Those of you who are interested in political History will surely find this article useful and worth reading. Being a historian myself I learnt a lot from it.
Unluckily there are no links to the following parts so you'll have to change the numbers in the link.
http://eastwest-review.com/article/pawns-somebody-elsersquos-game-little-known-facts-galician-history-part-i
Friday, June 18, 2010
Thursday, June 17, 2010
Iranophobia in Israel. Interview with proofessor Haggai Ram
"Iranophobia in Israel started immediately hand-in-hand with the 1979 Islamic Revolution. Then, with time, it took different shapes. It was not a static phenomenon, but a historical phenomenon that reacted both to prophecies and events that took place outside the boundaries of the Jewish state. And at times it was a reaction to phenomena and circumstances that took place within the boundaries of the Jewish state<...>.
The tragic thing is that both Israel and the United States see eye to eye with respect to the threat that a nuclear Iran might pose to them. Just a few days ago we had the head if the Joint Chiefs of Staff visiting Israel, announcing unequivocally the United States would not permit Iran to obtain nuclear weapons and if that should happen the US will help Israel in its attempt to eliminate that eventuality. So the fact that both Israel and the United States see eye to eye on that is not a very welcoming idea."
See the whole interview on http://www.eastwest-review.com/article/iranophobia-interview-proofessor-haggai-ram
The tragic thing is that both Israel and the United States see eye to eye with respect to the threat that a nuclear Iran might pose to them. Just a few days ago we had the head if the Joint Chiefs of Staff visiting Israel, announcing unequivocally the United States would not permit Iran to obtain nuclear weapons and if that should happen the US will help Israel in its attempt to eliminate that eventuality. So the fact that both Israel and the United States see eye to eye on that is not a very welcoming idea."
See the whole interview on http://www.eastwest-review.com/article/iranophobia-interview-proofessor-haggai-ram
Lobby which plays with America
If you look through everyday titles of White House press-releases, it may seem that great reforming is on in the USA: initiatives follow one another, and acute problems are being attacked from unexpected directions. America’s advantage is that everything is spoken openly there. One can hardly notice in such a fuss that there are not so many positive changes in reality, and acute problems remain unsolved for decades. One of the most serious of then is unregulated and disorganized financial and banking sphere which has led world economy to crisis and doesn’t want to be changed.
You'll find the whole text here: http://www.eastwest-review.com/article/lobby-which-plays-america-part-1
You'll find the whole text here: http://www.eastwest-review.com/article/lobby-which-plays-america-part-1
Future of Karabakh conflict as viewed by Russian experts
Activization of negotiation process, regarding Karabakh settlement, contributed to the extension of Russian expert community attention both to problems of relations between Armenia and Azerbaijan and to peculiarities of international relations in South Caucasus.
Here is the article written by Dr. Niyazi Niyazov, an associate Professor of he School of International Relations, St. Petersburg State University. Majoring in Caucasian studies, Dr. Niyazov provides a thorough analysis of the situation in Karabakh from different angles.
http://www.eastwest-review.com/article/future-karabakh-conflict-viewed-russian-experts-part-1
Here is the article written by Dr. Niyazi Niyazov, an associate Professor of he School of International Relations, St. Petersburg State University. Majoring in Caucasian studies, Dr. Niyazov provides a thorough analysis of the situation in Karabakh from different angles.
http://www.eastwest-review.com/article/future-karabakh-conflict-viewed-russian-experts-part-1
Wednesday, June 16, 2010
EU: between Russia and the USA
Today Europe is facing a hard time trying to find a balance between Russia and the USA. It is clear that Europe has lost its top priority place on American foreign policy agenda and Russia can not replace the USA's image of a big reliable boss.
Russia, in its turn, has lost its illusions about the possibility of full integration in to the European structures and reoriented its interests eastward.
Besides, both actors are divided by energy issue which prevents Europe from seeing Russia as totally friendly and positive neighbor with no hidden jokers in his pockets.
The article I link here is a bit old but it didn't lose its relevance and importance.
http://www.eastwest-review.com/article/european-union-deciding-between-russia-and-usa-part-i?page=1
Russia, in its turn, has lost its illusions about the possibility of full integration in to the European structures and reoriented its interests eastward.
Besides, both actors are divided by energy issue which prevents Europe from seeing Russia as totally friendly and positive neighbor with no hidden jokers in his pockets.
The article I link here is a bit old but it didn't lose its relevance and importance.
http://www.eastwest-review.com/article/european-union-deciding-between-russia-and-usa-part-i?page=1
Taliban in Afghanistan: returning to power or path to nowhere?
Here is a rather good article on the history of Afghanistan war in 1978-2010. Helps to see how it all happened.
http://www.eastwest-review.com/article/taliban-afghanistan-returning-power-or-path-nowhere-part-1 and http://www.eastwest-review.com/article/taliban-afghanistan-returning-power-or-path-nowhere-part-2
http://www.eastwest-review.com/article/taliban-afghanistan-returning-power-or-path-nowhere-part-1 and http://www.eastwest-review.com/article/taliban-afghanistan-returning-power-or-path-nowhere-part-2
Israeli blockade of Gaza Strip
Resolutions of UN Security Council, e.g. Resolution 1860, point directly that “Gaza Strip constitutes an integral part of the territory occupied in 1967 and will be a part of the Palestinian state”.
Read the whole article on http://www.eastwest-review.com/article/israeli-blockade-gaza-strip-and-seizure-humanitarian-flotilla-israeli-military-forces
Thus, as one can see, Gaza Strip is not a subject of international law, so in this case Israel can’t apply the rules of naval blockade in a time of armed conflict between states. But Gaza Strip is not also a part of Israel. And even if it were, in case of a civil war naval blockade can’t go further than territorial waters. Thus, though Israel declared Gaza Strip some obscure enemy territory, many international and humanitarian organizations keep on regarding it as an occupied territory.
All these facts make the blockade of Gaza Strip and impediment for supplies of humanitarian cargo violating the international law, moreover concerning that the mentioned above Resolution 1860 of UN Security Council “calls for the unimpeded provision and distribution throughout Gaza of humanitarian assistance”. Israeli attack on Freedom Flotilla may be regarded thereby as an act of hostility towards the countries, which owned the vessels with humanitarian aid and passengers of which became victims of the conflict. In turn, the actions of crew members and passengers of Mavi Marmara can be regarded as a rightful attempt to resist the attackers of the ship on the high sea.
Particularly this, or similar position was supported by many famous diplomats and specialists in international and sea law in many countries of the world.Read the whole article on http://www.eastwest-review.com/article/israeli-blockade-gaza-strip-and-seizure-humanitarian-flotilla-israeli-military-forces
About the relations between the initiators of humanitarian convoy to Gaza and Chechen fighters
Immediately after the events in the Mediterranean Sea Israeli mass media published the information that Turkish fund İnsanın Yardım Vakfı (IHH, The Foundation for Human Rights and Freedoms and Humanitarian Relief), the main initiator of the convoy to Gaza, had also been supporting Chechen terrorists.
Salih Bilici, a fund representative, has told us that the organization has always taken part only in peaceful humanitarian actions and is to do so in the future. He confirmed the fact that the fund worked in Chechnya and delivered medication, food (mostly halal products for Muslim holidays), and clothes; however, he resolutely contested the possibility of financing or providing with supplies of any military operations in North Caucasus, as well as relations with such organizations as Ichkeria, the Caucasus Emirate, and others; he also denied the fact of sending of volunteers to any illegal armed forces. As for information which appeared in Israeli press, Salih Bilici has pointed out that Israel has been carrying out informational war, using any possible measures to soften consequences of its barbaric operation and to put Russia at odds with the Islamic world, Arab countries, and Turkey.
See the whole text which touches also the problem of Muslim's attitude to Chechnya problem, on http://www.eastwest-review.com/article/about-relations-between-initiators-humanitarian-convoy-gaza-and-chechen-fighters
Salih Bilici, a fund representative, has told us that the organization has always taken part only in peaceful humanitarian actions and is to do so in the future. He confirmed the fact that the fund worked in Chechnya and delivered medication, food (mostly halal products for Muslim holidays), and clothes; however, he resolutely contested the possibility of financing or providing with supplies of any military operations in North Caucasus, as well as relations with such organizations as Ichkeria, the Caucasus Emirate, and others; he also denied the fact of sending of volunteers to any illegal armed forces. As for information which appeared in Israeli press, Salih Bilici has pointed out that Israel has been carrying out informational war, using any possible measures to soften consequences of its barbaric operation and to put Russia at odds with the Islamic world, Arab countries, and Turkey.
See the whole text which touches also the problem of Muslim's attitude to Chechnya problem, on http://www.eastwest-review.com/article/about-relations-between-initiators-humanitarian-convoy-gaza-and-chechen-fighters
Thursday, June 10, 2010
Africa: clash of the American and Chinese geopolitical interests
Yemen is considered to be the cradle of the Arab world. In the north Yemen borders Saudi Arabia, narrow part of the western border falls on the Red Sea area, the southern border faces the Gulf of Aden while the Oman is in the east. Political system of Yemen allows the country to maneuver among the endless mosaic of tribes that are characterized by the different degree of the territorial independence. Tribal differences are also connected to the division of the country population onto Sunni — who make up the majority with the insignificant superiority in numbers — and the Shia who make up about 45% of population.In the recent year Shiaz have undergone numerous attacks from the governmental troops.
In November 2009 the conflict was first internationalized. Air Forces of Saudi Arabia bombed the Shiites’ positions at Jebel Duchan. Saudis were afraid of the Shiites’ strengthening — in Saudi Arabia itself they make up the oppressed minority.
The USA are playing their own political game in the region. They are interested mostly in one question: who will control Bab-el-Mandeb strait?
Bab-el-Mandeb strait between Yemen, Djibouti and Eritrea is a key to the “oil path” between Africa and the Middle East — it connects the Mediterranean Sea with the Indian Ocean. Every day 3.5 million barrels of oil “float” through it to the USA, Europe and Asia. Besides that, oil fields in the Masila and Shabwa basins are also located in Yemen, which neighbors the Saudi Arabia. Geopolitical significance of Yemen and Somali turn these countries into the sphere of the U.S. strategic interests.
Americans have outstripped China that has also stated the need to create a military base in the western part of the Indian Ocean. For now, only Iran is open for China in that region as long as the rest of the countries have already been pulled inside of the NATO orbit. Control over the Aden port in Yemen brings huge benefits to the Americans and opens the infinite possibilities for maneuver in front of them.
China, on its part, is trying to improve its influence in Sri Lanka and Burma in order to form the new transport paths in the Persian Gulf, Africa and Middle East area. Recently, British press media reported that the USA promised to delete Burma out of the “axis of evil”-countries list if it stops “playing on the Chinese side”.
Thus, it is unlikely that the political games in the regions will cease in the nearest future. On the contrary, American desire to control everything possible might lead to another outbreak of instability in this already instable part of the world.
http://www.eastwest-review.com/article/africa-clash-american-and-chinese-geopolitical-interests
In November 2009 the conflict was first internationalized. Air Forces of Saudi Arabia bombed the Shiites’ positions at Jebel Duchan. Saudis were afraid of the Shiites’ strengthening — in Saudi Arabia itself they make up the oppressed minority.
The USA are playing their own political game in the region. They are interested mostly in one question: who will control Bab-el-Mandeb strait?
Bab-el-Mandeb strait between Yemen, Djibouti and Eritrea is a key to the “oil path” between Africa and the Middle East — it connects the Mediterranean Sea with the Indian Ocean. Every day 3.5 million barrels of oil “float” through it to the USA, Europe and Asia. Besides that, oil fields in the Masila and Shabwa basins are also located in Yemen, which neighbors the Saudi Arabia. Geopolitical significance of Yemen and Somali turn these countries into the sphere of the U.S. strategic interests.
Americans have outstripped China that has also stated the need to create a military base in the western part of the Indian Ocean. For now, only Iran is open for China in that region as long as the rest of the countries have already been pulled inside of the NATO orbit. Control over the Aden port in Yemen brings huge benefits to the Americans and opens the infinite possibilities for maneuver in front of them.
China, on its part, is trying to improve its influence in Sri Lanka and Burma in order to form the new transport paths in the Persian Gulf, Africa and Middle East area. Recently, British press media reported that the USA promised to delete Burma out of the “axis of evil”-countries list if it stops “playing on the Chinese side”.
Thus, it is unlikely that the political games in the regions will cease in the nearest future. On the contrary, American desire to control everything possible might lead to another outbreak of instability in this already instable part of the world.
http://www.eastwest-review.com/article/africa-clash-american-and-chinese-geopolitical-interests
Afghanistan: an apple of discord or a field for co-operation?
Twenty years ago Soviet troops were withdrawn from Afghanistan, and eight year ago NATO forces were deployed there. The state has passed through two occupations against the background of the never-ending civil war, has become the main supplier of heroin to the global market, the symbol of international terrorism, famine and devastation. Soviet administration, planning the expedition, didn’t expect Pashtun guerillamen, equipped with old British rifles – the trophy of Anglo-Afghan wars – to occasion well-trained and armed troops of the USSR a lot of troubles. However in the 80s Afghanistan was foreordained to become the last range territory for the Cold war: with the help of the USA the opposition succeeded in outfighting the great neighbor and gaining independence.
Contemporary advocates of democratic Afghanistan don’t face such challenges. Today's guerillamen are equipped with self-made machine guns, which are made of locally available material in the north of Pakistan, with Russia preserving friendly neutrality. Ample resources are directed to the humanitarian aid, the conduction of free elections and maintenance of security. How come no positive shift has taken place in the past eight years? The famine has not been overcome, the war is still in progress, the drug production is increasing.
The greatest disillusionment of the NATO operation is caused by political and social situation in modern Afghanistan. It is still the poorest country in the world. The large part of the population shifts with less than one dollar a day while the international community spends millions on tackling this problem. Cultivation of opium poppy and production of heroin amount to more that 60 percent of GNP of modern Afghanistan.
That’s about the situation in modern Afghanistan, which is officially controlled by NATO. The country has changed a lot in the course of eight years but the question is if it has become less dangerous for the global community, for Europe and Russia? To what extent the presence of the USA is profitable for Afghanistan?
The USA succeeded in gaining predominance in Central Asia region with the complete approval of the global community. Nineteen new military bases, which are located in the territory of Iraq, Afghanistan and former Soviet republics – Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, were opened after 2001. It gives an opportunity to control from the East and from the West one of the main declared hostiles of the USA – Iran, as well as China, Pakistan and Russia.
American cynicism is not typical for the Europeans. If the promotion of democracy, tackling social problems and the war on terror are just propagandistic clichés for the USA administration, the European treat this terms seriously. They are ready to wage the war on international terror, threatening both the USA and the West European countries, on Islamism radicalization, which can have negative influence on spirit among immigrants, or at least they are ready to struggle for universal democratic ideals. After eight years of occupation there is clash of views of Europe and the USA on the possible policy in Afghanistan. This clash can lead to the split in the coalition.
Public polls in Russia and some European countries show the negative influence of anti-terrorist operation conducted by the USA on the global situation and the necessity of making new decisions on Afghanistan in co-operation with Europe and Russia. Can we expect it in the short-run? I doubt so as Afghanistan issue is again off the top priorities of today's political agendas due to never-ending economic troubles suffered by many countries due to Afghanistan and other useless expenses.
http://www.eastwest-review.com/article/afghanistan-apple-discord-or-field-co-operation
Long farewell, USSR
From the historical point of view, Soviet regime was a more appropriate structure then a preceding archaic and ignorant epoch. One can’t totally reject the Soviet period, at least because the government managed to teach to read and write the nation illiterate on the whole in a very short period of time. In the same time, one can’t worship it unconditionally, because it proved impossible to teach to understand what was read and written in such short time, with all implied consequences.
There is, truly, a problem of terrible legacy. The terrible thing about it lies in the human type left as a legacy, a type of an underdeveloped person of no principles, an incubatory conformist, incapable of demonstrating common consistency and integrity in social matters.
Today a total breakup with the Soviet past is suggested to us by the government - with smashing the monuments and banning Soviet symbols. Before smashing the monuments like a Barbarian one shouldn’t forget that there are leaders, and then, there are leaders. Lenin’s rule is the one thing, Stalin’s is another, and Chrushchev’s is completely different.Besides, political renovationists suggest nothing to replace the Soviet ideology which, in all its ugliness, was a very strong one.
There is no other post-Soviet country where the government would like the people to forget their Soviet past completely, and the reasons of that are quite obvious. And if it’s so, wouldn’t it be wiser not to spit in the well of the past, but to study it impartially and thoroughly making vital conclusions with consideration of all light and dark sides? Perhaps, that will help us to deal with the present and, finally, to start building the future.
http://www.eastwest-review.com/article/long-farewell
There is, truly, a problem of terrible legacy. The terrible thing about it lies in the human type left as a legacy, a type of an underdeveloped person of no principles, an incubatory conformist, incapable of demonstrating common consistency and integrity in social matters.
Today a total breakup with the Soviet past is suggested to us by the government - with smashing the monuments and banning Soviet symbols. Before smashing the monuments like a Barbarian one shouldn’t forget that there are leaders, and then, there are leaders. Lenin’s rule is the one thing, Stalin’s is another, and Chrushchev’s is completely different.Besides, political renovationists suggest nothing to replace the Soviet ideology which, in all its ugliness, was a very strong one.
There is no other post-Soviet country where the government would like the people to forget their Soviet past completely, and the reasons of that are quite obvious. And if it’s so, wouldn’t it be wiser not to spit in the well of the past, but to study it impartially and thoroughly making vital conclusions with consideration of all light and dark sides? Perhaps, that will help us to deal with the present and, finally, to start building the future.
http://www.eastwest-review.com/article/long-farewell
Tuesday, June 8, 2010
Alexander Rahr: Russia is a part of Europe
Here you will find an interview with Alexander Rahr, a well-known political scientist, the son of Russian emigrant, who has been living in Germany. In 2000 he published a book "The German in the Kremlin" about Vladimir Putin. Today he answers several questions about his vision of Russia and Russia's role in the modern Europe.
http://www.eastwest-review.com/article/interview-famous-political-scientist-director-programs-russia-and-cis-german-society-foreign
http://www.eastwest-review.com/article/interview-famous-political-scientist-director-programs-russia-and-cis-german-society-foreign
Monday, June 7, 2010
Uranium exchange agreement and a project of new sanctions against Iran
In the middle of May in Teheran a new summit of G-15 took place, the organization including 19 developing countries of Asia, Africa, and Latin America. During the talks foreign affairs ministers and leaders of Iran, Brazil, and Turkey have achieved a very important agreement concerning Iranian nuclear program. A following exchange alternative has been discussed: Iran is to receive fuel for Teheran research reactor in return for a half of Iranian supplies of low-enriched uranium. Despite that the USA has proposed the UN Security Council a project of resolution imposing new sanctions against the Islamic republic.
According to the statement signed on May 17, 2010by the USA, France, Russia, and the IAEA Iran is to deliver 1200 kilos of low-enriched uranium to Turkey. This uranium is to be kept by Turkey; however, it is to remain the property of Iran and may be supervised both by representatives of Iran and IAEA. After the low-enriched uranium is delivered to Turkey, it is to be exchanged for 120 kilos of nuclear fuel necessary for Teheran research reactor within one year.
After the document was signed, Turkey, Russia and China claimed that there was no more need in imposing sanctions against Iran. The Western community, however, reacted different. The USA are still drafting a resolution aiming at “further efforts in order to bring pressure on Iran”.
If new sanctions are to be adopted and come into force, it would lead to further confrontation and failure of the compromise found by Brazil, Turkey, and Iran. Thus, a new coil of this vicious circle will begin, putting off an efficient solution of Iranian question to uncertain future.
It is clear that the USA are afraid that Turkey and Brazil will get too much political credit, having once shown themselves the succeessful negotiators. But isn't it the time to put ambitions aside in order to heal this long-itching wound?
http://www.eastwest-review.com/article/uranium-exchange-agreement-and-project-new-sanctions-against-iran
According to the statement signed on May 17, 2010by the USA, France, Russia, and the IAEA Iran is to deliver 1200 kilos of low-enriched uranium to Turkey. This uranium is to be kept by Turkey; however, it is to remain the property of Iran and may be supervised both by representatives of Iran and IAEA. After the low-enriched uranium is delivered to Turkey, it is to be exchanged for 120 kilos of nuclear fuel necessary for Teheran research reactor within one year.
After the document was signed, Turkey, Russia and China claimed that there was no more need in imposing sanctions against Iran. The Western community, however, reacted different. The USA are still drafting a resolution aiming at “further efforts in order to bring pressure on Iran”.
If new sanctions are to be adopted and come into force, it would lead to further confrontation and failure of the compromise found by Brazil, Turkey, and Iran. Thus, a new coil of this vicious circle will begin, putting off an efficient solution of Iranian question to uncertain future.
It is clear that the USA are afraid that Turkey and Brazil will get too much political credit, having once shown themselves the succeessful negotiators. But isn't it the time to put ambitions aside in order to heal this long-itching wound?
http://www.eastwest-review.com/article/uranium-exchange-agreement-and-project-new-sanctions-against-iran
Turkey: the nature of national modernization
Today's Turkey is one of the most dynamically developing economies in the world. The underdeveloped agrarian state turned into the member of G20, lying in the 15th place in the rating of the greatest global economies. In 2002-2009 the average GDP was 6-9 percent, the figure was doubled in five years. Now it is 880 billion dollars (the nearest competitors are South Korea, Mexico and Australia). Turkey expands its international influence, seeking to gain the role of informal leader of the Middle East and the Balkans. It may lead to the revival of the new Ottoman Empire. How did it happen that the poor state turned into politically, economically strong entity?
The elections of 2002 shocked both Turkey and the international community: the Islamists came to power! However, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, the new Turkish leader proved to be a clever man. Aspiration to full-fledged EU membership and reforming legislation to meet its standards represented one of the main directions of the political program. This step was very successful and the party still enjoys its dividends. Having quickly understood that the main danger is posed to his party from inside the country - mainly from traditionally secular military and civil officers who head the Constitutional Court and the Council for National Security- Erdoğan took care of their non-involvement in political life of his country. According to the incumbent Constitution of 1982 these bodies are completely entitled to dissolve any political force which could be accused of attempted violation of secular bases of the society. Amendment of legislation towards europeization would deprive the army from this right. Slogans of democratization and europeization provide strong support from abroad.
Many other home reforms found approvement of the EU leaders and bodies and clever foreign policy made Turkey one of the new leaders of emerging world order. I guess almost every country could find some useful example to take from this country's policy, but will any? I doubt as despite these achievement Turkey is still perceived by most Europeans as a second chop state.
http://www.eastwest-review.com/article/turkey-nature-national-modernization-essay-1
The Relations between Turkey and Russia: New Eurasian Alliance?
Russia and Turkey were “Historical enemies” for ages. There were 11 russo-turkish wars, centuries of competition and hostility. This policy resulted in enormous economical and demographic losses and formation of Independent Balkans – zone of instability, hostile to both empires. The last russo-turkish war destroyed Ottoman and Russian Empires. A short period of friendship in 20-30-es of the XX century was profitable for both Soviet Union and Turkey, but it finished with the beginning of the II World war.
Later on the relations were developing still rather poorly. For Russians, Turkey has remained, as before, the primordial contender on the Caucasus and Black sea, the carrier of a hostile culture and alien values, the instrument of American policy and NATO`s sentinel on the southern flank of the weakened Russian empire. For Turks, Russia, as in the old days, has been associated with threat – “the northern bear” – unpredictable, dangerous, and capricious.
At the beginning of the new century the situation changed quickly and dramatically. The russian and turkish business opened numerous projects and tens thousands of Russian tourists chose Turkey the best place to spend summer vacation.
The turning point is observed in political relations as well. The clear Eurasian policy of both states, the far-fetched threat of American intervention and common economic interests pulled Moscow and Ankara together, leveling regional contradictions between them. Turks and Russians relied on cooperation with each other and ousting the USA from the region. Putin’s and Erdogan`s policy makers came to the conclusion that both countries could not cardinally change the regional balance of forces, but together were able to resist American involvement. Vexing questions remain, but they are not causing as much concern as before and are currently viewed in the common context of geopolitical partnership. Ankara is still dissatisfied with the Russian military presence at Georgia and Armenia, and Moscow feels uncomfortable with Georgian-Turkish and Azeri-Turkish military cooperation.
History shows that hidden or neglected problems do not often disappear by themselves, they still have to be solved. Will this Moscow-Ankara based balance of power in the Central Asia last for long?
http://www.eastwest-review.com/article/relations-between-turkey-and-russia-new-eurasian-alliance
Thursday, June 3, 2010
Israel facing a new Intifada
After Israeli troops attacked the Peace Convoy in the morning of 31st of May it became obvious that it was the best moment for pressing upon Israel. During the recent years this country has been violating international law too openly: it uses British and Australian passports to carry out acts of terrorism in foreign countries, continues building of settlements in Palestinian territories, and now it has come to actual piracy. Information is to be spread extremely actively now; for example, photos of killed human rights activists or crates with cookies stained with blood. Formally, Israel is right: the blockade was launched long ago, the territories were occupied, and human rights activists were warned about possible responsibility.
A session of the Security Council is to be called for; sanctions, eliminating of the blockade, and launching of humanitarian missions are to be demanded. Pressing can be carried out using massive meetings in front of embassies, boycott of Israeli goods, and departing of Israeli diplomats.
In theory, it is high time for Russia to remember about its own concerns in the Middle East. Russian neutrality allows interfering the situation, condemning Israel, and proposing guarantees of peaceful reconciliation of the conflict. Together with Turkey, Russia is to call for a session of the UN Security Council and to bring this act of state-level terrorism to the highest level of international discussion. It would also allow to improve the authority of the UN, which the president Dmitry Medvedev is talking about so often.
In fact, Russia allows various foreign political powers to manipulate with Russian opinion concerning the current situation. Yevgeny Satanovsky, the president of the pro-Israel Middle East Institute, was the first to comment upon the event from the Russian side in his interview to official broadcasting station “Voice of Russia”. He named the attack righteous and called for an immediate occupation of the Gaza Strip by the Israeli forces. This means that, unlike Turkey, Russia does not have any strategy in the Middle East.
And if Russia stays aside fruitful actions are unlikely to be taken against Israel.
http://www.eastwest-review.com/article/israel-facing-new-intifada
A session of the Security Council is to be called for; sanctions, eliminating of the blockade, and launching of humanitarian missions are to be demanded. Pressing can be carried out using massive meetings in front of embassies, boycott of Israeli goods, and departing of Israeli diplomats.
In theory, it is high time for Russia to remember about its own concerns in the Middle East. Russian neutrality allows interfering the situation, condemning Israel, and proposing guarantees of peaceful reconciliation of the conflict. Together with Turkey, Russia is to call for a session of the UN Security Council and to bring this act of state-level terrorism to the highest level of international discussion. It would also allow to improve the authority of the UN, which the president Dmitry Medvedev is talking about so often.
In fact, Russia allows various foreign political powers to manipulate with Russian opinion concerning the current situation. Yevgeny Satanovsky, the president of the pro-Israel Middle East Institute, was the first to comment upon the event from the Russian side in his interview to official broadcasting station “Voice of Russia”. He named the attack righteous and called for an immediate occupation of the Gaza Strip by the Israeli forces. This means that, unlike Turkey, Russia does not have any strategy in the Middle East.
And if Russia stays aside fruitful actions are unlikely to be taken against Israel.
http://www.eastwest-review.com/article/israel-facing-new-intifada
Tuesday, June 1, 2010
Goebbels' project of the united Europe or the way SS invented the European Union
A couple of months ago a document was found in American military intelligence archives, which was lying there for 65 years and didn't arise any interest until the present day.
US Military Intelligence report EW-Pa 128which was dubbed “Red House Report” by the British media, was prepared by a French agent. This is a detailed report about the secret meeting, which took place at the Maison Rouge Hotel (“Red House”) in Strasbourg on August 10, 1944. According to this document, Nazi high command invited the elite group of German industrialists in order to plan the postwar recovery of Germany, to prepare everything to bring the Nazis back to power and to create a “strong German empire” — in other word, the Fourth Reich.
Three-page closely typed report marked “Secret” was copied for British authorities and air-mailed to Cordell Hull, U. S. Secretary of State. This report contains a detailed description of methods, which Nazis together with German industrialists were willing to use in order to re-build the German economy, e.g. transferring money through Switzerland. Later on they were going to wait for the right moment and seize the power in Germany once again.
There were representatives of such companies as Volkswagen, Krupp and Messerschmitt among the gathered industrialists. Top officials of the fleet and the Armament ministry were also present at this meeting. With a remarkable foresight they decided that the Fourth Reich should be an economic empire, rather than the military one — but this time it wasn't supposed to be solely German.
The ideas brought to life at this meeting seem quite alike to those that formed the basis of the European integration at the end of 1940-s. History often gives us ridiculous lessons, doesn't it?
http://www.win.ru/en/school/2450.phtml
US Military Intelligence report EW-Pa 128which was dubbed “Red House Report” by the British media, was prepared by a French agent. This is a detailed report about the secret meeting, which took place at the Maison Rouge Hotel (“Red House”) in Strasbourg on August 10, 1944. According to this document, Nazi high command invited the elite group of German industrialists in order to plan the postwar recovery of Germany, to prepare everything to bring the Nazis back to power and to create a “strong German empire” — in other word, the Fourth Reich.
Three-page closely typed report marked “Secret” was copied for British authorities and air-mailed to Cordell Hull, U. S. Secretary of State. This report contains a detailed description of methods, which Nazis together with German industrialists were willing to use in order to re-build the German economy, e.g. transferring money through Switzerland. Later on they were going to wait for the right moment and seize the power in Germany once again.
There were representatives of such companies as Volkswagen, Krupp and Messerschmitt among the gathered industrialists. Top officials of the fleet and the Armament ministry were also present at this meeting. With a remarkable foresight they decided that the Fourth Reich should be an economic empire, rather than the military one — but this time it wasn't supposed to be solely German.
The ideas brought to life at this meeting seem quite alike to those that formed the basis of the European integration at the end of 1940-s. History often gives us ridiculous lessons, doesn't it?
http://www.win.ru/en/school/2450.phtml
FUTURE OF EUROPE: New security system or new “Berlin walls”?
What should the Europeans be afraid of today? Many still believe that the main threat is coming from Russia and try to install some powder kegs between itself and this potential enemy.
But much more real are threats coming from inside. In the first place — it's the unpredictable and inadequate behavior of the “new democracies” of Eastern Europe; their political climate is very favorable for the emergence of the ultra-nationalist regimes as if they were transferred by a time machine right from the 1930s—1940s. It is them who create the zone of conflicts around the Europe, which threatens the Old World with numerous troubles. The most outrageous example of them is Georgian troops invasion in Southern Ossetia in August of 2008. Only intervention of the Russian army saved the citizens of Ossetian city Tskhinvali from the genocide, which cannot be denied: Georgian tanks were firing directly to the residential houses, schools and hospitals. Recently Dmitry Medvedev made a public statement that if the effective international security institution, capable to stop the aggressor, existed in 2008, Georgia would have never taken the audacity to unleash the war against the people of South Ossetia.
There are yet other potential threats coming from inside - for example, economic crisis that can destroy European architecture so thoroughly built during the last decades.
It is therefore to unify all possible sources to improve the situation. And not the least of the actions needed is adooption of a common European security system.
http://www.win.ru/en/school/2891.phtml
But much more real are threats coming from inside. In the first place — it's the unpredictable and inadequate behavior of the “new democracies” of Eastern Europe; their political climate is very favorable for the emergence of the ultra-nationalist regimes as if they were transferred by a time machine right from the 1930s—1940s. It is them who create the zone of conflicts around the Europe, which threatens the Old World with numerous troubles. The most outrageous example of them is Georgian troops invasion in Southern Ossetia in August of 2008. Only intervention of the Russian army saved the citizens of Ossetian city Tskhinvali from the genocide, which cannot be denied: Georgian tanks were firing directly to the residential houses, schools and hospitals. Recently Dmitry Medvedev made a public statement that if the effective international security institution, capable to stop the aggressor, existed in 2008, Georgia would have never taken the audacity to unleash the war against the people of South Ossetia.
There are yet other potential threats coming from inside - for example, economic crisis that can destroy European architecture so thoroughly built during the last decades.
It is therefore to unify all possible sources to improve the situation. And not the least of the actions needed is adooption of a common European security system.
http://www.win.ru/en/school/2891.phtml
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)