Cyrill Vatomsky, Where All Politics Are Global

In April of this year Russian President Putin declared that Russia declare moratorium on adherence to restrictions set up in the Conventional Armed Forces in Europe (CFE) Treaty. Today he  made good on the promise.

There has been quite a bit of point counter point arguments between Russia and NATO over the years regarding the treaty but the basic disagreement goes to the heart of the philosophical differences between the current Russian position and that of the West.

The original CFE Treaty took some 10 years to negotiate and it was signed in November 1990 by 30 countries:

Since the treaty came from and was still a part of the Cold War, initial CFE limitations were set up to achieve a balance between existing military blocks or alliances: NATO and the Warsaw Pact. Each block was limited to 20,000 tanks, 20,000 artillery pieces, 30,000 armored combat vehicles,  6,800 combat aircraft and 2,000 attack helicopters.

Subsequent geopolitical disaster of the fall of the USSR and the Warsaw Pact, as Mr. Putin eloquently called it, completely changed the military, but most importantly political and philosophical landscape of Europe. The idea of pan European unity became possible, old captive Warsaw Pact members abandoned their forced allegiance and decidedly moved towards Europe eventually integrating themselves into the European Union and NATO, completely distorting the original CFE regime.

Naturally, further negotiations were necessary and in November 1999, 9 years later to the day, the Adapted Conventional Armed Forces in Europe Treaty was signed. It is worth to note that Boris Yeltsin was still President of Russian Federation. The main difference between the original and adapted treaties reflected the sea of change in philosophical approach of how Europe looked at itself. Instead of a the Cold War standoff between the two adversary alliances, the troop ceilings were to be replaced with a ceilings based on each of country and /or adjacent territory . The principle of two rival gangs was replaced with the principle of a community. Or so it was envisioned.

Results of the Adapted Treaty were less then spectacular, since it never went into effect. September 11th 2001 not only distracted attention from the treaty but, what was worse, the Adapted Treaty became a negotiating chip between NATO, US, Russia and multiple minor signatories. Instead of pushing forward towards complete ratification of the treaty and bringing legality to the new concept of Europe, unnecessary bickering  continued. Still basking in its past glory and happy with enlargement, NATO decided to use Russian military presence in Georgia and Moldova to apply pressure on Russia. This marginally related issue did not yield anything of substance and as a result, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Russia and Ukraine are the only parties that ratified the treaty. It is quite shameful that none of the European countires managed to break ranks and move ahead with what was most definitely a major positive step forward for Europe.

Was excessive Russian military presence in "flank" areas a concern? Yes it was. Was it worth postponing ratification of the Adapted CFE treaty that had so many positive implications? Not at all. This is yet another miscalculation from the Bush Administration that keep piling on and on.

Although Russia is one of the four countries that actually did ratify the Adapted Treaty, it is not without blame. And here comes the fundamental philosophical difference between current Russian policy and the new concept of Europe that went into the foundation of the treaty. The government of Vladimir Putin still thinks in terms of spheres of influence, in terms of territorial control rather than economic and social integration. Putin stubbornly tries grasping at straws of old imperial grandeur, harassing Georgia and other neighbors. This return to the rival gang view that seemed to be on its way out is back.

Russia considers NATO expansion as a threat to itself, which also reflects Russia's idiosyncratic relationship with its past. It is no longer the communist dictatorship out to impose its communist ideology over everyone, but it cherishes what it used to be. After all, Putin did call the fall of the USSR the greatest geopolitical disaster of the XXth century. The 6 "exceptional circumstances" that Russia lists as the rationale to  suspend the treaty come exactly from the adversary standoff mentality. The last one about the Baltic states is simply laughable. I must add here that there are some vivid discrepancies between the Russian and English versions of the reference memo to the Presidential decree published at Kremlin.ru.

2. The excessive parties to the CFE Treaty that belong to NATO, and the exclusive group that formed among CFE Treaty members as a result of the widening of the alliance;

3. The negative impact of the planned deployment of America's conventional forces in Bulgaria and Romania because of this exclusive group mentality;

4. The failure of a number of parties of the CFE Treaty to comply with the political obligations contained in the Istanbul Agreements relating to the early ratification of the Adapted Treaty;

5. The failure of Hungary, Poland, Slovakia and the Czech Republic to comply with commitments accepted in Istanbul to adjust their territorial ceilings;

6. Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania’s failure to participate in the CFE Treaty has adverse effects on Russia’s ability to implement its political commitments to military containment in the northwestern part of the Russian Federation. Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania’s actions result in a territory in which there are no restrictions on the deployment of conventional forces, including other countries’ forces.

Russia is afraid of the ever growing Estonian army?

Russian military analyst Aleksandr Golts, speaking to RFE/RL's Russian Service, called Putin's decision "a deeply unfriendly act," adding: "The irony is that even though NATO countries haven't ratified the adapted agreement, they all observe its terms. No one is going over the prescribed limit."

A deeply unfriendly act indeed. With a stroke of a pen Putin annuls almost 3 decades of negotiations and significant progress.

It fits quite well with the tension building course Putin has embarked on since his Munich speech, including recent threats to target more missiles at Europe for wanting to build a missile defense shield.

Sean from Sean's Russia Blog suggests nothing more than symbolism

There is also no doubt that talk about a "New Cold War" will get another gasp of life even though there seems to be an early consensus that Russia's move is mostly symbolic. "Stability" between European countries is hardly at risk. The bigger risks to stability are increasing tensions over immigration, Islam, and European integration show within European countries, not between them. Plus Russia's influence over Europe does not reside in its hard power, but in its economic soft power. The real area of global insecurity stretches across the Central Asia and the Middle East.

All quite true, but it still begets the question "why?" If this is nothing more then a symbol or an attempt to further solidify his base at home before elections, than the trade off of further aggravating already tense relations with the West is hardly adequate.

I frankly have very little doubt this is not a cosmetic or symbolic move. It fits all too well with the recent pattern of Russian foreign policy. It longs for the lost former glory and power while aware it can't sustain a new Cold War. I also have very little doubt there will be quite a lot of expressed support for Putin's move from Russian Internet users. One of them had recently affectionately mentioned an old Russian saying to me: "God rid us of our friends and we will fight off our enemies ourselves." It is a chilling sentiment if it can take over a society.

Just consider what would our reaction to the recent pattern of Putin's hostility be if  we thought Russia could sustain and win a new Cold War. This will most certainly be a subject tomorrow on my Embassy of the New World Order radio show on KSCO. 11 AM PST

 

 

 

 

Back in Russia there was an old joke about a young surgeon right out of college performing his first surgery, then frustrated at his own failure, he started slashing the poor patient yelling "this one doesn't work, bring me another one!" I know: gross, but illustrative. Russia seems to have a problem with getting bilateral agreements to join WTO. In order to join this heir to GATT, any applicant must conclude bilateral negotiations with every single existing member. Russia has been so pushy lately, using economic policy for purposes of political pressure, some countries like Georgia that was hit by a wine and mineral water embargo just seem to balk.

What does a frustrated President of Russia have to do in this situation? Call for another body. Mr. Putin wants to create his own WTO, since he can't get into the real thing. A temper tantrum to be sure; not as gross, but still illustrative.

Naturally, Mr. Putin immediately got supporters for his grandiose idea of setting his own skull and bones: the biggest friend of all Russians (according to the polls, no less) Narsultan Nazarbaev, the democratically self elected President of Kazakhstan wants to join in. Kazakhstan is not currently a WTO member.

Mr. Putin insisted that "International organizations are in need of restructuring and modernization."

"These structures that were created for many active players look outdated, undemocratic and awkward, unable to consider changing balance of power" ... "One can see this in the stalled Doha Round of the WTO" - said the Russian President according to the Vzglyad Business Daily , that adds also that old methods do not work in new conditions, whatever it means. USA Today offers this version :

Putin said the stalled Doha round of global trade talks were a sign of the problems with the organization: "Old methods of decision-making at times don't work.".

Again, whatever it means. Too bad USA Today leaves out some of the more interesting quotes from Vzglyad Business Daily.

Medvedev, Russian First (or is it second) Deputy Prime Minister and at the same time Gazprom Chairman of the Board is in agreement. To be sure, some accusations of protectionism Putin and Medvedev level against developed western economies are quite true and should make the US and Europe feel ashamed. These protectionist barriers need to go.

It is however amusing to hear this from the President of Russia who had presided over a de-facto nationalization program creating a situation in Russia when state investments in the economy just recently surpassed private sector investments. It is also amusing to hear Medvedev's "When someone wants to take something away from somebody; that someone will without exception loose something of his own". No kidding, Sherlock. Go tell this to Shell or BP, mister Chairman of the Board of Gazprom.

Jokes aside, however, Putin's and Medvedev's comments should be taken very seriously. They don't only illustrate frustration of people tired of the slow process; they suggest a certain mindset that an international super body like WTO needs to react to changing balance of power - economic or otherwise. This is exactly the opposite to what WTO needs to be - an impartial arbiter of economic disputes. Putin's suggestion is also quite a bit arrogant, since WTO is not something that was concocted recently. It took half a century to become what it is now. Putin's little plan is nothing but a regional trading setup like NAFTA. Any claim of some grandiose future and an alternative to WTO is yet another example of longing for lost power of the USSR and the bypolar world. To support this general idea Putin seems to be invoking the tried old claim of the decline of the developed capitalism.

"The world is indeed changing before our eyes. Countries that yesterday seemed hopelessly behind are today the fastest growing economies of the world," Putin told a gathering of business leaders and government officials at an economic forum in Russia's second-largest city of St. Petersburg according to AP via CNN.  

"If, 50 years ago, 60 percent of the world's GDP came from G-7 countries, then today it is the other way around," he said.

Coming home from the last week G-8 meeting and immediately juxtaposing himself and his country to the old G-7 suggests he received a very cold shoulder in Germany. Mr. Putin needs to decide for himself if he wants to be a member of the good old boys or whether he wants to lead the pitchfork brigade to topple it. If Mr. Putin decides to abandon G-8, he might not get to be the rebel leader. China could easily overshadow Russia's economic prowess and claim the leadership ring, since without China's 15% of World's GDP Mr. Putin's claim would be meaningless.

Putin also said that global financial markets have evolved around "one or two" currencies -- an apparent reference to the euro and the dollar -- and their fluctuations often have highly negative effects on many countries' economies and financial reserves.

"There can be only one answer to this challenge: the creation of several world currencies, several financial centers," he said.

Here is yet another pipe dream. The more I read about Mr. Puttin's speech while writing this piece, the more I see how utterly ignorant he is about the fundamentals of capitalism. He thinks the global financial system can be changed by a decree. He is not alone, of course. Lots of conspiracy theory nutcases think it is run by decrees, but what a company to keep!

Russia's WTO ascension is a very complex issue. On one hand, blocking it from WTO membership will only exacerbate its problems and will reinforce the paranoid view of the West that a lot of people in Russia seem to be developing. On the other hand, if Russia becomes a WTO member before the Ukraine, does anyone have any doubts Russia would try to use its membership as an instrument of political pressure, just like Georgia does now?

With either Medvedev or Ivanov posed to be Putin's heirs, there isn't much one can expect in terms of change. After all, Mr. Medvedev is on record suggesting that preventing Gazprom from becoming an integrated vertical natural gas supplier in UK by blocking its potential takeover of Centrica would "mean the end of real capitalism" The man does not understand that real capitalism is where monopolies like his own Gazprom are legally prevented from existence.

Overall, however, Russia needs to become a WTO member and the sooner the better. WTO membership will help tame the feeling of isolation and weird aspirations of being a counterweight to the capitalist west. It will start molding Russian wild state capitalist kleptocracy into something more humane. In the long run it might help break up state monopolies and with them might help loosen the stranglehold the current crop of Putin's oligarchs has over Russian politics and government. Mr. Putin's current apprehension about the WTO is very easy to understand:

'Globalization does not respect spheres of influence,' said Peter Mandelson, the European Union trade commissioner. 'Membership in the WTO is Russia`s ticket to a rules-based system.'

There is a fairly simple explanation for Mr. Putin's smug threat to target Europe with missiles. One only needs to recall what was going on in Europe in the early 1980-s, According to John c. Kornblum, former US ambassador to Germany:

This is exactly what President Putin is aiming at:


The plan is to recreate the old nuclear war fears. I frankly have no way to predict or even to speculate whether Putin's plan will succeed or backfire. I do hope that the Europeans in general and Germans in particular will remember at least two things:

• Deployment of Pershings most certainly drove Russia to the negotiation table. Mikhail Gorbachev admitted this much in an interview to Radio Echo Moskvy[link in Russian only]:

• It was about deployment of Pershings - nuclear missiles after all - not a harmless radar station and missile interceptors. One thing is to have someone target missiles at you because you have missiles targeted at them, quite another thing is to have somebody targeting you because you are trying to protect yourself. If the intellectually superior Europeans understand this distinction, then Putin's gambit will fail.
  

There is an additional wedge he is trying to drive in here. He most certainly will expect the more lenient Western Europe to pressure rowdy and unfriendly Eastern Europe, notably Poland and Czech Republic to abandon cooperation with the US missile defense plans. It is only yet another example of how Russia is forcing Europe to take the solidarity test. Energy blackmail over the last year and a half was hardly different. Will Europe stand together with those they have invited and accepted into their Union? So far it had not.

If Putin succeeds in driving this wedge and fanning another hysteria in Germany and elsewhere in Europe, this will be a sorry testament to Europe's state of mind. I do hope this will not have to come. But I have to admit that I have my doubts.

As always - this is not a transcript, only a brief outline of the radio show. Go to the blog site and click on "listen" button there when it is available to listen to shows and podcasts. Either listen there or download to your podcast software.

Opening with Hugo Chavez closing RCTV down. Similarities with Putin's policies are obvious. Also obvious is that Chavez is not against media moguls, he is fine with corporations that support him. Just like Putin is. And just like Mussolini was. Fascism, once again is a form of socialism where government and monopolism merge.

Moving on to other subjects, involving recently blogged ones like the Moscow Mayor Luzkov's law suits, rediculous ban on  export of medical specimen as well as perceptions by Russian people of who their friends and foes are.

I just came back from an exciting and always invigorating Memorial Day weekend trip to London, only to read an interview with Economist's Edward Lucas at Marginalia blog. I spent quite some time there in wandering around town, ST. Paul, Westminster Abbey, looking among other things at memorials to those perished over the XX-th century. Beds of red poppies in England always produce bitter sweet butterflies in my stomach. What Sacrifice!

You want scary? Here is your scary thought for the week from Edward Lucas:

It is scary not because of how imposing, assertive and in the long run, aggressive Russia has become. There is a cold chill of Munich and betrayal of Poland oozing from this sentiment. Will The West betray the Balts again?

On the emotional level, the first reaction is resentment. These countries are all NATO members. This can't be. US and UK will not forget and forgo NATO members, even if Europe will. And European Union is different from NATO, isn't it?

But then I look at the rise of petty isolationism, the rise of petty nationalistic temper tantrums in the US both on the left and on the right and realize that if these people ever get to power in the USA, they will forgo the Balts just like they want to forgo Iraqi people now and cut and run in the face of difficulties or, in most cases of the left - for petty political gains.

The West owes Eastern Europe big time. Abandoning them to the USSR allowed the West to recover, flourish and eventually reclaim therm back peacefully, but lives of generations were lost. Only the first half of my life was lost in the USSR but the feeling of loss is quite strong nonetheless, believe me.

Even during these proudest of moments, while reflecting on previous sacrifices we should never forget that they will mean nothing if more sacrifices are not made because the work has not been finished. Resting on laurels of others will get us nowhere. Call this pompous all you will. I will raise you your petty cynicism.

I do hope what Lucas is warning about will never come to pass.

Sorry, not enough time right now to write a full blown show outline. If anyone knows of any decent way of ttranscribing my shows I would appreciate it.

In any case, as usual, this is only a writeup of what happened on the air during my live KSCO AM 1080 board cast. To listen to the full show (sans commercials) follow click on the listen button above. If you are looking at this in your email, just follow the link to my blog and then click Listen.

First part of the show was dedicated to exciting news from France and exciting first week for Nicolas Sarkozy as France's new President. Some interesting observations there as well as critique of American inflexible reaction. For example, Rush Limbaugh unloaded on Sarkozy for nominating Bernard Kouchner a Socialist as his foreign minister, probably unaware, that Kouchner was all but the only member of the French political elite that supported in principle invasion of Iraq and liberation of it from the tyranny of Saddam Hussein.

Then some dopey caller wanted to argue about socialism in the US with me without really having any clue. I kept this segment for entertainment purposes just to show the whole world how ignorant some ultra-right winders (that are no different by the way from ultra left wingers) can get.

Second hour also opened with a bit of talk about socialism and then it launched me into a tirade about meaning of words. As a linguist, I think I can afford a tirade or two on the subject.

The last portion of the show was devoted to the recent immigration bill. In a nutshell, I am generally in favor of resolving the issue of 12 million illegals without forcing massive deportations that will require collection and detention centers, also known as concentration camps and all kind of nastiness this country should not be getting into. There is no easy solution and I have not seen anything from those that oppose the current plan except the same old unimplementable idea of massive deportation.

My general point is that although we claim to be a country of laws, there could be good laws and bad laws. Immigration system in the US was a clear example of bad laws that never worked. In the mean time we have 12 million people caught in this net because this country had bad, unnatural laws on the subject. And I simply call not to destroy peoples' lives, not to punish too hard for doing something that very many ancestors of current US citizens had done themselves. Very many laws were violated by the avalanche of settlers from Europe. Let's not be too hypocritical.

Please listen and enjoy.

It seems that the only agreement Condoleezza Rice and Vladimir Putin could come up to is to tone down rhetoric in public. According to RIA Novosti:

The rest of the news story basically lists all open problems that did not get resolved in any meaningful way:

Meanwhile, this is not the only front where no agreement or even no progress had been achieved. According to business newspaper Vzglyad (Outlook, link in Russian) European  Union is not ready to start the next round of negotiations on the future framework of Russian-EU relationships. The upcoming Samara summit of foreign ministers
was going to kick off negotiations that are still being put on hold because of firm opposition from Poland and now Lithuania and Estonia. Poland wants Russia to lift meat imports embargo it imposed when Poland violated EU rules and tried to ship meat products purchased in third countries. As has been mentioned sometime earlier on the Embassy of the New World order radio, Lithuania claims that Russia is deliberately squeezing a Lithuanian refinery by cutting supplies. The general suspicion has been for a while that Russia would like to depress the value of the refinery and then purchase it for pennies.

According to Vzglyad Estonian foreign minister accused Russia of imposing unofficial sanctions against Tallinn.

The only way for Russia would be to drive a wedge between the Old Europe and the Eastern European newcomers to the Union. Vzglyad quotes Dmitry Orlov a political analyst as suggesting that EU made a mistake by expanding so fast and that the newcomer countries do not yet feel adequate responsibility for continent-wide issues. The implication of course is that Russia is mature enough to adequately feel that responsibility recent hysteria notwithstanding.

Unfortunately, Estonians are not helping their cause either. The same Vzglyad reports that deputy speaker of the Estonian Parliament called to ban broadcasts of Russian TV channels in Estonia. Someone pick up a phone and tell Kristina Ojuland that freedom of speech either exists or it does not. Obviously, Estonia is a European country and Europeans do not hold freedom of speech in the same respect as the US does - banning speech is normal in Europe, so maybe it is not that big a deal.

Once again I ask the question of purpose. Those roadblocks that Russia seems to be encountering in the West - are they hurting her, are they of her own doing or does she really care as long as she can bring progress in the East by announcing a complex deal to build a Near Caspian pipeline?

Although the vocal protests and PR driven saber rattling around the move of the Bronze Soviet Soldier to a military cemetery seem to be subsiding, the real fallout will be felt for quite some time. Not in form of direct actions but rather in attitude that will result in actions or inactions.

Western attitude towards relationships with Russia seems to be dull and lacking. It lacks excitement of the early 90-s, it lacks the sense of partnership of late 90-s and it starts loosing the sense of trust that came out of the Reagan Gorbachev era. Just like political capital of a leader can be wasted, political capital of a country can diminish. The US can most certainly feel some loss of political capital due to situation in Iraq, but it is expected from a controversial endeavor of such magnitude. But what has Russia spent its political and emotional capital on? What does it want to achieve by pursuing the current course? And is there a course after all?

Condi Rice is in Moscow right now and I would like to see a show of hands from people that think that something of any significance is going to be achieved during this visit? Kommersant Daily dies not expect any advances on any major issues.(link in Russian only) Oh, of course, they all will be addressed one way or another but both sides will likely agree to disagree.

The White House will sit and wait for changes during the complex period of transfer of power to a new president. Neither the White House no Kommersant seem to be considering a democratic transfer of power through free elections. There is no expectation of a vibrant political struggle, clashes of ideas, debates of where does Russia go from here. The course seems to be set, the engine running fairly smoothly and the crew is ready to go wherever the captain is taking the ship to. And this probably is going to be the main achievement of President Putin, if one can call it such: the tired crew is willing to follow the captain to that deserted island with a treasure chest. Does it occur to them that wild savages are going to eat half of them when going gets tough?

Who will send rescue teams when the mortgage bubble causes a crash in Russia? Brotherly Turkmenistan? Friendly China? Grateful Iran? It probably will not be neighbours like Estonians or Poles. Radio Echo Moskvy reports that Estonia might follow Poland and block the new Russia-EU agreement.

Estonian Defence Ministry will also ask NATO to consider computer attacks (most likely denial of service types) from foreign countries equal to military attacks. US Senator Richard Lugar had already suggested NATO should consider energy blackmail as a military upfront. Neither suggestion is likely to be adopted any time soon, but this forms a peculiar context around the course that Russia is pursuing. And my nagging feeling is that Russia is not pursuing any course at all. It has been taken for a ride by its President and his cohorts.

Russia has recently made several threatening moves using energy supply and flexed some natural gas muscle letting Europe know of its intentions. It has been on a buying expedition trying to purchase energy infrastructure in Europe, it has successfully blocked any potential for a TransCaspian  pipeline, routing all future gas from Turkmenistan through Gasprom pipelines and switches. Russian President hints of other sinister powers in the world that are supposedly seeking world domination. And then he takes two days to congratulate Nicolas Sarkozy with his presidential election victory in France.

What might be the purpose of this collision course? I can think of only one answer that does not involve excessive use of imagination: there is no purpose.  There is no plan, there is no course other then  the course of personal power and enrichment for the clan of Mr. Putin. To this purpose Russia's political and emotional capital is being spent with incompetent, criminal neglect.

The last of the Embassy of the New World Order shows until I return from my overseas trip in mid may. I do promise to post blog entries just like I did when I was in Russia last September.

The first part of the show was dedicated to the coverage of the recent marches and demonstration in Moscow, St. Petersburg by the Western media. Almost all articles I saw seem to pretend these were rallies of pro-democracy freedom minded liberal pro-westerners, and this is not the case. Of course some participants favour western democratic principles, but one side of these events is conspicuously missing: the role of the Nutsballs. I just love this name, it is a rendition of  a Russian abbreviation for National Bolshevik party, but Nutsballs rolls of the tongue so well...

I made a search on Google news for Limonov - the leader of the NutsBall  party and got a very short list compared to the general list of articles about Moscow and St. Pete's rallies. And even these were nothing but in passing references. A glaring example of wishful thinking. Sure, like a lot of people in the media that cover these events, I would love for these demonstrations to be advancing values of capitalist based democracy, but they are not. One of the prominent objects in photos from the March 3 rally was the Confederate Flag. National Bolsheviks are not liberal democrats, well, in Russia even Liberal Democrats and not liberal democrats.

There of course will be a parade of pro-Putin blogs rightfully criticizing western media for this omission and some will likely suggest an anti-Russian bias or even a conspiracy. I think, however, this says more about how confused the western media reporters are. Edward Limonov and his Nutsballs  are in fact a very inconvenient phenomenon for any lefty or a socialist, because they represent the missing link between fascism and socialism - the two systems that came from the Left and are the Left. Most western media professionals are left of center but have been always pretending and insisting to classify fascism to be the far right. Limonov and the Nutsballs are a thorn in the side, a poke in the eye, a sword over shoulder of the left that illustrates to the left its political origins. It is no surprise the left wing media ignores the problem.

Needless to say, there is probably quite a bit of ignorance and  sloppy journalism involved.

Continuing on the last subject from the last week's show, more on the obscene, abhorrent ethanol folly. The chickens are coming home to roost. Food prices worldwide have risen 10% over last year because of this abomination. To turn food into fuel is worse then what Mari Antoinette could ever had suggested. Meat prices in the US are about to rise as well. Soy for vegans will be more expensive, but here I have no sympathy, suspecting that 99% of vegans are pro-ethanol moonbats.

The last subject was upcoming French elections. I do hope Sarkozy  wins and carries out badly needed reforms. He seems to be an admirer of the Anglo Saxon economic model and has a chance of digging France from the economic grave. The rest of the field are all a parade of lefties rushing again to step on the proverbial rake of socialism and get the nose bloodied again. And yes, I include Jean Marie Le Pen with the lefties as well. Please, France, no more fascists getting 20% of the vote this time! For the sake of your national psyche.

According to a Georgia News Agency (Georgia as in a country not a US state) Georgian Parliament unanimously voted for a resolution to seek NATO membership for their country.

As I have suggested before on numerous occasions here and on my radio show, the West should encourage as many countries as possible to turn towards it. Not all will be capable to join NATO or other Atlantic structures right a way and Georgia will face some serious work ahead, but it is the intent that makes this important.

I am not aware yet of any official Russian statement - a brief Google news search did not yield anything of significance. But rest assured this will not be taken lightly in Moscow, especially in the midst of the brewing crisis over air shield-1 that Pentagon considers deploying either in Georgia or someplace in Eastern Europe.

Even more insightful was the rhetoric, and phraseology used by many parliamentarians that took the floor -

that values declared in the resolution are dear, that Georgia will do all it could to join the organization that brings peace to the world and the region.

Some of it went a bit too far I think - claims that

the main priority for all (sic) Georgians is to join NATO, and surprise, surprise that joining NATO will help resolve the issue of territorial integrity of Georgia - faced right now with breakaway Abkhasia and Osetia regions. Georgia claims that Russia is responsible for stirring up the pot in both regions.

Needless to say it is a challenge to the West, NATO and the US in particular. It does not look like Putin and his government will repeat their non-involvement posture when the Balts, Poles and other Eastern Europeans joined its supposed adversary. On the other hand, the fact that Russia considers NATO a threat to itself and to be an anti-Russia alliance, does not mean NATO is what Russia thinks it is. And it most certainly does not mean that the West should pay attention to Russia's claims in any way other then common courtesy.

Will this be a test of US-Russian relations? No doubt about it. It will also be a test of NATO and the intestinal fortitude of Europeans that are weary of frustrating their main natural gas supplier, cognizant of what happened to Ukraine and Belarus. Georgia is most certainly forcing the hand of the West and it might have been done with a silent nod from Washington.

Will there be another outburst of anti-Georgian nationalism in Russia similar to what I saw there in last October? I hope not, but my hopes are... slim.

 

The tempest in the Minsk teapot is brewing into a regional tornado that eventually threatens to wipe Belarus democratically self-elected President Aleksander Lukashenka off the political map of Europe.

• Some time in the past Mr. Putin decided to abandon considerations for unification of Belarus and Russia into a new state entity thus allowing Mr. Putin to run for the third term as President of Russia, making democratically self-elected Lukashenka a mere nuisance and a waste of hard earned petrodollars.
• Also some time in the past, democratically self-elected Belarus President Alexander Lukashenka mouthed something that Mr. Putin found offensive.
• Russia decided to raise prices Belarus pays for natural gas imports from Russia to $200 per 1,000 cubic meters. On the surface, this goes along the lines of “Russia(Gazprom) ain’t Santa Claus.” Too true. Calendar based contracts turn democratically elected CEO of Russia Inc into a Grinch instead.