Posted on 02/02/2006 5:45:59 PM PST by Tailgunner Joe
The recent squabbles between Russia and Ukraine, Moldova, and Georgia over gas have shed light on an interesting symbiotic relationship between Russia's National Security Concept, signed in March 2000, and Russia's Energy Strategy adopted in August 2003.
The most significant "modification" of Russia's National Security Concept appears to be an expanded role given to the use of energy as the primary lever of Russian foreign policy.
The "Energy Strategy of Russia Up To 2020," while not formally a part of the National Security Concept, has become a road map for Russian foreign policy. According to the Energy Ministry's website: "Russia possesses large resources of energy and has a powerful fuel and energy complex that serves as the foundation for its economic development and is an instrument for implementing domestic and foreign policy. The role of the country in world energy markets determines its geopolitical influence."
Putin was clearly guided by the text of the energy strategy when he spoke on 22 December 2005, at the height of the Ukrainian-Russian "gas war." "Our country enjoys a natural competitive advantage, and has natural and technological capabilities for taking more prominent positions on the energy market," Putin said. "We must use these positions in the interests of the whole international community, but not to the detriment of our national interests."
Price Increase
Among the factors that likely led to the adoption of the energy strategy three years ago are:
* A dramatic increase in the price of oil and gas, which most experts believe will not drop significantly in the foreseeable future
* The West's preoccupation with the war on terrorism and the war in Iraq
* Iran's increasing international isolation diminished its hopes that it could become an alternative supplier of natural gas in Eurasia
In a nutshell, it became clear that energy as a policy tool was cheaper than tanks and missiles; Russian energy policy is able to reach those distant lands where the underpaid and demoralized Russian military would never dare venture.
Threats Persists
Within weeks of his election as Russian president in March 2000,
Vladimir Putin signed the National Security Concept of the Russian Federation, which subsequently became known as the Putin Doctrine. This doctrine identified the main international threats to Russia to be:
* The possible appearance of foreign military bases and large military contingents in direct proximity to Russia's borders
* The danger of weakening the political, economic, and military influence of Russia in the world
* The strengthening of military-political blocs and unions, above all the eastward enlargement of NATO
* The weakening of the integration processes in the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS)
At the time the concept was drafted, Russia was still shaken by the financial crisis of August 1998 and the disruption of economic relations with the West. "Stratfor Global Intelligence" then commented that "the Russians felt they had little to lose" and adopted a concept that allowed for a nuclear first strike "in response to large-scale aggression using conventional weapons in situations critical to the national security of the Russian Federation."
In some respects, Russia has succeeded since 2000 in reinforcing its position vis-a-vis the CIS -- and, thus, mollifying the threats. In 2000, Russia moved rapidly to create the Eurasian Economic Community -- a sort of Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Zone once promulgated by pre-World War II Japan -- which consists of Russia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, and most recently, Uzbekistan. This Eurasian Economic Community, coupled with Russia's active use of energy politics in the region, has helped enhance Russia's leading role in Central Asia while achieving a certain reintegration of the CIS countries.
In other respects, however, recent Russian behavior suggests that its perceptions of external threats not only have remained unchanged, but also have taken on greater urgency.
The rise of international terrorism and the U.S. War On Terror radically altered geopolitics and brought U.S.-led forces into Central Asia in order to defeat Al-Qaeda forces operating in Afghanistan. Russia initially went along with these Western intrusions into what had traditionally been its sphere of influence, but by 2005 felt compelled to seek the removal of U.S. bases from its periphery and reestablish its own security umbrella in the region.
Now, the feared and unwanted Western bases "in direct proximity" to Russia in Central Asia that were established in the wake of 9/11 are in the process of being partially dismantled. Uzbek President Islam Karimov has ordered the United States to close down its bases in his country, while in Kyrgyzstan the leases are being renegotiated.
In other areas, however, the threat has grown. The victory of the Rose Revolution in Georgia in November 2003 and the Orange Revolution in Ukraine 13 months later gave new impetus to those two countries' aspirations to NATO membership and the possibility that they might allow NATO bases on their territory.
This has evoked harsh comments from Russia's military top brass. According to a report by "The Moscow Times" on 2 December 2005, Yury Baluyevsky, the chief of the General Staff, said: "Attempts are being observed to weaken the commonwealth through recruitment of CIS states into NATO." Baluyevsky added: "Russia will defend its interests vis-a-vis this process."
It was not a coincidence that Baluyevsky made his remarks at the height of the Ukrainian-Russian gas standoff, a conflict which many interpreted as Russian pressure on Ukraine to abandon its pro-Western ways and return to the Russian fold.
"In a nutshell, it became clear that energy as a policy tool was cheaper than tanks and missiles; Russian energy policy is able to reach those distant lands where the underpaid and demoralized Russian military would never dare venture. "
This Weapon of Gas Destruction is a double edged sword.
Petro prices are plummeting
http://www.bloomberg.com/markets/commodities/energyprices.html
and another 3 weeks of this and Putin will be bankrupt - just like the communists went bankrupt in the 90's.
Putie Pingie
.) Why do you use "Zavtra" and "Zavtra" journalists in your rebuttals to people?
2.) Do you endorse "Zavtra" or will you condemn it?
3.) In which country's army did you serve?
4.) If you were eligible to serve in our great nation's military, why didn't you?
5.) At which GULag were your parents held?
6.) Under what article where they held?
7.) Do you renounce the anti-Semitism, Anti-Americanism, and Anti-Capitalism that your source, "Zavtra" publishes on a daily basis?
Att: All Freepers,
Compare the following "talking points directive" issued by the Kremlin after a "mad slasher" incident with the subsequent post by jb6 and Romanov on the same day.
xxxxxxx
"The objectives of media reaction.....
• maximum connection of the party “Rodina” with nationalist ideology and placing the responsibility for what is happening on the party;"
xxxxx
Posted by Romanov to jb6
On News/Activism 01/12/2006 8:01:20 PM EST · 36 of 36
"One interesting thing to come out of this despicable act is Rodina and its leader Rogozin were very quick to condemn in very harsh language the skinhead and those who think like him. (Remember - this was a party accused of being anti-semitic [with good reason])."
xxx
Is it any surprise that a review of all posts by jb6 and Romanov reveals that they are 95% spin doctoring for the Kremlin?
Wow, you actually dug out a pretty accurate report. Highlights what I have been saying. The Western-leaning advisors have been steadily losing their influence because of the constant drum-beat of the "America is evil in everything it does" advisors who don't realize the Cold War is over. They have lost their power because of the extremely negative and usually incorrect reports in the media regarding Russia. Makes the "Cold Warriors" in Russia incorrectly appear correct.
We have the same reactionaries here. Sad thing is, just like the overwrought Russian reactionaries, our reactionaries push people in the wrong direction.
But, I guess you haven't figured out that this article vindicates what GarySpFc, Jb6, x5452, and others have been articulating. (Instead the tendency of late has been to ignore those indicators and trash the people spelling it out.) Russia has designs on regional power and will use their resources as a means to the ends. Just like we do, just like Britain does, Germany, France, it's called geo-politics. It's our job (the US) to figure a way to get the Russians to do things that don't directly confront our interests. In order to do this correctly we need to understand how they look at the world.
Ok spanalot, explain how what I wrote about Rogozin is an endorsement of what he stands for, or follows in line with the fake temnyki that your anti-semitic source published?
Of course please keep posting what I wrote over and over. It highlights your woeful English comprehension "skills."
And before I forget:
1.) Why do you use "Zavtra" and "Zavtra" journalists in your rebuttals to people?
2.) Do you endorse "Zavtra" or will you condemn it?
3.) In which country's army did you serve?
4.) If you were eligible to serve in our great nation's military, why didn't you?
5.) At which GULag were your parents held?
6.) Under what article where they held?
7.) Do you renounce the anti-Semitism, Anti-Americanism, and Anti-Capitalism that your source, "Zavtra" publishes on a daily basis?
You'd be able to answer them if you were able to stick to a.) your story and b.) the truth.
Lets be frank gentlemen - each of you has had a rabid reaction to all those here at FR who have criticized the Kremlins power grab.
Below is a typical ham handed threat to those that look into Putie's eyes and don't see a friend.
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Paperwork
From Romanov | 01/31/2006 9:53:17 PM EST new
Spanalot,
I've warned you before. That's the last time. Expect to be hearing from me via legal channels.
xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Romanov, its rather hypocritical to send this and then have the temerity to cry "forgery" after it is publicized.
I know the Russians think they are acting in their own interests. I just disagree. Just like I disagree that its in Russia's interests to support Iran, Chavez, Kim Jong-Il and all the rest of America's enemies. In fact, I think it's a really bad idea which will come back to haunt them.
Spanalot,
Here's what I wrote:
""One interesting thing to come out of this despicable act is Rodina and its leader Rogozin were very quick to condemn in very harsh language the skinhead and those who think like him. (Remember - this was a party accused of being anti-semitic [with good reason])."
You claim I wrote this because the anti-Semitic newspaper "Zavtra" published a fake "temnyki" ordering the press to slam Rogozin. Which means you think Rogozin is a good guy.
Ok, let's see what the official US position is vis-a-vis Rogozin and his party:
"MOSCOW (Interfax) - Leader of the Rodina (Homeland) parliamentary group Dmitry Rogozin has categorically disagreed with statements that the Rodina party made anti-Semitic remarks, for which it was blamed in a U.S. Department of State report about anti-Semitism in various countries.
"I would call it filthy slander. We are not dealing with such rubbish," Rogozin told journalists on Wednesday in comments on the report."
The excerpt from the US State Dept report:
"It also points at Anti-Semitic statements of many Russian politicians, in particular, representatives of Rodina (Homeland), Communist and LDPR parties. " (note: Rogozin is the leader of Rodina)
So, you going to contact the US Dept of State and tell them their Kremlin lackies and Putinites? Let's see, my position on this is in-line with Sec. Rice's position. Your position is in line with Rogozin, the Communist Party and Zhirinovsky's party. Shame on you.
This is Putin's year, he is to host the G-8 Summit and he said it was to be about ENERGY SECURITY. What, maybe Putin is now the 'oil and gas' cartel?
"I know the Russians think they are acting in their own interests. I just disagree. Just like I disagree that its in Russia's interests to support Iran, Chavez, Kim Jong-Il and all the rest of America's enemies. In fact, I think it's a really bad idea which will come back to haunt them."
I can't argue with that position as I have made these same statements. But for that (explaining why Russia does what they do), I am labeled a "traitor."
Didn't Bush say the US and Russia were exploring ways of increasing the amount of Russian oil we import? And didn't OPEC try really hard to get Russia to join? Putin turned them down. OPEC wanted to control Russia because it ALSO uses oil/gas as a foreign policy tool.
This: "... "Zavtra" published a fake "temnyki" ordering the press to slam Rogozin."
Should actually be:
"Y... "Zavtra" published a fake "temnyki" it claimed was from the Kremlin ordering the press to slam Rogozin."
This: "... "Zavtra" published a fake "temnyki" ordering the press to slam Rogozin."
Should actually be:
"Y... "Zavtra" published a fake "temnyki" it claimed was from the Kremlin ordering the press to slam Rogozin."
xxxx
What's the matter? Did you transcibe the "Temnyky" Temnyky incorrectly?
ping
So where are your Zavtra Tymniki, which you refuse to post and site? Did you leave the URL in the Gulag you grew up in?
When resources are private property, that's called freedom. When the government controls the natural resources we call that socialism. Putin is introducing third way fascist economics to Russia.==
I would rather agree with you here. Just one remark. If the natural resources go to the private hands of such figure as Hodorkovskii then I would rather disagree.
If you want assess Hodorkovskii then think Enron but much much much dirtier.
Just like I disagree that its in Russia's interests to support Iran, Chavez, Kim Jong-Il and all the rest of America's enemies. In fact, I think it's a really bad idea which will come back to haunt them.==
I think Russia just nor support them. Russia is just making money in vague situation. And just remember that those countries are neibors of Russia (include China and except Chavez). If Russia will go into conflict with them then it will trouble her borders.
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.