“On the first day of its summit in Chicago, NATO has declared stage one of its European missile defense shield “provisionally operational.”
“It is the first step towards our long-term goal of providing full coverage and protection for all NATO European populations, territory and forces,” NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen told reporters on Sunday.
Specifically, this means that the United States has transferred command of a radar system in Turkey to NATO’s command and allowed the alliance to direct the missile defense system stationed on US ships. These ships can also be placed under NATO command. Spain, Turkey, Romania and Poland have agreed to deploy key parts of the U.S. missile defense system on their soil.
The White House says it expects initial operational capability by 2015, while the system will be fully functional in 2018. All 28 members of the alliance will participate in the financing.
The missile defense shield has created tension with Russia, which views the system as a threat. Rasmussen stressed that Russia has no influence on the sovereign decision of NATO’s member states but still invited Moscow to co-operate in discussions on the subject. German Foreign Minister Guido Westerwelle also said ahead of the summit that Russia is welcome to work on a joint security strategy for Europe: “The door remains open for Russia.” …
Article – Deutsche Welle
The European Union foreign ministers on March 23 decided to impose sanctions on a further 12 Belarusians, including businesspeople, and 29 Belarusian companies to punish the Lukashenka regime for the repression of political activists and civil society representatives, BelaPAN said.
In particular, the EU Council added the 12 persons to the 27-nation bloc’ list of those targeted by a travel ban and asset freeze, reported euroalert.net. They include individuals benefiting from or supporting the regime, as well as persons responsible for the repression of civil society and the democratic opposition in Belarus.
In addition, the EU Council froze the assets of 29 entities, which are controlled by persons subject to restrictive measures due to their role in supporting the regime.
“I am extremely concerned about what is happening with the civil society,” said Catherine Ashton, the EU’s high representative for foreign affairs and security policy, speaking ahead of the EU Council’s meeting in Brussels. “We have been extremely clear about the regime in Belarus that they release political prisoners. We would like to engage with them when they comply with what we have asked them to do.”
In an interview with the government`s news agency BelTA earlier this week, Andrey Savinykh, spokesman for the Belarusian foreign ministry, said that the EU should stop using pressure against Belarus if it wanted to “settle existing differences.”
Both Belarus and the EU will benefit from a “mutually acceptable settlement” of them, said Mr. Savinykh.
“The EU should in the first place drop the practice of reinforcing its sanctions on a regular basis,” said the spokesman. “The point is not about whether the sanctions are efficient. What is important is that this practice rules out the possibility of bringing sensibly and reasonably the positions closer to each other.”
On January 31, 2011, the EU Council imposed asset freezes and travel bans on 156 Belarusian government officials and other individuals for their role in “the violations of international electoral standards” in the December 14-19, 2010 presidential election and a post-election crackdown on civil society and pro-democratic supporters. The Council blacklisted more Belarusians later, placing on the list judges and prosecutors involved in the prosecution of post-election protesters, as well as the judge and the public prosecutor in the trial of prominent human rights defender Ales Byalyatski.
The EU Council`s Friday decision brought the total number of Belarusians on the blacklist to 234.
After the EU imposed travel bans and asset freezes on new Belarusian officials on February 27, the Belarusian foreign ministry “recommended” that the head of the EU delegation to Belarus and the ambassador of Poland to Belarus return to their capitals for consultations, while simultaneously recalling the country`s permanent representative in Brussels and ambassador in Warsaw.
All EU ambassadors have left Belarus since “in expression of solidarity and unity.”
Materials from BelaPAN, Naviny
“Russia has suggested to NATO it could use its own airport near Ulyanovsk if Manas transit shipment centre is closed, Voice of America reported.
‘The Russian government plans to use the airport near Ulyanovsk as a transit point for NATO coalition troops in Afghanistan’, the statement said. ‘Moscow allowed NATO to supply coalition forces in Afghanistan through Russia by railway for three years. One of Russia’s airports in Ulyanovsk may be also be used to deliver military cargo’.
According to the plan, military aircraft will fly out of Kabul, then over Central Asia to land 3000 kilometres away in Ulyanovsk.
Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov told the Russian Duma members that the use of the airport by the NATO military is in Russia’s interest, as this will facilitate the orderly withdrawal of NATO troops from Afghanistan by December 2014 as was planned.
The agency stressed that the Russian leadership’s decision was announced the day after the Kyrgyz authorities told U.S. Secretary of Defence Leon Panetta that they did not intend to prolong the lease term of the U.S. Air Force base Manas which expires in July 2014.
Expert on security issues in Central Asia Joshua Kucera, working in Washington, thinks that this statement of the Kyrgyz leadership can simply mean that it is time to begin lease negotiations with the new president Almazbek Atambayev, Voice of America said.
Kucera said that Ulyanovsk will be a fall-back option if Manas is closed and on the other hand, Manas is a fall back option in case of overlapping the channels passing through the territory of Pakistan.”
From TREND News Agency
—
“NATO, Russia and the Central Asian’s countries have a number of common interests in the region, James Appathurai, NATO Secretary General’s Special Representative for the Caucasus and Central Asia told in an interview with atlantic-community.org.
Appathurai said he would like to reject the opinion that the West and Russia are competing for influence in the Central Asia.
“We have common interests in Central Asia. And I mean common with the Central Asian countries and NATO, and common between all three if we include Russia as well,” he said.
First common interest is the stability in Afghanistan as vital for all that Afghanistan does not once again begin exporting terrorism, extremism, or continue exporting drugs, which of course hit all, Appathurai mentioned.
“So we have an interest in stabilizing Afghanistan, shared by all of us. And the best way to do that is to cooperate,” he added.
Appathurai added that NATO, Russia, and Central Asia for example train together their counter narcotic officials, particularly Central Asian, Afghan but also now Pakistani.
Russia plays a very important role in this joint project with NATO allies, he said, and it works very well.
The other NATO’s interest in the region is to help the Central Asian countries reach their full potential, including as transit areas for trade, as production and transit areas for energy and that is a mutual interest for everybody, Appathurai added.
“The Central Asian countries are concerned that when 2014 arrives and the Alliance has a much smaller and different presence in Afghanistan, that they will be left with a problem or a growing problem of instability, and terrorism, and extremism, and drugs,” he mentioned.
The NATO is committed for the long term to Afghanistan’s stability and committed not just rhetorically or politically, the alliance will have people on the ground doing work to help the Afghans stabilize their own country, Appathurai stressed.
“We will also work with the Central Asian countries so that they can protect themselves better, fight against and defend against these many threats. So we’re going to offer them more consultation, more exercises, more joint training to help them beef up their own capacity to handle these problems,” he added.”
From TREND News Agency
Vladimir Putin | 63.60% | 45,602,075 |
Gennady Zyuganov | 17.18% | 12,318,353 |
Mikhail Prokhorov | 7.98% | 5,722,508 |
Vladimir Zhirinovsky | 6.22% | 4,458,103 |
Sergei Mironov | 3.85% | 2,763,935 |
Invalid Votes | 1.11% | 836,691 |
Turnout |
64.5% |
70,864,974 on 109,860,331 Registered voters |
Source: Central Election Commission of the Russian Federation
Развод по-советскиПрошлое и будущее постсоветского пространства. The Soviet DisUnionThe Past and the Future of the post Soviet area. |
В ходе встречи состоится презентация книги La DisUnione Sovietica. da Superpotenza a periferia della globalizzazione. Milano, Greco&Greco editori, 2012. Присутствуют: ректор РГГУ профессор Е.И. Пивовар и автор книги Джузеппе Д’Амато, а также гости – дипломаты, журналисты.
Понедельник – 5-го марта в 14.00 часов – ауд. 220 Miusskaya sq, 6, Moscow. Metro Novoslabodskaja. Contact telephone: Rectorate (499)2506910 |
Russia is not Belarus, but this is little consolation. Its people took to the streets to demonstrate that Russians are no longer subjects of an empire, but citizens of a modern country. They want to play an active role in the decision process that will choose the path for the next decade.
Let’s be clear. December’s legislative elections, preceded by the “dirtiest” campaign since the collapse of the USSR, were a major setback on the way to the attainment of full democracy. But they have awoken the long sleepy and apathetic Russian society.
In a deep popularity crisis, United Russia – the party of the Kremlin – had to get the maximum number of votes to launch Vladimir Putin’s presidential campaign. And, more or less, it reached its goals.
Nevertheless, in some situations form is more important than substance. And this is the case. The Russians, who do not share the Kremlin’s view, had no alternatives at the polls. There was no room for a vote of dissent or protest. “It is unbelievable! I had to vote for the communists so as not to give it to those” said an upset thirty-year-old Moscow specialist. Now, on March 4th, at the presidential elections, it is the same!
At the legislative elections the legal guarantor or arbiter, usually the head of State, was missing. Dmitry Medvedev was the “number one” candidate in the United Russia list and in his traditional pre-election message to the nation he invited his people “to choose those who have experience in overcoming the crisis.”
If this attitude from the authority in power towards competitors continues, imagine what would happen if suddenly an alternative serious candidate to Putin, and not the usual retiree, were to appear on the political scene.
Undoubtedly, for the first time since his arrival in power at the end of 1999, Vladimir Putin was not considered by his people the problem-solving “good czar” but rather was associated with the corrupt nomenklatura.
Politicians should understand that Russia has changed. It is no longer the place where people just listen to the voice of the Kremlin and complain “in the kitchen” like during the Soviet times. While the federal television channels broadcast hours of programmes on the government’s successes, Russians post the daily reality and express their anger on the internet. Social networks and blogs showed the dirty face of the electoral campaign.
Certainly, in past elections there were frauds, falsifications, and violations of the law as well. The difference is that today not only are common people in Russia armed with the latest technology and denounce the abuses but they have also lost their patience, especially in the regions where local authorities have become too arrogant. Muscovites and Peterburgers (a significant percent of the active electorate) have added the request for a new, more just society like in the West.
It is mainly the rich Russian middle class that is disappointed with life in its homeland. Sociologists are already analyzing today’s wave of emigration that is the strongest since the Bolshevik Revolution. The flight of capital seems to be unstoppable in these months. The Russians appear to be the first not to believe in their country.
The next President will have to deal with this psychological crisis and find the right therapy. Russians are no longer hungry like in 2000 when they gave up some of the achievements of the Nineties for stability. A fully open political system and more development of democracy are probably the needed medicine. Otherwise there will always be a Smartphone ready to unmask the authorities’ sins.
Giuseppe D’Amato
“On Saturday, citizens were called to vote in a referendum to decide whether Russian should be made the country’s second official language and be given equal status with Latvian. The result was clear: 78 percent voted against the proposal, 21 percent in favor. Some 69 percent of the 1.5 million eligible to vote cast their ballot.
The referendum was launched by the initiative Mother Tongue of the Russian minority in the country and intended to change five clauses in the country’s constitution.
“The Russian people of Latvia have to show to the rest of the world that they will never accept their status of being outcasts in their own home country,” the website of Mother Tongue urged its supporters ahead of the poll.
The government, however, had called on people to vote against the proposal, arguing that the Latvian language was at the heart of the constitution and that the proposal had to be defended…
The referendum marked the escalation of tensions that had been simmering for decades. Under Soviet rule, hundreds of thousands from across the Soviet Union where moved to Latvia to work there. Moscow’s policy eventually led to over 40 percent of Latvia’s population officially speaking Russian as their first language. Many Latvians saw Russian as a threat to their own language and were concerned at the prospect of becoming a minority in their own country…
Citizenship also depends on knowing Latvian. As a consequence, some 300,000 people living in the country are stateless. They do not hold Latvian citizenship and only have their old Soviet Union documents and passports. Amongst other disadvantages, those 300,000 don’t have the right to vote…
The main problem is not the language, but rather the general view that Latvians have on the Russians. Many Russians are discriminated against because of their ethnicity and are treated like second-class citizens, she said, adding that she herself is not too optimistic that this will change anytime soon… ”
Full Article – Deutsche Welle
“In her keynote address, opening the World Economic Forum in Davos, Chancellor Angela Merkel urged Europe to become “more European” and work together to resolve its festering problems.
Merkel said Europe lacked the political structures to make the common currency, the euro, work properly. Despite recent biting criticism that Germany should shoulder more responsibility in the current debt crisis, Merkel stressed that Berlin was resolved to do what was necessary to save European unity.
Merkel said that the world had not learned from the 2008 financial crisis. Reforms of financial markets have not gone far enough, she said.
The Chancellor said Berlin was ready to play its full part in combating the eurozone crisis, but could not promise things it cannot deliver.
In an interview Merkel insisted that nations at the center of the eurozone debt crisis needed to press ahead with economic reform measures. “It does not make sense to promise more money, but not tackle the causes of the problem,” the Chancellor said.
At the same time, she again called on other European leaders to agree on a tough set of parameters to form the basis of the planned fiscal pact on budget discipline.
“If you have promised debt reduction and solid public finances a hundred times, then it must also be enforced in the future,” Merkel said.
The Chancellor’s remarks followed calls by Italy and the International Monetary Fund for Germany to offer more funds to boost the so-called European Stability Mechanism (ESM). Merkel has ruled out bolstering the permanent euro rescue fund… ”
Full Article – Nancy Isenson Deutsche Welle
Former German Foreign Minister Hans-Dietrich Genscher has paid tribute to the late Czech president and anti-communist hero Vaclav Havel. Europe has lost a “great European,” Genscher says. When did you last speak to Vaclav Havel?
Hans-Dietrich Genscher: It was either this year or last year. We saw quite a lot of each other – even before the revolution in 1989 – but of course much more during his time in office. But we also still kept in touch after we both had left office. I had direct a contact with him for many years through two of his colleagues who worked on “Charter 77” with him.
When you first met Havel, he had already been a writer for many years. In that sense he was not a professional politician, but an artist. What role did that play in his commitment to politics?
Commitment to freedom was a way of life for him. But as a poet he was able to convey his beliefs through the power of words. And it was with the power of words that he challenged the communist regime in former Czechoslovakia and ultimately brought it to an end. He was a source of encouragement to the people of the Czech Republic and Slovakia in their fight for freedom and democracy.
Thinking back to the revolution in 1989, the image that comes to mind for many people is of Havel on the balcony of the embassy in Prague. Which image of Vaclav Havel has particularly stuck in your memory?
A whole series of images come to mind, even those taken when you could see how distressed and restricted he was by his terrible disease. And yet you could still see his fighting spirit and the courage he had shown during times of persecution. The former federal German President Richard von Weizsäcker’s first visit to the official residence of the Czech president in Prague was also particularly special because the man who was formerly persecuted could receive guests from Germany as the president of Czechoslovakia.
People often refer to a “political friendship” when the talk about the relationship the two of you shared. You have said yourself that you continued to see Havel even after your political career had ended. Was it a political friendship or was it more than that?
We were certainly in tune with one another on many basic issues, but there was also a very human affection, which probably should always be the case. It was the case here. Perhaps the fact that we had both experienced life under communist regimes played a part. He experienced it in Prague and I had experienced communism while living in the Soviet occupation zone and then the German Democratic Republic between 1945 and 1952, before I left for West Germany.
What will you miss most about Vaclav Havel?
The death of Vaclav Havel has made Europe a lot poorer. We have lost a great European and I think that many Europeans will be united in mourning today, at any rate, the Germans and the Czechs.
FULL Interview – Michael Borgers – Deutsche Welle
VIDEO – Mourning
BIOGRAPHY – France24 – VIDEO
Mr President, thank you for an excellent organization of today’s summit.
The summit allowed us to take stock of the bilateral relations and agree on priorities for the future. It was also an opportunity to assess in more general terms the implementation of commitments and respect to declared values.
Let me start my reiterating that Ukraine is a partner of strategic importance for the EU. Our commitment to developing the relationship between the EU and Ukraine is firm. Since the last summit there has been developments in the EU-Ukraine relations – both positive and some that have given us reason for strong concern.
Today, we can publically announce that negotiations on the Association Agreement have been finalised. It was difficult work, but your government’s declared European choice and dedication has made it possible to conclude the talks with success. This is a giant step for our relations.
What is encouraging is the broad support this Agreement – and Ukraine’s European choice – enjoys in Ukrainian society.
It is also of decisive importance for Ukraine’s progress towards modernisation, prosperity, and the realisation of Ukraine’s European ambition. I pay tribute to the work that has been done.
We want to take steps to sign and ratify the Association Agreement as soon as we can, but this will depend on political circumstances. In this regard, a number of recent domestic developments in Ukraine have led to a difficult atmosphere between the European Union and Ukraine.
The support of European public opinion to Ukraine’s political association and economic integration to the EU is an important asset, closely related to this field. The perceived deterioration of the quality of democracy and rule of law in Ukraine has a direct impact in our Member-States, in our public at large, and in the European Parliament.
Our strong concern is primarily related to the risks of politically-motivated justice in Ukraine. The Timoshenko trial is the most striking example. But just as important, a comprehensive justice
reform in line with international standards is absolutely key. Media freedom and freedom of assembly are also key for a full fledged democracy. Shortcomings have to be corrected.
Mr President, the respect for these principles, enshrined in the Eastern Partnership and at the core of the Association Agreement, is decisive for the pace and depth of rapprochement with the EU and of the signing and ratification of the Association Agreement . But it is also fundamental to Ukraine’s future development as a competitive, dynamic and innovative society.
In this context, the parliamentary elections to be held next year, will be a litmus test. The conduct of these elections will have to meet the commitments of the OSCE, including the ensuring of a level playing field for all possible candidates. And it is of outmost importance that they can exercise their political rights.
We do, however, take note of the cross-party adoption by the Ukrainian Parliament of a new Law on Election of the People’s Deputies. We encourage you to continue close cooperation with the Venice Commission.
In summary, we share not only the common interest but also the common ambition of a closer EU-Ukraine relationship. This summit is proof of our commitment. We will work toward the realisation of this ambition. But this will require a major effort from Ukraine.
Finally, we will have an exchange on a couple of regional issues during lunch.
First on Belarus. Today it is one year since the violations of electoral standards at the 19 December Presidential elections in Belarus, which triggered a crackdown on civil society and political opposition. The developments during the last 12 months are worrying – the atmosphere of repression remains unabated.
The EU’s policy is principled. We stick to our policies of restrictive measures and outreach towards Belarusian civil society and public at large. We will not change this until all political prisoners are released and rehabilitated.
We are happy for the dramatic improvement in Ukraine – Moldova relations since our last Summit. The European Union and Ukraine have a common interest in the territorial integrity of Moldova. We have high hopes for the resumption of the formal talks.
Once again, Mr President, this is an important day in our relations. Hopefully it is the beginning of the important period in which we can fully share common values and common interests.
The Official statement by President of the European Council Herman Van Rompuy following the 15th European Union-Ukraine Summit.
We are a group of long experienced European journalists and intellectuals interested in international politics and culture. We would like to exchange our opinion on new Europe and Russia.