi had been working with Litvinenko in supplying intelligence to Spain, he told the hearing. He said that Litvinenko had phoned Lugovoi from hospital, using a dedicated phone he used only for his contacts with the other Russian, to tell him that he was unwell and would be unable to join him on a planned trip to Spain to deliver intelligence.
The case against Lugovoi centres on a meeting he and another Russian, Dmitry Kovtun, had with Litvinenko at the Palm bar at the Millennium hotel in Mayfair on 1 November 2006. It is alleged that Litvinenko's tea was poisoned with the polonium-210 at that meeting. Kovtun also denies involvement.
At the instigation of MI6, Emmerson said, Litvinenko had been supplying information to a Spanish prosecutor, José Grinda González, regarding "organised crime, that's Russian mafia activities in Spain and more widely".
"The critical point was that it was MI6 who asked Mr Litvinenko to work for the Spanish security service," the lawyer said, adding that Litvinenko had also had a Spanish handler who used the pseudonym Uri.
Litvinenko's planned trip to Spain with Lugovoi had been with the intent of delivering intelligence to Spanish prosecutors of Russian mafia links with the Kremlin and Vladimir Putin, Emmerson said.
The lawyer said the inquest should also consider whether the British government had been culpable in failing to protect Litvinenko, arguing that "the very fact of a relationship between Mr Litvinenko and his employers MI6" placed a duty on the government to ensure his safety when asking him to undertake "dangerous operations".
"It's an inevitable inference from all of the evidence that prior to his death MI6 had carried out a detailed risk assssment and that risk assessment must in due course be disclosed."
Counsel for the Home Office, representing MI6, said the government could neither confirm nor deny that Litvinenko had been a British agent.
Russia has not formally been designated an interested party in the inquest, although the coroner will now rule on whether he intends to make it one. Luguvoi, however, is represented at the inquiry, as are the Home Office, the Metropolitan police and the Russian oligarch Boris Berezhovsky, a friend of Litvinenko who has successfully fought a libel action over allegations that he was involved in the murder.
The coroner will also rule on the scope of the inquest, including whether he will examine Russian or British state culpability, and whether he intends to sit with a jury.
Speaking outside Camden town hall after the hearing adjourned, Marina Litvinenko declined to comment on specific evidence raised in the hearing. She said: "I would like to say I appreciate already what was done today and I am looking forward to any decision that will be taken by the coroner."
The full inquest will open on 1 May 2013, the coroner said.

[American Patriot]

Alexander Litvinenko was 'paid MI6 agent' as files say Russia 'has case to answer on poisoning'






Murder: ex-Russian spy Alexander Litvinenko (Picture: PA)

Justin Davenport, Crime Editor




13 December 2012


Murdered ex-Russian spy Alexander Litvinenko worked as a paid agent for the British security service MI6, it was sensationally claimed today.

He was also employed by Spanish intelligence investigating links between the Kremlin and Russian organised crime, a pre-inquest hearing was told.
The claims were made as a lawyer for the inquest declared that the Russian state had a case to answer over the dissident’s death at a London hospital in 2006.
The former KGB agent, 43, was poisoned by radioactive polonium–210 while drinking tea during a meeting in a Mayfair hotel with former security colleagues.
The inquiry team said secret Government documents, which included material submitted by Scotland Yard and intelligence agencies, showed that the Russian state had a prima facie case to answer over its culpability for Mr Litvinenko’s death.


Hugh Davies, the counsel to the inquest, said the evidence ruled out the involvement of the Chechens, the Spanish mafia and the British government in his death.
The extraordinary claims are expected to plunge relations between Britain and Russia to a new low.


Lawyers acting for Mr Litvinenko’s widow Marina said her husband held meetings with his MI6 handler, a man called Martin, in central London.


Ben Emmerson, QC, representing Mrs Litvinenko, said her husband was employed by the Spanish security services at the behest of MI6. The former Russian spy received payments from both MI6 and the Spanish intelligence service into a joint bank account he held with his wife.


Two Russians — Andrei Lugovoi, a former KGB bodyguard, and Dmitri Kovtun, a former military intelligence officer — have both been identified by Scotland Yard as prime suspects in the murder.


Russia has refused to extradite the men, each of whom denies involvement in the killing.


Today Mr Emmerson claimed that Mr Litvinenko and Mr Lugovoi were working together and had planned to travel to Spain to give evidence about links between the Russian mafia, the Kremlin and the country’s President Vladimir Putin.


When Mr Litvinenko fell ill he phoned Mr Lugovoi from his bed in University College Hospital to say that he could not make the trip.


The pre-inquest hearing was told that the former spy had a mobile phone to contact MI6 and a separate one to get in touch with Mr Lugovoi.


Mr Emmerson also cited evidence from a Wikileaks cable, which quoted evidence from Mr Litvinenko that the Russian intelligence and security services effectively controlled the nation’s mafia. The cable from the United States embassy also talked about evidence that Russia was a mafia state.


Mr Emmerson called for the Russian state to be made an interested party at the inquest.


He told the coroner, Sir Robert Owen, the evidence showed that the inquest should examine “the possible culpability of the British state” in failing to protect Mr Litvinenko.
The findings were revealed at the pre-inquest hearing in Camden Town Hall. Sir Robert announced that the full inquest will take place on May 1 next year.

[American Patriot]

Russian opposition refused permission to protest in Moscow




MOSCOW | Thu Dec 13, 2012 12:56pm EST




(Reuters) - Russia refused on Thursday to register a demonstration against President Vladimir Putin planned for Saturday and said some earlier protests were orchestrated by Georgia.


State TV channel Rossiya 24 aired what it said were recordings of talks between Georgian politician Givi Targamadze and Russian opposition activists that the federal Investigative Committee said proved Targamadze was involved in past protests.


"This material contains evidence confirming not only the financing of the Russian opposition by Givi Targamadze but also his clear role in the organization of mass riots," said Vladimir Markin, spokesman for the committee that answers only to Putin.


Russia often accuses the opposition of taking help from abroad and activists say the latest allegations are part of a crackdown against criticism of Putin, who started his third presidential term in May.


Prominent leftist leader Sergei Udaltsov said Moscow city authorities had refused to register Saturday's planned protest in the capital, increasing the risk of arrests and confrontation with police if opposition activists show up in large numbers.


He said he would still come to a square in Moscow "as a free Russian citizen" on Saturday, a day after he was summoned to the Investigative Committee to testify further over allegations of plotting riots.


Udaltsov and two others have been charge in the case.


Udaltsov was ordered to remain in Moscow pending further investigation, but two lesser-known activists are under arrest with one of them, Leonid Razvozzhayev, saying he was abducted and tortured to confess.


Razvozzhayev has subsequently retracted his confession.


Putin faced the largest wave of protests against his 13-year rule before his return to the Kremlin, but the opposition has lost momentum since then and so far failed to pose a more systematic threat to the authorities.


Putin has insisted in the past that protesters must obey the law and said that any foreign meddling in Russia's politics is unacceptable.


Russia and Georgia severed diplomatic relations over a brief war in August 2008 that left Moscow recognizing two breakaway regions, South Ossetia and Abkhazia, as independent from Georgia.


Georgia's new Prime Minister Bidzina Ivanishvili has said, however, that he wants to improve relations with Moscow and the first bilateral talks since the war are expected soon.

[American Patriot]

Putin: Re-Educating Youth Is Answer to Russia’s Moral Crisis

Topic: Putin’s Address to Parliament (2012)

Putin: Re-Educating Youth Is Answer to Russia’s Moral Crisis
© RIA Novosti. Alexei Kudenko


15:08 12/12/2012


MOSCOW, December 12 (RIA Novosti) – Russian society lacks “spiritual braces” to hold it together, and should look to education and “traditional values” to change that, President Vladimir Putin said Wednesday.


“It pains me to speak of this … but Russian society today lacks spiritual braces – kindness, sympathy, compassion toward one another, support and mutual assistance, a deficit of that which has always, throughout history, made us stronger,” Putin said in his state-of-the-nation address in Moscow.


While government interference in people’s convictions and views smacks of “totalitarianism” and is “absolutely unacceptable,” the state should focus on strengthening society’s “spiritual-moral foundation” through education and youth policy, Putin said.


He instructed the government to prepare a supplementary educational program focusing on “vospitanie” – a Russian cultural concept that refers to preparing young people for adulthood, usually through moral upbringing and conferring rules of etiquette, values and traditions.


In terms of impact on young people, schools are losing to the Internet and electronic media, Putin said, and should restore their “unconditional value” by updating curricula and offering a wide range of electives, accessible to all children regardless of family income.


He also stressed the importance of teaching history and Russian language and emphasized the need to strengthen national identity, in part through connecting “historical epochs into a single whole.” In that vein, Putin proposed creating a memorial to the heroes of World War I and restoring famous tsarist-era military units, including the Preobrazhensky and Semyonovsky regiments, founded by Peter the Great.


While Putin did not explicitly refer to religion during the live broadcast on state television, the camera panned to a group of clerics as he spoke of support for “traditional values.”


“We must wholly support institutions that are the bearers of traditional values and have historically proven their ability to transmit them from generation to generation,” Putin said, without elaborating.


The president also praised grassroots charity activism, which is on the rise in the country, and promised a separate meeting with their volunteers in the unspecified near future.

[American Patriot]

Jan 31, 6:54 AM EST

City renames itself Stalingrad to mark battle


MOSCOW (AP) -- The southern Russian city where the Red Army decisively turned back Nazi forces in a key World War II battle will once again be known as Stalingrad, at least on the days commemorating the victory.

The city was renamed Volgograd in 1961 as part of the Soviet Union's rejection of dictator Joseph Stalin's personality cult. But the name Stalingrad is inseparable with the battle, in which at least 1.25 million people died.

Russia on Saturday plans extensive ceremonies to mark the 70th anniversary of the battle's end.

The Volgograd city council passed a measure Thursday to use the name Stalingrad in city statements on the commemoration day, on Russia's May 9 Victory Day and on four other days connected with the battle, the ITAR-Tass news agency reported.

[American Patriot]

Russia says US signals desire to ease tensions
April 15, 2013 13:00 GMT
MOSCOW (AP) -- Russia's foreign minister says that President Barack Obama's administration has signaled its desire to overcome the current strain in ties and focus on cooperation.
Russia-US relations took a nosedive recently with Washington announcing sanctions against Russian officials accused of rights violations and Russia retaliating by banning U.S. adoption of Russian children. On Friday, the U.S. released a list of 18 Russians targeted for sanctions and Moscow responded over the weekend with a list of 18 Americans.
Sergey Lavrov said after his meeting with Tom Donilon, Obama's national security adviser, that the U.S. administration had promised to work on solving these issues.
Donilon also met Monday in Moscow with Russia's President Vladimir Putin and handed him a letter from Obama. Putin's aide, Yuri Ushakov, said the letter was "quite constructive."

[vector7]

Russian economy becomes biggest in Europe

August 16, 2013 Posted In: RUSSIA



As Russia Bans gay propaganda- stands up for Christians in Africa and the middle east promotes Christianity in its own country-One wonders who’s side is god on as the Russian economy becomes biggest in Europe. Europe which is doing the exact opposite is seeing the implosion of its economies in fact all western nations are in decline.

According to data from the World Bank, Russia’s economy has jumped ahead of all the European nations, becoming the fifth largest worldwide in terms of GDP. Experts are confident that, in the future, the gap between the Russian Federation and the Old World will widen further.

Central Bank of Russia Chairman Sergei Ignatiev and Russia’s Finance Minister Anton Siluanov at the G20 finance ministers meeting during the Spring Meeting of the International Monetary Fund and World Bank in Washington, on April 19. Source: Reuters

According to data published by the World Bank in July, Russia is fighting the global economic crisis much more successfully than most developed countries. Based on GDP adjusted for purchasing power parity (PPP), Russia jumped ahead of all the EU nations in 2012, including Germany, which is number six in the world.

Ahead of Russia in the top five were the United States, China, India and Japan. The World Bank data substantiated the IMF rankings published in late 2012, even though the IMF rankings put Russia in sixth place, slightly behind Germany.

July’s World Bank rankings of GDP adjusted for PPP further confirm the noteworthy level of the Russian economy, experts say. According to IMF data on nominal GDP, Russia rose from ninth to eighth place.

In addition, in early July, the World Bank shifted Russia to the group of countries with high national income per capita; for the last decade, Russia was in the category of upper middle income.

The ascent in the rankings will become a significant advantage for Russia’s accession to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), which is planned for 2015. To raise per capita GDP, OECD experts recommend increasing labor productivity, stimulating innovation, and implementing financial and tax regulation.

The success of Russia’s economy does not surprise experts. According to Yaroslav Lissovolik, chief economist at Deutsche Bank, the ranking by GDP adjusted for PPP fully reflects the consumption of goods and services in the economy.

“The Russian economy is generating growth due to favorable oil prices, at a time when Europe is in a recession and its prospects for exiting this recession are not clear. The situation in southern Europe, which affects Germany and other countries, is particularly complicated.

Consequently, Russia is losing less from the current crisis than Europe is. Moreover, over the last year and a half, the ruble has shown decent results against a backdrop of decline on other developing markets,” Lissovolik said.

Dmitry Orlov, CEO of the Agency for Political and Economic Communications, also believes that Russia’s place in the GDP rankings is completely justified. “Due to our problems, in terms of gross product and purchasing power, we are far from China but much higher than Europe,” he said.

[vector7]

Vladimir Putin, the new leader of the free world

By Justin King
Sep 9, 2013



During recent negotiations, Vladimir Putin demonstrated his skill at using peace as a weapon, and placed Russia in a position to take the title of the guardian of democracy and western values.

It is hard to imagine the “leader of the free world” administering a nation where journalists are imprisoned, militarized police kick in doors without warrants, where any citizen can be arrested and shipped to a remote prison without charge or trial, where police can kill unarmed citizens with impunity, where the government orders military attacks in defiance of international law, where dissidents flee in fear for their freedom or lives, where constant identification checkpoints stop citizens on the road, and where security services spy on every citizen in the country. However, that is the country that President Obama currently reigns over, leaving the title of “leader of the free world” up for grabs.

While Russia’s human and civil rights policies are only slightly better than those of the United States, the unapologetic nature of President Putin places him on a higher moral ground. Some of his actions may be unfavorable to certain parts of his country, but they are done in the open with a "love it or leave it" attitude. The United States, however, has developed a reputation for hypocrisy.

In 2007, we held congressional hearings into Yahoo’s involvement with getting a journalist, Shi Tao, arrested in China. The United States condemned his 10-year sentence for sharing state secrets on a website. Chelsea Manning was just sentence to 35 years for the same activities.

The systematic nature of those abuses is also very different. For example, when the Russian army kills civilians in a counter-insurgency operation, they do it with artillery that is notoriously inaccurate, and it is not a calculated decision. When the United States kills civilians, it is with a drone strike approved after a commander sees a live feed of the target, and the missile is accurate to within one meter. Even with the lesser technology, Russia has killed half as many civilians in a counter insurgency operation lasting the same amount of time.

With the notable exception of gay rights, Russia beats the United States in almost every metric of individual liberty. With many expecting a reboot of the Cold War, it will be interesting to see who plays the villain this time.

Update 1-hour after print: The United States Senate delays vote on a Syrian strike, partially because of President Putin's efforts.

http://www.digitaljournal.com/articl...#ixzz2eVfCPuEP