[A-List] EU, German Politicos, Think Tank Brigades Activated Against Russia

["tony black" <tal@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: Rick Rozoff
To: Stop NATO
Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2007 12:34 PM
Subject: [stopnato] EU, German Politicos, Think Tank Brigades Activated 
Against Russia


http://en.fondsk.ru/article.php?id=775

Strategic Cultural Foundation
June 6, 2007

What Russia Should Expect From the West
Andrei Areshev

-[T]he German representative said in a no less
imperative manner that the problem must be resolved on
the basis of the Ahtisaari plan and that this option
is adequate to Russia’s interests.
Comments seem unnecessary in the case.
Further, A. Schockenhoff reproached Moscow for a lack
of activity in combating terrorism in the Black Sea
region (!). This is said at the time when the West is
literally turning Kosovo into a criminal and terrorist
enclave. Of course, the US military bases, which are
in the process of urgent deployment in the Black Sea
region (in Bulgaria and Romania), are not meant to
counter terrorism – their purpose is something
completely different.
-A. Schockenhoff chose not to mention that the
antimissiles are a part of the global system with
installations along the Russian border and that
elements of the system are also planned to be deployed
in space – either he believes that Russian experts are
total idiots or hopes that the statements of the kind
will finally become credible if reiterated endlessly.
-[W]hile promoting our energy cooperation with Germany
we should not forget that it was and remains the major
military and political ally of the US in Europe.

Shortly before the summertime vacations season, the
activity of Western diplomacy on the Russian direction
is extremely high.

Visits of high-ranking and not so high-ranking US and
European delegations, meetings, conferences, and
receptions organized mostly by Western foundations
operating in Russia and their Russian affiliates are
taking place incessantly.

The range of issues discussed is extremely broad –
from EU politics in Central Asia to the “return to
totalitarianism” in Russia. At the highest point of
this activity, George Bush invited the Russian
president to visit his family compound in
Kennebunkport on July 1-2 (in less than a month after
the G-8 meeting in Germany).

Naturally there has to be a reason for the high
activity.

The escalation of the pressure on Russia over a whole
spectrum of political issues is obvious, and it is
easy to explain – during recent months, Russia has had
a major success both in the energy politics (an
agreement on the Caspian pipeline was reached by
Russia, Kazakhstan, and Turkmenistan) and in the
military sphere (missiles capable to overpower the
missile shield the US is deploying in Europe were
test-launched).

It also plays a role in the stand-off between Russia
and the West caused by the disagreement over the
future of Kosovo continues (Moscow has once again
rejected the Ahtisaari plan), and a number of minor
problems like the import of the beef from Poland
persist....

So far nothing seems to indicate that the West is
going to abandon its unilateralist policy of
exclusively advancing the viewpoint of the US (the
potential of the EU to implement an independent
politics appears at least very limited).

Therefore, one can expect that attempts - disguised as
a search for compromise - will continue to get Moscow
involved in resoling problems in the only vein –
entirely on Western conditions and under the Western
control.

The aforementioned meetings of politicians and
experts, convening in anticipation of the coming
summit, can be considered a confirmation of the above.
Speaking privately, the participants of the meetings
describe them as dialogs of the deaf and the blind.

The speech of Andreas Schockenhoff, Deputy Chairman of
the CDU/CSU Group of the German Parliament, at the
conference on the perspectives of the cooperation
between Russia and the EU in the European security and
defense matters (Moscow, May 30) is a vivid example.

The statements by A. Schockenhoff are made even more
significant by the fact that he is the Coordinator of
German-Russian Intersocietal Cooperation.

After the routine mentioning of the “strategic
partnership” and “shared values” the speaker moved on
to specific recommendations.

He opined that pressure must continue to be exerted on
Iran jointly with Moscow, and suggested that, as a
part of the process, Moscow should stop any export to
Iran of not only missile technologies, but also of the
air defense systems.

The “suggestion” is absurd in general, as the sales of
sensitive dual-purpose technologies are regulated very
strictly both by Russian and the international laws,
and the sales of defensive antiaircraft systems are
not restricted by any international agreements.
Nevertheless, A. Schockenhoff finds it possible to
discuss what Moscow should or should not do.

Speaking on the Kosovo issue, the German
representative said in a no less imperative manner
that the problem must be resolved on the basis of the
Ahtisaari plan and that this option is adequate to
Russia’s interests.

Comments seem unnecessary in the case.

Further, A. Schockenhoff reproached Moscow for a lack
of activity in combating terrorism in the Black Sea
region (!). This is said at the time when the West is
literally turning Kosovo into a criminal and terrorist
enclave. Of course, the US military bases, which are
in the process of urgent deployment in the Black Sea
region (in Bulgaria and Romania), are not meant to
counter terrorism – their purpose is something
completely different.

Besides, Russia is invited to cooperate with the EU in
Congo, Sudan, and Lebanon.

As for the post-Soviet space, according to A.
Schockenhoff, the EU will take part in the settlement
of the frozen conflicts regardless of whether there
will be any cooperation or not.

The question is whether there is any point in the
European’s getting involved in post-Soviet space if
they have no idea how to deal with numerous
ethno-political problems in their own homes.

No conference of this sort has ever avoided discussing
the deployment of elements of the US missile shield in
Europe.

Not surprisingly, A. Schockenhoff’s talk included the
allegation that Moscow is fully aware that the 10
antimissiles to be deployed in East Europe are neither
intended to be a threat to Russia nor capable to
neutralize its strategic nuclear potential.

A. Schockenhoff chose not to mention that the
antimissiles are a part of the global system with
installations along the Russian border and that
elements of the system are also planned to be deployed
in space – either he believes that Russian experts are
total idiots or hopes that the statements of the kind
will finally become credible if reiterated endlessly.

Currently, the deployment of the US missile defense in
Europe is also justified by … the increasing kamikaze
terrorist activity (obviously, they must be planning
to start buying intercontinental ballistic missiles).

In reality, what we encounter here is the logic of the
endless and self-reproducing arms race, and if one
follows it thoroughly, eventually the conclusion has
to be that the only threat to the EU is presented by
the spread of the weapons of mass destruction from the
Russian territory (references to Iran and N. Korea
cannot be taken seriously). Somehow, all of this does
not seem to preclude talking about “common interests”.

The impression is that not only the “new” but now also
the “old” Europeans accept the presence of the US
antimissiles and other military infrastructures on
their territory.

Well, this is their deliberate choice.

Under the circumstances, there is no reason to feel
surprised that, according to public opinion polls
conducted in Russia shortly after the Russia-EU summit
in Samara, 65% of the respondents regard the EU as a
potential adversary. As for the US and NATO, the
result would be even more predictable.

Europeans keep telling that Russia depends on them a
lot more than they depend on it.

True enough, so far this has been the case – the EU
imports 44% of the gas it consumes from Russia,
whereas Russia pipes 67% of the gas it produces to the
EU.

Gradually, we must make the situation change. It is
sure to change due to the increase in the domestic
consumption of gas in Russia and the rapid development
of the energy markets in South, East, and South-East
Asia.

Besides, while promoting our energy cooperation with
Germany we should not forget that it was and remains
the major military and political ally of the US in
Europe.

Though Moscow is becoming increasingly independent in
its international politics, there are no real reasons
to charge Moscow with being uncompromising. On the
contrary, oftentimes we see too many concessions being
made. Sometimes the tradeoffs that we agree to are
quite dubious. Examples? Here they are.

Russia delegated its rights to negotiate with Iran to
Javier Solana who represents the three European
nations (France, Germany, Great Britain) at the talks
with Ali Larijani. The usefulness of this arrangement
is extremely dubious as the difference between the
positions of Solana and the US on the “Iran issue”
happens to be microscopic.

Russia’s technical assistance in the NATO operation in
Afghanistan continues despite the fact that the
production of heroin in the country has increased by a
factor of dozens since the US gained ground in the
region.

It is clear that Russia’s proposals concerning the
normalization of the situation in Afghanistan have
ended up in the garbage bin.

The German representative said that the EU plans to
carry out a major police mission in Afghanistan, but
the available experience (importantly, of the military
presence in the country, not of police missions)
instills no optimism.

While the NATO transit to Afghanistan via Russian
territory continues, Moscow can only hope to see any
progress in the resolution of the problem of its
transit (including the military one) to the
Kaliningrad oblast.

Examples of the kind are plentiful.

So far, Moscow never got a mutually rewarding dialog
with Washington or Brussels no matter how hard it
tried.

It seems that it will never have one – in case, like
the 1990s, the West will continue to reject the idea
of an equal partnership and to teach the Russian
leaders condescendingly how Russia’s interests should
be understood.

===========================
Stop NATO
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/stopnato

To subscribe, send an e-mail to:
stopnato-subscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
==============================

__________________________________________________________
Expecting? Get great news right away with email Auto-Check.
Try the Yahoo! Mail Beta.
http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/mailbeta/newmail_tools.html

__._,_.___
Messages in this topic (1) Reply (via web post) | Start a new topic
Messages | Files | Photos | Links | Database | Polls | Members | Calendar

Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch format 
to Traditional
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe Recent Activity
1New Members
Visit Your Group
SPONSORED LINKS
Military lawyer
Get Discounts
Yahoo! Shopping
Compare prices and
find great deals.
Yahoo! Movies
Staying in tonight?
Check out new DVDs
and read reviews.
Yahoo! Mail
Get it all!
With the all-new
Yahoo! Mail Beta.
__,_._,___