Russia, former Soviet republics launch military-political bloc

The Times of India ^ | April 28 2003 | PTI

[knighthawk]

MOSCOW: Russia and five former Soviet republics on Monday launched a new military-political bloc in the East, similar to NATO of the US-led western nations.

At a summit near Dushanbe, leaders of Russia, Armenia, Belorus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan formalised their collective security pact into Collective Security Treaty Organisation (CSTO) with a charter containing an article similar to the article 5 of NATO when an act of aggression on one member-nation would be considered as an aggression on all the member-nations, state-run 'Rossia" channel reported.

"At Monday's session we finally agreed on military and military-political mechanisms, decided to set up a joint headquarters and a rapid deployment force, and made a decision on coordinating political approaches," Russian President Vladimir Putin said in his televised statement at the end of the CSTO summit.

"The purpose of the Collective Security Treaty Organization is to guarantee the security, territorial integrity and sovereignty of its member-countries," he said.

However, key ex-Soviet republics of Ukraine in the west and Uzbekistan in Central Asia have kept themselves out of the Moscow-led military bloc and along with Georgia and Azerbaijan are seeking closer alliance with Washington.

[knighthawk]

Europe-list

If people want on or off this list, please let me know.

[epluribus_2]

let's see... Russians are slavs, Tadzhiks are iranian, Kazazks and Kirghiz are Turks, and Armenians are non of the above. Three of four are islamic, one is catholic, and one is post-marxist orthodox. This ought to work out real well. (Knowing that NATO is just as Diverse, but still wanting to point out how ridiculous this looks when one considers the history of the region)

[epluribus_2]

er three of five.

[Frank_Discussion]

"Collective Security Treaty Organization"

"Collective", eh? Sounds very familliar - Retro to pre-1990...

[Frank_Discussion]

Soviet Chic, as it were...

[BlackElk]

Wait a minute! What about France, Germany, Canada and their collective Belgian poodle? Why can't they join this club?

[genefromjersey]

Does anyone reading this doubt Russia is intensely interested in "re-constituting" the original Soviet Union ?

It won't necessarily be Communist , but I predict it will have most of the attributes of the old Communist state - and a cosmetically modified version of Stalinism.

There is already something nicknamed " Putin-ism " in effect: Major parties setting aside their ( often minor ) differences as a means of consolidating executive prestige and power.

[RussianConservative]

Better not tell Armenians they Catholic, they would kill you for the insult. The Armenian church is independent of both Catholic and Orthodox but is almost identical to Orthodox in practice.

[RussianConservative]

Further Tadziks are not Iranians, as there is no iranian race. Most Iranians persians by race but many other ethnic groups there. Kazaks are not turks either but Mongol-Tatar and half populations is Russian with also many Germans.

[RussianConservative]

Why Soviet Union and not Russian Empire? More historic weight to Russian Empire...500 years then Soviets 70 years. Cold War over, Empire is renitting itself.

[genefromjersey]

Interesting thought ! Will Putin try to become Czar ? ( Re-named " President-for-Life " or some such . )

[genefromjersey]

Interesting thought ! Will Putin try to become Czar ? ( Re-named " President-for-Life " or some such . )

[epluribus_2]

Armenians are in communion with rome, while remaining independant.

Kazakh is a turkic language, not to far off from Osmanli but with it's own proud history.

Persians are called fars, farsi from pars, but they all are in the iranian branch of the indo-iranian family.

[RussianConservative]

Really? Armenians are? Well, not according to my wife, who is half Armenian, her relatives in Armenia and their priests or Armenians I knew in NY. Most hated Rome and were ready to fight if told they Catholic or anything of sort.

Consider that Armenia became Christian in early 300s, predates Rome's schism from Orthodoxy and predates Constantine's establishement of the Orthodox Church in the Roman Empire. Just because the word catholic is used in name, does not mean it is ROMAN catholic or in affiliation with them.

But don't take my word, take the Armanian's word:
The Armenian Church is One, Holy, Apostolic, Catholic, Church. (the catholicity of the Church is understood in terms of the Church's universality throughout time and space. Also, the term should not be confused with the Roman Catholic Church).

The Armenian Church belongs to the Orthodox family of churches, known as the Oriental Orthodox, or Non-Chalcedonian, Churches, i.e., the Armenian, Coptic, Syrian, Ethiopian and Indian Malabar churches.

These are in turn closely allied to Eastern Orthodox Church with work on unification in progess. From same article:

"The Christological controversy continued for centuries, often becoming a matter of political influence and expediency. However, in 1990, the theologians and official representatives of both Eastern and Oriental Orthodox Churches--after years of dialogue and consultations--agreed in a formal statement that their theological understanding, especially their Christology, is "orthodox." The statement called for unity and communion among the Eastern and Oriental Churches and as such, the document was sent to the respective leaders of the participating churches for formal approval."

Persians are called fars, farsi from pars, but they all are in the iranian branch of the indo-iranian family.

Fine and good, but that like saying that all Europeans are kin and will stick togather because all Europeans part of indo-european group.

As for Kazakhstan, you are right about the language, but fact is, Kazakhs, to include those of mixed Russian ancestory, are only 53% population and after massive Russian migration. Kazakhstan directly dependent on Russia for business/economy.

[epluribus_2]

I think I may be misled by the term Armenian Catholic but I read this as meaning the two were in communion:

I agree on the now very mixed populations of what was an all turkic kazakhstan historically.

...

These churches are subdivided into two groups: Western and Eastern. At the present time there exists just one Western Church, known also as the Roman or Latin Church, and spread throughout the world. Besides it there exist in the Catholic Church twenty one Eastern Churches, among them the Armenian Catholic Church. This difference first arose as a result of the division of the Byzantine Empire, which had played an enormous role in the spread of Christianity, into eastern and western parts. The churches of the western part of Byzantium were called Western and those of the eastern, Eastern. When Christianity spread beyond the bounds of the Byzantine Empire, specifically to Armenia, Persia, and India, the churches of these countries also became part of the Eastern. Gradually, as a result of religious, political, and historical causes, all the western churches united under the headship of the Roman Church and her Bishop - who, being the successor of the Apostles Peter, was the head of the entire Catholic Church. The development of the Eastern Churches had a more independent character, and in them there arose traditions of their own, which are to be seen today as well. At the head of the hierarchy of each of these churches stood a reigning bishop, called "Patriarch" or "Metropolitan." The Roman Bishop was, besides, the Patriarch of the West.

In this communion of Churches the Bishop of the Roman Church, the successor of Peter, the Roman Pope has a specific role of service: the service as head of the Universal Church. Communion with the Roman Church and its bishop were in ancient times considered as necessary conditions for preserving the fullness of the true faith. Because of various historical circumstances many of the eastern churches broke communion with the See of Rome. Although attempts to reestablish this communion were undertaken, they were as a rule unsuccessful. The churches which found themselves outside this communion called themselves "Orthodox Churches," having the view that they preserved the authentic Christian faith. Those who recognized the headship of the Bishop of Rome were called "catholic," that is, submitted to the Universal Church. Gradually these words became known as they are today as the names of the confessions.

Although these eastern churches as a whole basically did not reestablish a hierarchical communion with the See of Rome, at various periods in their histories various parts did return to communion with the Roman Church and the Bishop of Rome. Therefore there exist today the Eastern Catholic Churches beside the Eastern Churches not in communion with Rome. Catholics believe that they nonetheless exist in a certain communion with these various churches outside communion with Rome, albeit not a full communion. The Armenian Catholic Church, headed by its own Patriarch- Catholicos- and in full communion with the See of Rome, is one of these Eastern Catholic Churches. The theological and spiritual traditions of the Armenian Catholic Church relate it to the Armenian Apostolic Church.

http://armeniancatholic.ru

[RussianConservative]

The Eastern Orthodox churchs are not independent but in communion with each other forming the Eastern Orthodox church. We don't have pope, no one ring to rule us all...but we are all bound togather as one. Much more republican structure.