Posted on 03/07/2006 5:03:48 PM PST by x5452
Posted on Tue, Mar. 07, 2006 Russia appears to remain united with U.S. on Iran nuclear issue By Jonathan S. Landay
WASHINGTON - Russia appeared Tuesday to close ranks with the United States and Europe over Iran's nuclear program, after briefly promoting a plan that would have allowed Iran to conduct small-scale uranium enrichment research, which the Bush administration strongly opposes.
The move indicated that Russia would join the United States and the European Union in sending the impasse over Iran's uranium enrichment program to the U.N. Security Council, which can impose economic and political sanctions.
Russia had faced stiff U.S. and European opposition to its plan to allow Iran to conduct small-scale uranium enrichment work in return for postponing an industrial-size effort for up to nine years. Iran has threatened to start such a large effort if the issue goes to the Security Council.
"There is no compromise new Russian proposal," Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov asserted during a news conference with Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice before a White House meeting with President Bush.
Enrichment produces low-enriched uranium for power plants and highly enriched uranium for nuclear weapons.
The 35-nation board of the U.N. International Atomic Energy Agency voted Feb. 4 to send the issue to the Security Council. But it agreed to allow a month for a diplomatic resolution at the suggestion of Russia and China, which have hefty financial interests in oil-rich Iran.
The board was expected to wrap up a meeting at IAEA headquarters in Vienna, Austria, on Wednesday without reconsidering its decision, clearing the way for Security Council deliberations.
U.S. and European officials are demanding that Tehran abandon all enrichment activities because of suspicions that Iran is secretly developing a nuclear arsenal, a charge Iranian officials deny.
Lavrov said consultations that Russia has held recently with Iranian, European, U.S., Chinese and U.N. officials concerned only a Russian plan to form a joint venture with Iran to produce low-enriched uranium fuel in Russia for shipment to power plants in Iran.
But a U.S. official and a diplomat close to the IAEA, both of whom requested anonymity because of the sensitivity of the issue, said Russia had been informally promoting the compromise as a possible way to defuse the crisis.
"We haven't seen the presentation in writing," said the diplomat.
The U.S. official said Lavrov presented the idea to Rice at a dinner on Monday, but "disclaimed" that it was a Russian proposal.
Rice, he said, "made crystal clear" that the United States opposed such a plan, a stance she reiterated at the news conference.
"Enrichment ... on Iranian soil is not acceptable because of the proliferation risks," she said.
EU diplomats said France, Britain and Germany - which were spearheading negotiations with Iran - also opposed any plan that would allow Iran to conduct any enrichment work.
Iran insists it has the right to enrichment for peaceful purposes under the Non-Proliferation Treaty, the basis of the global system to prevent the spread of nuclear arms.
The IAEA board of governors found that Iran had breached its treaty obligations by concealing its enrichment program for 18 years and failing to account for many activities, including purchases of weapons-related know-how from a Pakistani-led smuggling ring.
Vice President Dick Cheney warned Tuesday that the international community would "not allow Iran to have a nuclear weapon" and "is prepared to impose meaningful consequences" on Tehran if it refuses to abandon its program.
"The United States is keeping all options on the table," Cheney told AIPAC, a pro-Israel lobbying group, in Washington.
"To: x5452
You are some kind of Russian agent. "
And there are about 5 more. Remarkably, they are often US veterans with many contacts in Special Ops and they often have Russian wives, ergo the "Russian Wives Club".
"Guess that makes me an agent of Russia."
Right Again!
So, what do you think about the double bitch slap the US gave Putie this week?
Two big improvements for Ukraine.
First WTO and now they repealed Jackson Vanik!
Tough one to lose, jb6.
"It sounds like Ukrainian thugs to me"
I see you had no explanation for Putie selling gas 60% below cost to his own people and industry.
Are you sure that ain't communism?
Well if that is not, certainly this is.
http://www.lietuvos.net/istorija/communism/
Thanks. I am now aware of it.
It makes perfect sense. I've run into this kind of presence in the past. It's their output that is surprising.
You support Soros in Georgia, Ukraine, and the rest of East Europe.
You quote from anti-Bush Ukranian web sites.
You call direct quotes of the Secretary of State Rice's comments 'the work of the KGB'.
You have zero credibility.
1. Note that GarySPFC, and Romanov who will probably chime in at some point both support Secretary Rice's position and are former Military. Spanalot refuses to say whether he answered the call up.
2. Please go to this site:
http://eng.maidanua.org/
Spanalot posts from this reguraly, i'll be happy to show you the posts if you like.
This site is anti Russia, but also anti-capitalism, and anti-Bush. Does that seem like a conservative source to you?
3.
SECRETARY RICE: On the Russians, we certainly have had our differences. We've certainly had our commonalities as well. I think the President retains a very good relationship with President Putin. Obviously we are very concerned particularly about some of the elements of democratization in Russia that seem to be going in the wrong direction. This is not the Soviet Union; let's not overstate the case. I was a Soviet specialist. I can tell you that Russia bears almost no resemblance to the Soviet Union.
http://www.state.gov/secretary/rm/2006/60969.htm
SECRETARY RICE: I very well know Mr. Medvedev. We have talked on a number of occasions.
But could I go back to the broader question here, which you began to ask? How do we see development of U.S.-Russian relations? Is Russia a strategic partner? Russia is not a strategic enemy or we are not against Russia. It is a country with which we have developed excellent relations over a very long period of time now, really going back to the period of perestroika and the Soviet Union and continuing. And I think that President Bush and President Putin have gained a respect for each other and that they work very well together.
So we see Russia as a strategic partner moving forward. We see Russia as a strategic partner in the war on terrorism. We see Russia as a strategic partner in stopping the spread of weapons of mass destruction. We see Russia as a strategic partner in solving regional issues, like the Balkans or the Middle East.
http://www.state.gov/secretary/rm/2005/44968.htm
Now one might wonder is Rice informed to make such conclusions? Well let's checkout her bio:
At Stanford, she was a member of the Center for International Security and Arms Control from 1981-1986 (currently the Center for International Security And Cooperation), a Senior Fellow of the Institute for International Studies, and a Fellow (by courtesy) of the Hoover Institution. Her books include Germany Unified and Europe Transformed (1995) with Philip Zelikow, The Gorbachev Era (1986) with Alexander Dallin, and Uncertain Allegiance: The Soviet Union and the Czechoslovak Army (1984). She also has written numerous articles on Soviet and East European foreign and defense policy, and has addressed audiences in settings ranging from the U.S. Ambassador's Residence in Moscow to the Commonwealth Club to the 1992 and 2000 Republican National Conventions.
From 1989 through March 1991, the period of German reunification and the final days of the Soviet Union, she served in the Bush Administration as Director, and then Senior Director, of Soviet and East European Affairs in the National Security Council, and a Special Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs. In 1986, while an international affairs fellow of the Council on Foreign Relations, she served as Special Assistant to the Director of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. In 1997, she served on the Federal Advisory Committee on Gender -- Integrated Training in the Military.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/nsc/ricebio.html
4.
http://wwwa.house.gov/international_relations/108/pau120704.htm
Statement on "Ukraine’s Election: Next Steps"
House International Relations Committee
7 December, 2004
Ron Paul, M.D., Member of Congress
(Libertarian Republican from Texas)
Mr. Chairman: President Bush said last week that, "Any election (in Ukraine), if there is one, ought to be free from any foreign influence." I agree with the President wholeheartedly. Unfortunately, it seems that several U.S. government agencies saw things differently and sent U.S. taxpayer dollars into Ukraine in attempt to influence the outcome.
We do not know exactly how many millions - or tens of millions - of dollars the United States government spent on the presidential election in Ukraine. We do know that much of that money was targeted to assist one particular candidate, and that through a series of cut-out non-governmental organizations (NGOs) - both American and Ukrainian - millions of dollars ended up in support of the presidential candidate, Viktor Yushchenko.
Let me add that I do not think we should be supporting either of the candidates. While I am certainly no supporter of Viktor Yushchenko, I am not a supporter of his opponent, Viktor Yanukovich, either. Simply, it is none of our business who the Ukrainian people select to be their president. And, if they feel the vote was not fair, it is up to them to work it out.
How did this one-sided US funding in Ukraine come about? While I am afraid we may have seen only the tip of the iceberg, one part that we do know thus far is that the U.S. government, through the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), granted millions of dollars to the Poland-America-Ukraine Cooperation Initiative (PAUCI), which is administered by the U.S.-based Freedom House.
PAUCI then sent U.S. Government funds to numerous Ukrainian non-governmental organizations (NGOs). This would be bad enough and would in itself constitute meddling in the internal affairs of a sovereign nation. But, what is worse is that many of these grantee organizations in Ukraine are blatantly in favor of presidential candidate Viktor Yushchenko.
Consider the Ukrainian NGO International Centre for Policy Studies. It is an organization funded by the U.S. Government through PAUCI, but on its website you will find that the front page in the English section features a prominent orange ribbon, the symbol of Yushchenko’s party and movement. Reading further on, we discover that this NGO was founded by George Soros’s Open Society Institute. And further on we can see that Viktor Yushchenko himself sits on the advisory board!
And this NGO is not the only one the U.S. government funds that is openly supportive of Viktor Yushchenko. The Western Ukraine Regional Training Center, as another example, features a prominent USAID logo on one side of its website’s front page and an orange ribbon of the candidate Yushchenko’s party and movement on the other. By their proximity, the message to Ukrainian readers is clear: the U.S. government supports Yushchenko.
The Center for Political and Law Reforms, another Ukrainian NGO funded by the U.S. government, features a link at the top of its website’s front page to Viktor Yushchenko’s personal website. Yushchenko’s picture is at the top of this US government funded website.
This May, the Virginia-based private management consultancy Development Associates, Inc., was awarded $100 million by the US government "for strengthening national legislatures and other deliberative bodies worldwide." According to the organization’s website, several million dollars from this went to Ukraine in advance of the elections.
As I have said, this may only be the tip of the iceberg. There may be many more such organizations involved in this twisted tale.
It is clear that a significant amount of U.S. taxpayer dollars went to support one candidate in Ukraine. Recall how most of us felt when it became known that the Chinese government was trying to funnel campaign funding to a U.S. presidential campaign. This foreign funding of American elections is rightly illegal. Yet, it appears that that is exactly what we are doing abroad. What we do not know, however, is just how much U.S. government money was spent to influence the outcome of the Ukrainian election.
Dozens of organizations are granted funds under the PAUCI program alone, and this is only one of many programs that funneled dollars into Ukraine. We do not know how many millions of U.S. taxpayer dollars the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) sent to Ukraine through NED’s National Democratic Institute and International Republican Institute. Nor do we know how many other efforts, overt or covert, have been made to support one candidate over the other in Ukraine.
That is what I find so disturbing: there are so many cut-out organizations and sub-grantees that we have no idea how much U.S. government money was really spent on Ukraine, and most importantly how it was spent. Perhaps the several examples of blatant partisan support that we have been able to uncover are but an anomaly. I believe Congress and the American taxpayers have a right to know. I believe we urgently need an investigation by the Government Accounting Office into how much U.S. government money was spent in Ukraine and exactly how it was spent. I would hope very much for the support of Chairman Hyde, Chairman Lugar, Deputy Assistant Secretary Tefft, and my colleagues on the Committee in this request.
President Bush is absolutely correct: elections in Ukraine should be free of foreign influence. It is our job here and now to discover just how far we have violated this very important principle, and to cease any funding of political candidates or campaigns henceforth.
60% below Ukraine's cost is not 60% below gazprom's costs within Russia's borders.
Your very complete commentary is unexpected but most appreciated.
Many of us (me for example) have had difficulty following the inner metamorphosis of Russia and its the many factions. Chechen, for example, had many of us 'going to school' just get an idea of what was basically happening there.
It's abundantly clear that having more and better information should be a key to improved understanding.
Your post required certain effort and I ,for one, thank you again for the courtesy.
Russia does many boneheaded and selfish things, some of which work against our own (America's) interests.
What bothers me and some others here is taking every piece of MSM spin as evidence that Russia is still run by Stalin. This is especially true when the MSM props up Soros acolytes, and socialists as evidence for this.
Rep. Paul is a good man. And a rare honest politician.
You'll note that there are some on here willing to sell out the US and disparage US policy if it flies in the face of what they see as "Orange Ukraine." That, just coincidentally, is also George Soros' position. Frankly, we've become infiltrated with people wanting to influence the US government (and the conservative movement) to the advantage of a foreign government (in this case - Ukraine). They probably laugh about how they have us "fooled."
When confronted with people who call them out on it they resort to name-calling and libel. They've managed to falesly accuse one decorated veteran of being a Soviet. And, they'll stoop at nothing. (Watch the response to this post - the ones calling people names will be the ones to watch)
Anybody that posts from and distributes any information from eng.maidanua.org should automatically be suspected of having socialist anti-American ties. The "craftier" (or at least those who think they are) will try to mask themselves as "anti-Communist" and slander the real anti-Communists. It's a tried and true method and so far has met with some success on here.
If you have time do a little research on the sites that one "Freeper" uses to press his arguments - usually when he's desparaging US military veterans. For example, would you keep posting as a reference ANY materials from a site that publishes the following trash:
From his favorite site:
"www.eng.maidanua.org
"http://eng.maidanua.org/node/390
Two America's illustrated
Harrowing scenes of third world desperation, as the youngest and fittest secured what little food and drinking water was available. Reports of armed gangs scouring the streets, pictures of unburied dead and the lingering threat of water borne disease. As if a war ravaged part of Africa had somehow been lifted and transported to part of the United States."
"http://eng.maidanua.org/node/369"
Ukraine: US Neo-Conservatives at the Gates
Take the worst of the worst mindless Bush supporters in the US, clone them in Ukraine, and you end up with an emerging religious cult that preaches high-minded ideals but believes in – and fully expects and hopes for – Armageddon, death, massive destruction, and the end of the world. "
"In the Beginning...
Submitted by Terry Hallman on Thu, 2005-03-10 06:57.
This weblog (blog) has to begin with the "Doom and Revolution" piece."
http://eng.maidanua.org/node/168
With that part done, and having read hundreds of English-language articles relating to the current state of affairs of US democracy since the time the above piece was published on Maidan, I have to select something that hits near the epicenter of my concerns about the US side.
Even though Maidan is mostly about Ukraine issues and democracy in Ukraine, I will mix, contrast, and compare Ukrainian democracy(new) with US democracy (old)."
And this:
"http://eng.maidanua.org/node/196
Pretty much sums up that "Maidan" organization that a so-called Freeper is a fan of:
"Common Dreams
Common Dreams is a national non-profit citizens' organization working to bring progressive Americans together to promote progressive visions for America's future. Founded in 1997, we are committed to being on the cutting-edge of using the internet as a political organizing tool - and creating new models for internet activism."
http://eng.maidanua.org/node/419
Hmmm.... "Progessive Americans together to promote progressive visions for America's future"
I'll give you three guesses what that means and the first two guesses don't count. And part of the activism appears to be to cause splinters in the conservative movement by posing as conservatives and causing infighting.
Beware those who are quick to label others "communist" - it's a tactic they use to distract attention away from themselves and their true goals. The person who has posted the link to eng.maidan.org on Free Republic has done so on numerous occasions. This to me signifies he has more than just a passing interest in that website and that organization's goals.
Personally, I don't know about you, but I don't think FR is a place for someone how touts a site that calls Bush supporters morons, compares the US to a third world country, states that our democracy has "died" and calls for uniting "Progessive" Americans.
"You have zero credibility."
BWHAHAHAHA --Do you think you and your Putie boot lickers are fooling anyone on this site?
You missed this one.
http://www.lietuvos.net/istorija/communism/
But I didn't forget this one:
http://tukmakov.livejournal.com/136407.html
The source for your lame "temnyki" story that comes from the anti-Semitic, anti-American Red-Brown coalition newspaper "Zavtra" - also linked to the "Progessive" maidan.org website and also linked to the newspaper "Zavtra."
The author of the "temnyki" claim, which you quoted, is Denis Tukmakov - a journalist for "Zavtra" and a Red-Brown coalition member. You have yet to denounce these socialist-nationalist-communist sites you use so one can only surmise that you support them. A statement given credence by your repetitive use of said sites.
Your labeling of American veterans as Soviets, Putin Lackies, and worse shows traits of a Code-Pink fellow traveler.
PS- You don't have to ping me with the Lithuanian website link. I've been to the Museum of Genocide Victims and have met with the staff. But thanks anyway.
You must have me confused with someone that cares about your Russian propaganda.
I don't read Russian and would not mind if it became obsolete.
Do you speak Ukrainian - the source also publishes in Ukrainian, oh, yeah and in English... Nice try to deflect.
And since you claim not to speak Russian how can you ascertain the validity of the nonsense you post based on Russian sources? (Zavtra and the Zavtra journalist's website linked to from eng.maidanua.org) And, since you have repeatedly provided the link for that site do you endorse what they've said about America and the conservative movement?
As far as "propaganda," a laughable accusation, but I expect nothing less from the likes of you. What "GULag" was it your parents were allegedly sent to? You never did back up that claim. And if they were in GULag, they probably spoke Russian (unless they were Western fellow travelers sent there) - so how did you communicate with them? After all, if you're originally from Ukraine, you were so oppressed you weren't allowed to use Ukrainian, but were forced to speak Russian. Your story, as usual is full of holes.. But, again, thanks for the laugh.
"What "GULag" was it your parents were allegedly sent to? You never did back up that claim... But, again, thanks for the laugh."
I did not say - I learned after my first KGB interrogation to NEVER trust a Russian.
The day will come when genocidal, imperious Russian lackeys like yourself will no longer be laughing.
Heh!
"I did not say - I learned after my first KGB interrogation to NEVER trust a Russian. "
HAHAHAHA Thanks for the laugh and a glimpse into your fantasy world. But, wait a sec, you don't speak Russian - how'd you end up in the hands of the KGB? How were they able to "interrogate" you since you don't speak Russian? You won't say because you know it's a lie. And if it were true you wouldn't dare post anything that was originally published by "Zavtra" - true dissidents and oppressed people know exactly what that newspaper stands for.
And btw, "nice" calling an American military member "genocidal" - how's Code Pink these days?
Russia doesn't give a damn about "uniting" with
America on anything. For Russia, America is to be
exploited and used for everything it can get.
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.