Posted on 11/17/2004 10:32:59 AM PST by TapTheSource
The Eurasian Axis Dr. Alexandr Nemets Monday, Oct. 20, 2003
On Oct. 8-9, a German-Russian summit took place in Yekaterinburg city, also known as the capital of Ural; this was the sixth German-Russian summit during President Vladimir Putins regime, i.e., in three and a half years.
Ministers of Foreign Affairs Ivanov and Fisher, Ministers of Internal Affairs Gryzlov and Shilli, Ministers of Trade and Economy Gref and Klement, etc., participated in the summit. In addition, German Chancellor Gerhard sSchroeder brought a group of 50 leading German businessmen, including the presidents of Ruhrgas, Deutsche Bank and Lufthansa Airline. In 1995, Russian President Boris Yeltsin proposed to French President Jacques Chiraq and German Chancellor Helmut Kohl to have a summit in Yekaterinburg for the purpose of establishing a new German-French-Russian political axis. This summit didn't take place.
In March 2003, during the Iraqi War (when the Paris-Berlin-Moscow-Beijing axis, for the first time ever, went from the darkness to the light), Putin sent Schroeder a new invitation to visit Yekaterinburg. It is unknown whether French President Chiraq received the same invitation. However, Schroeder almost certainly represented, at the last summit, the interests of France in addition to Germany.
In 2002, German-Russian trade reached $24 billion and could slightly increase in 2003. By the end of 2003, the accumulated volume of German investment in Russia reached $7 billion. Germany is the largest creditor of Russia: it owns 40 percent of Russian debts to the London Club, or $17 billion. Germany is one of the few countries investing money in the Russian manufacturing industry. The number of Russian enterprises with German participation reached 2,500.
It should be stressed that Germany receives from Russia 23 billion cubic meters of natural gas annually, mostly from Gazprom Corp.; this satisfies at least one-third of the German demand for natural gas.
Presently, Russia sells natural gas to Germany and other European customers for about $100 per 1,000 cubic meters, while Russian customers pay (if based on the official exchange rate) only $20 per 1,000 cubic meters. Putin and Schroeder discussed ways to raise Russias internal prices for energy, including gas, up to the world level.
In this case, Russias internal consumption of natural gas would definitely drop just as it already happened with crude oil and oil products and Russia would receive huge resources for gas export to Germany and other EU countries.
The two sides signed agreements about facilitating the issuing of visas and expanding cooperation between Germany and Russias most-western Baltic enclave of Kaliningrad. They also signed an agreement for transportation, through Russia, of German military personnel and goods to Afghanistan.
Remarkably, the two sides discussed the problems of Iraq, North Korea and Iran, and found how close their positions are; the differences are small if any. And the joint position of these two countries in these areas differs greatly from Americas.
Many years ago, French leaders produced the idea of a "United Europe" from the Atlantic to Ural. However, this United Europe has nothing to do with American interests.
Simultaneously with the summit in Yekaterinburg, on Oct. 10, Speaker of the Iranian Parliament Mehdi Karubi met, in Tehran, a delegation from the German Bundestag. Karubi emphasized during the meeting that the Iranian nuclear program is "transparent, peaceful and contains no threat to the world."
He also stressed that "criminal actions of Zionists contribute to instability in the Middle East." It looks as if these statements elicited no serious objections from the German guests. Speaker Mekhdi also said that development and expansion of political and economic ties with the EU, particularly with Germany, is a priority for Tehran.
Volker Ruhe, the head of the Bundestag delegation, supported the expansion of ties between Germany and Iran and "highly estimated the recent processes of democracy expanding in Iran." He also appealed to Irans role in local conflict solving.
These were just two messages, from many, characterizing relations among Paris, Berlin, Moscow, Beijing, Tehran and Pyongyang. The Paris-Berlin-Moscow-Beijing axis is growing and strengthening; and the nice regimes in Tehran and Pyongyang are becoming its clients.
This is bad by itself, but the deliberate ignoring of this reality by official Washington, D.C., is even worse. We know that the Bush administration concentrates all its efforts on solving the problems of postwar Iraq. However, very probably, just the activity of some participants and clients of the Eurasian Axis especially those very interested in high oil prices on the world market and very uninterested in restoring the Iraqi oil industry effectively blocks these efforts.
In March 2003, when American-Russian relations were at their low ebb, Gleb Pavlovsky, one of Putins "dark strategists," published in the major Moscow papers, including the official Russian army paper Krasnaya Zvezda, several articles, which can be condensed to the following: Russia should help America to exhaust itself in the struggle for world hegemony. Eventually America will crash as the USSR crashed and will crawl back to the North American continent.
Despite all the sweet words between Washington and Moscow, the Kremlin continues working only in this direction. And not without success: Look at the figures of the federal deficit. Indeed, for how long will America be capable of maintaining its presence, particularly a military presence, in Iraq and other key regions of the world?
And would it be possible for America to take even a step ahead in the Middle East, i.e., to increase its political and military presence in Trans-Caucasus region (in Georgia and Azerbaijan) and in Central Asia? Kremlin and the entire Eurasian Axis spare no effort to prevent the strengthening of the American position in this vital zone. And without such a strengthening, any hopes for a changed situation in Iran and termination of the Iranian nuclear-missile program would fail.
On Sept. 25-28, the leading Beijing papers published a series of comments on the Bush-Putin summit. They can be condensed to the following:
a) Putin escapes direct confrontation with America. Moreover, he intends to get as much money from America and the entire West in the form of hydrocarbons export and Western investment in Russia as possible.
b) Putin pretends to be "a friend of America" and repeats phrases about "joint Russian-American struggle against terrorism"; this allows Putin to run wild in Chechnya and the surrounding Muslim regions of North Caucasus, without problems with the West.
c) However, in some principal areas, such as helping modernize the Iranian military or preventing any American action against North Korea, Putin is adamant: President Bush will get nothing here.
It is necessary to admit that the conclusions of the Beijing media are correct. Putin merely "plays a friend of America" and, at the same time, works for solidifying and expanding the Eurasian Axis, the new world pole, generally hostile to the USA and its close allies.
Remarkably, these articles in the Beijing papers even didn't touch the possible influence of the Bush-Putin summit over the huge and still growing supplies of Russian warfare and dual-use technology to China. This is a real sacred cow for the Kremlin.
***Finally, the author has begun distributing the book "Chinese-Russian Alliance," written jointly with his friend Dr. Thomas Torda, with the support of NewsMax.com. The table of contents is given below. Purchasing information is at the Web site http://excelenterprises1.tripod.com
Link:
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2003/10/19/214534.shtml
Dr. Alexandr Nemets (BIO)
Alexandr Nemets was born in Moscow in 1955. He studied at the Moscow Institute of Steel and Alloys, where he received a B.S. degree as a specialist in industry automation in 1978 and an M.S. degree as a data base developer in 1983. From 1978 to 1986, he worked as a programmer, at the same time studying Chinese and Japanese.
From 1986 to1992, he worked at the Presidium of Academy of Sciences USSR as an expert on the economic and technological development of China and Japan. During this period he published several dozen articles and booklets in the Soviet scientific media.
In 1991, Dr. Nemets defended his Ph.D. thesis, "Science-intensive sectors in the Chinese economy," at the Central Economic-Mathematical Institute, Academy of Sciences USSR and received a Ph.D. degree in 1992.
In 1989-93, Dr. Nemets undertook seven trips to the vast region between Lake Baikal and Beijing. In 1994 he emigrated to the United States, working at the University of Minnesota in 1995.
From 1996 to 2000, Dr. Nemets was a consultant to Science Applications International Corp. and published several hundred research reports related to China and Russia.
From 2000 to 2002, Dr. Nemets was a consultant to the American Foreign Policy Council and other governmental and non-governmental organizations in Washington, D.C.
A lot of American companies are risking a lot of capital by investing in China.
Let me ask you a question. So what if China invades Taiwan. I mean, what if we just turned our heads and said it is local affair between the same peoples but with differences politically?
I mean so what? AS opposed if we were to fight the Chinese on Taiwan's behalf.
nick
BTTT
I certainly don't.
I'd rather destroy China than let them invade taiwan.
We should start demanding from companies to do less business with China and more with other countries. Put more jobs in Mexico.
Please ping those you think might find this useful info. Thanks--TTS
Hope you guys like Chinese food.
Sincerely,
Uncle Sam
How do you destroy China without destroying the whole world or a good portion of it?
They should work towards a political solution of their differences now. The only thing that can change the course is if the people of China, having tasted alittle bit of freedom, rise up and for a democracy.
This might happen as their economy grows and the people improve the quality of their living.
nick
ping!
My primary concern is that there is a whole lot of American money invested in China and Taiwan.
Of course, the other problem is that we have a treaty with Taiwan.
We would not be having this problem is the Clinton administration had not let the Chinese have our MIRVing technology, and our missile guidance technology.
Personally, I think the Chinese will eventually figure out that being aggressive toward the US and its allies is not a good strategy, but it might take a while.
If China attacks Taiwan it is a win-win situation for them.
1. They get Taiwan (I really don't see us getting involved other than as arbitrators because of the WOT)
2. Get rid of their excess males.
"A lot of American companies are risking a lot of capital by investing in China."
You've got that right! It's only a matter of time before they confiscate and nationalize them (as Stalin did when he wrapped up Lenin's NEP deception).
Jeff- thought you might be interested.
Rob
I agree, but are we prepared to go to war if let's say we wake up tomorrow and learn that one million chinese soldiers have parachuted into Taiwan?
Think about it.
nick
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.