Let’s Remember on this Somber Day

Five years ago today, a squad of crazed Islamic terrorists attacked the innocent people in the World Trade Towers, killing women and children as well as many Muslims. Heroic Americans responded by downing one of the terrorist jets and risking their lives rushing to the scenes of the attacks to peform valiant rescue work. We owe it to their memory that such a thing not be repeated, and for the past five years America has been 100% free of terror incidents on its home soil. We all must pause this day and honor the heroes of 9/11. As Lincoln said, no words we can utter are meaningful on such an occasion, only our deeds can matter.

On this somber day, as the fork-tongued serpent named Putin tries to propagandize by reminding the world that he was the first to call President Bush to offer 9/11 condolences, let’s not forget that Russia is complicit in this outrageous act, and more importantly in future similar acts which may befall America despite her best efforts to defend herself. Here’s why:

• Russia has long supported Islamic terror, especially that aimed at the U.S., through its secret police. It’s quite possible that KGB know-how was passed to the 9/11 terrorists through Russia’s contacts in the Islamic world and used by the terrorist to acquire the level of sophistication needed to carry out the attacks.

• Russia passed U.S. military secrets to Iraq during the U.S. attack on Sadaam Hussein; it also did everything it could to obstruct the invasion on the dipolmatic front.

• Russia is now supplying both assault weapons and attack jets to U.S.-hating Venezuela, from where they may be exported to Bolivia and other South American nations.

• Russia is now supplying sophisticated nuclear technology to Iran, another ardent U.S. foe, which is seeking atomic weapons.

• Russia is supplyling both dipomatic cover and financial support to both Hamas and Hezbollah (neither of which it will recognize as terrorist organizations) as they struggle to destroy U.S. interests in the Middle East.

• By doing all these things (and more) Russia has created a climate of ambivalence which indicates to the terrorists that American responses to their outrageous actions will be tempered by Russian resistance, making them bolder and bolder.

How many Russians publicly rejoiced with the Twin Towers were attacked, and how many more secretely? How many Russians came forward to publicly scold those who rejoiced? Even as we speak, drunk with oil revenues, Russia is willfully provoking the U.S. into a second cold war. Many believe the Russian secret police capable of having planted the bombs that exploded in Moscow apartment buildings just before Russia launched its second military campaign in Chechnya. The Kremlin’s callous disregard of Russian lives during the Beslan and Dubrovka crises is well known. Would the Kremlin really hesitate, then, to take actions that would jeopardize American lives?

In short, signs of genuine Russian friendship towards America are difficult indeed to identify, while signs of enmnity abound.

Thanks for reading La Russophobe !

Let’s Remember on this Somber Day

Five years ago today, a squad of crazed Islamic terrorists attacked the innocent people in the World Trade Towers, killing women and children as well as many Muslims. Heroic Americans responded by downing one of the terrorist jets and risking their lives rushing to the scenes of the attacks to peform valiant rescue work. We owe it to their memory that such a thing not be repeated, and for the past five years America has been 100% free of terror incidents on its home soil. We all must pause this day and honor the heroes of 9/11. As Lincoln said, no words we can utter are meaningful on such an occasion, only our deeds can matter.

On this somber day, as the fork-tongued serpent named Putin tries to propagandize by reminding the world that he was the first to call President Bush to offer 9/11 condolences, let’s not forget that Russia is complicit in this outrageous act, and more importantly in future similar acts which may befall America despite her best efforts to defend herself. Here’s why:

• Russia has long supported Islamic terror, especially that aimed at the U.S., through its secret police. It’s quite possible that KGB know-how was passed to the 9/11 terrorists through Russia’s contacts in the Islamic world and used by the terrorist to acquire the level of sophistication needed to carry out the attacks.

• Russia passed U.S. military secrets to Iraq during the U.S. attack on Sadaam Hussein; it also did everything it could to obstruct the invasion on the dipolmatic front.

• Russia is now supplying both assault weapons and attack jets to U.S.-hating Venezuela, from where they may be exported to Bolivia and other South American nations.

• Russia is now supplying sophisticated nuclear technology to Iran, another ardent U.S. foe, which is seeking atomic weapons.

• Russia is supplyling both dipomatic cover and financial support to both Hamas and Hezbollah (neither of which it will recognize as terrorist organizations) as they struggle to destroy U.S. interests in the Middle East.

• By doing all these things (and more) Russia has created a climate of ambivalence which indicates to the terrorists that American responses to their outrageous actions will be tempered by Russian resistance, making them bolder and bolder.

How many Russians publicly rejoiced with the Twin Towers were attacked, and how many more secretely? How many Russians came forward to publicly scold those who rejoiced? Even as we speak, drunk with oil revenues, Russia is willfully provoking the U.S. into a second cold war. Many believe the Russian secret police capable of having planted the bombs that exploded in Moscow apartment buildings just before Russia launched its second military campaign in Chechnya. The Kremlin’s callous disregard of Russian lives during the Beslan and Dubrovka crises is well known. Would the Kremlin really hesitate, then, to take actions that would jeopardize American lives?

In short, signs of genuine Russian friendship towards America are difficult indeed to identify, while signs of enmnity abound.

Thanks for reading La Russophobe !

Let’s Remember on this Somber Day

Five years ago today, a squad of crazed Islamic terrorists attacked the innocent people in the World Trade Towers, killing women and children as well as many Muslims. Heroic Americans responded by downing one of the terrorist jets and risking their lives rushing to the scenes of the attacks to peform valiant rescue work. We owe it to their memory that such a thing not be repeated, and for the past five years America has been 100% free of terror incidents on its home soil. We all must pause this day and honor the heroes of 9/11. As Lincoln said, no words we can utter are meaningful on such an occasion, only our deeds can matter.

On this somber day, as the fork-tongued serpent named Putin tries to propagandize by reminding the world that he was the first to call President Bush to offer 9/11 condolences, let’s not forget that Russia is complicit in this outrageous act, and more importantly in future similar acts which may befall America despite her best efforts to defend herself. Here’s why:

• Russia has long supported Islamic terror, especially that aimed at the U.S., through its secret police. It’s quite possible that KGB know-how was passed to the 9/11 terrorists through Russia’s contacts in the Islamic world and used by the terrorist to acquire the level of sophistication needed to carry out the attacks.

• Russia passed U.S. military secrets to Iraq during the U.S. attack on Sadaam Hussein; it also did everything it could to obstruct the invasion on the dipolmatic front.

• Russia is now supplying both assault weapons and attack jets to U.S.-hating Venezuela, from where they may be exported to Bolivia and other South American nations.

• Russia is now supplying sophisticated nuclear technology to Iran, another ardent U.S. foe, which is seeking atomic weapons.

• Russia is supplyling both dipomatic cover and financial support to both Hamas and Hezbollah (neither of which it will recognize as terrorist organizations) as they struggle to destroy U.S. interests in the Middle East.

• By doing all these things (and more) Russia has created a climate of ambivalence which indicates to the terrorists that American responses to their outrageous actions will be tempered by Russian resistance, making them bolder and bolder.

How many Russians publicly rejoiced with the Twin Towers were attacked, and how many more secretely? How many Russians came forward to publicly scold those who rejoiced? Even as we speak, drunk with oil revenues, Russia is willfully provoking the U.S. into a second cold war. Many believe the Russian secret police capable of having planted the bombs that exploded in Moscow apartment buildings just before Russia launched its second military campaign in Chechnya. The Kremlin’s callous disregard of Russian lives during the Beslan and Dubrovka crises is well known. Would the Kremlin really hesitate, then, to take actions that would jeopardize American lives?

In short, signs of genuine Russian friendship towards America are difficult indeed to identify, while signs of enmnity abound.

Thanks for reading La Russophobe !

Let’s Remember on this Somber Day

Five years ago today, a squad of crazed Islamic terrorists attacked the innocent people in the World Trade Towers, killing women and children as well as many Muslims. Heroic Americans responded by downing one of the terrorist jets and risking their lives rushing to the scenes of the attacks to peform valiant rescue work. We owe it to their memory that such a thing not be repeated, and for the past five years America has been 100% free of terror incidents on its home soil. We all must pause this day and honor the heroes of 9/11. As Lincoln said, no words we can utter are meaningful on such an occasion, only our deeds can matter.

On this somber day, as the fork-tongued serpent named Putin tries to propagandize by reminding the world that he was the first to call President Bush to offer 9/11 condolences, let’s not forget that Russia is complicit in this outrageous act, and more importantly in future similar acts which may befall America despite her best efforts to defend herself. Here’s why:

• Russia has long supported Islamic terror, especially that aimed at the U.S., through its secret police. It’s quite possible that KGB know-how was passed to the 9/11 terrorists through Russia’s contacts in the Islamic world and used by the terrorist to acquire the level of sophistication needed to carry out the attacks.

• Russia passed U.S. military secrets to Iraq during the U.S. attack on Sadaam Hussein; it also did everything it could to obstruct the invasion on the dipolmatic front.

• Russia is now supplying both assault weapons and attack jets to U.S.-hating Venezuela, from where they may be exported to Bolivia and other South American nations.

• Russia is now supplying sophisticated nuclear technology to Iran, another ardent U.S. foe, which is seeking atomic weapons.

• Russia is supplyling both dipomatic cover and financial support to both Hamas and Hezbollah (neither of which it will recognize as terrorist organizations) as they struggle to destroy U.S. interests in the Middle East.

• By doing all these things (and more) Russia has created a climate of ambivalence which indicates to the terrorists that American responses to their outrageous actions will be tempered by Russian resistance, making them bolder and bolder.

How many Russians publicly rejoiced with the Twin Towers were attacked, and how many more secretely? How many Russians came forward to publicly scold those who rejoiced? Even as we speak, drunk with oil revenues, Russia is willfully provoking the U.S. into a second cold war. Many believe the Russian secret police capable of having planted the bombs that exploded in Moscow apartment buildings just before Russia launched its second military campaign in Chechnya. The Kremlin’s callous disregard of Russian lives during the Beslan and Dubrovka crises is well known. Would the Kremlin really hesitate, then, to take actions that would jeopardize American lives?

In short, signs of genuine Russian friendship towards America are difficult indeed to identify, while signs of enmnity abound.

Thanks for reading La Russophobe !

Let’s Remember on this Somber Day

Five years ago today, a squad of crazed Islamic terrorists attacked the innocent people in the World Trade Towers, killing women and children as well as many Muslims. Heroic Americans responded by downing one of the terrorist jets and risking their lives rushing to the scenes of the attacks to peform valiant rescue work. We owe it to their memory that such a thing not be repeated, and for the past five years America has been 100% free of terror incidents on its home soil. We all must pause this day and honor the heroes of 9/11. As Lincoln said, no words we can utter are meaningful on such an occasion, only our deeds can matter.

On this somber day, as the fork-tongued serpent named Putin tries to propagandize by reminding the world that he was the first to call President Bush to offer 9/11 condolences, let’s not forget that Russia is complicit in this outrageous act, and more importantly in future similar acts which may befall America despite her best efforts to defend herself. Here’s why:

• Russia has long supported Islamic terror, especially that aimed at the U.S., through its secret police. It’s quite possible that KGB know-how was passed to the 9/11 terrorists through Russia’s contacts in the Islamic world and used by the terrorist to acquire the level of sophistication needed to carry out the attacks.

• Russia passed U.S. military secrets to Iraq during the U.S. attack on Sadaam Hussein; it also did everything it could to obstruct the invasion on the dipolmatic front.

• Russia is now supplying both assault weapons and attack jets to U.S.-hating Venezuela, from where they may be exported to Bolivia and other South American nations.

• Russia is now supplying sophisticated nuclear technology to Iran, another ardent U.S. foe, which is seeking atomic weapons.

• Russia is supplyling both dipomatic cover and financial support to both Hamas and Hezbollah (neither of which it will recognize as terrorist organizations) as they struggle to destroy U.S. interests in the Middle East.

• By doing all these things (and more) Russia has created a climate of ambivalence which indicates to the terrorists that American responses to their outrageous actions will be tempered by Russian resistance, making them bolder and bolder.

How many Russians publicly rejoiced with the Twin Towers were attacked, and how many more secretely? How many Russians came forward to publicly scold those who rejoiced? Even as we speak, drunk with oil revenues, Russia is willfully provoking the U.S. into a second cold war. Many believe the Russian secret police capable of having planted the bombs that exploded in Moscow apartment buildings just before Russia launched its second military campaign in Chechnya. The Kremlin’s callous disregard of Russian lives during the Beslan and Dubrovka crises is well known. Would the Kremlin really hesitate, then, to take actions that would jeopardize American lives?

In short, signs of genuine Russian friendship towards America are difficult indeed to identify, while signs of enmnity abound.

Thanks for reading La Russophobe !

Russia and Islamic Terror: The View from Inside

Global Politician offers readers a series of excerpts from the book Spetsnaz written by KGB defector Victor Suvurov. They highlight Russian involvement in international terrorism and are particuarly apposite on the somber anniversary of 9/11.

“…Soviet secret police, the KGB, carries out different functions (than the Spetsnaz) and has other priorities. It has its own terrorist apparatus, which includes an organization very similar to spetsnaz, known as osnaz. The KGB uses osnaz for carrying out a range of tasks not dissimilar to those performed by the GRU’s spetsnaz. But the Soviet leaders consider that it is best not to have any monopolies in the field of secret warfare. Competition, they feel, gives far better results than ration.”

“…Osnaz apparently came into being practically at the same time as the Communist dictatorship. In the very first moments of the existence of the Soviet regime, we find references to detachments osobogo nazhacheniya-special purpose detachments. Osnaz means military-terrorist units, which came into being as shock troops of the Communist Party whose job was to defend the party. Osnaz was later handed over to the secret police, which changed its own name from time to time as easily as a snake changes its skins: Cheka-Vcheka-OGPU-NKVD-NKGB-MGB-MVD-KGB. Once a snake, however, always a snake.”

“It is the fact that Spetsnaz belongs to the army, and Osnaz to the secret police, that accounts for all the differences between them. Spetsnaz operates mainly against external enemies; Osnaz does the same but mainly in its own territory and against its own citizens. Even if both Spetsnaz and Osnaz are faced with carrying out one and the same operation, the Soviet leadership is not inclined to rely so much on co-operation between the army and the secret police as on the strong competitive instincts between them.”

“…Thus if it is relatively easy to recruit a man to act as a ‘sleeper’, what about recruiting a foreigner to act as a real terrorist, prepared to commit murder, use explosives and fire buildings? Surely that is much more difficult? The answer is that, surprisingly, it is not.”

“A Spetsnaz officer out to recruit agents for direct terrorist action has a wonderful base for his work in the West. There are a tremendous number of people who are discontented and ready to protest against absolutely anything. And while millions protest peacefully, some individuals will resort to any means to make their protest. The spetsnaz officer has only to find the malcontent who is ready to go to extremes.”

“On another occasion a group of animal rights activists in the UK injected bars of chocolate with poison. If spetsnaz were able to contact that group, and there is every chance it might, it would be extremely keen (without, of course, mentioning its name) to suggest to them a number of even more effective ways of protesting. Activists, radicals, peace campaigners, green party members: as far as the leaders of the GRU are concerned, these are like ripe water-melons, green on the outside, but red on the inside-and mouth-watering. So there is a good base for recruiting.”

“The spetsnaz network of agents has much in common with international terrorism, a common center, for example-yet they are different things and must not be confused. It would be foolhardy to claim that international terrorism came into being on orders from Moscow. But to claim that, without Moscow’s support, international terrorism would never have assumed the scale it has would not be rash. Terrorism has been born in a variety of situations, in various circumstances and in different kinds of soil. Local nationalism has always been a potent source, and the Soviet Union supports it in any form, just as it offers concrete support to extremist groups operating within nationalist movements. Exceptions are made, of course, of the nationalist groups within the Soviet Union and the countries under its influence.”

“If groups of extremists emerge in areas where there is no sure Soviet influence, you may be sure that the Soviet Union will very shortly be their best friend. In the GRU alone there are two independent and very powerful bodies dealing with questions relating to extremists and terrorists.”

“…The GRU’s tactics toward terrorists are simple: never give them any orders, never tell them what to do. They are destroying Western civilization: they know how to do it, the argument goes, so let them get on with it unfettered by petty supervision. Among them there are idealists ready to die for their own ideas. So let them die for them. The most important thing is to preserve their illusion that they are completely free and independent.”

“Although the vast majority of spetsnaz is made up of Slavonic personnel, there are some exceptions…And spetsnaz contains Turks, Kurds, Greeks, Koreans, Mongolians, Finns and people of other nationalities.”

“The Soviet Union condemns the civil war in Lebanon. But there is no need for it to condemn the war. All it has to do is hold back the next transportation of ammunition and war will cease.”

“Apart from military and financial support, the Soviet Union also provides the terrorists aid in the form of training. Training centers have been set up in the Soviet Union for training terrorists from a number of different countries.”

“Every terrorist is studied carefully during his training, and among them will be noted the potential leaders and the born rebels who will not submit to any authority…Of equal importance are the students’ weaknesses and ambitions, and their relationships with one another. Some time, many years ahead, one of them may become an important leader, but not one approved by Moscow, so it is vital to know in advance who his likely friends and enemies will be.”

“The reward for the GRU is that a terrorist doing work for spetsnaz does not, in the great majority of cases, suspect he is being used. He is utterly convinced that he is acting independently, of his own will and by his own choice. The GRU does not leave its signature or his fingerprints around.”

“Even in cases where it is not a question of individual terrorists but of experienced leaders of terrorist organizations, the GRU takes extraordinary steps to ensure that not only all outsiders but even the terrorist leader himself should not realize the extent of his subordination to spetsnaz and consequently to the GRU.”

“The overture is a series of large and small operations the purpose of which is, before actual military operations begin, to weaken the enemy’s morale, create an atmosphere of general suspicion, fear and uncertainty, and divert the attention of the enemy’s armies and police forces to a huge number of different targets, each of which may be the object of the next attack.”

“The overture is carried by agents of the secret services of the Soviet satellite countries and by mercenaries recruited by intermediaries. The principal method employed at this stage is “gray terror”, that is, a kind of terror which is not conducted in the name of the Soviet Union. The Soviet secret services do not at this stage leave their visiting cards, or leave other people’s cards. The terror is carried out in the name of already existing extremist groups not connected in any way with the Soviet Union, or in the name of the fictitious organizations. The GRU reckons that in this period its operations should be regarded as natural disasters, actions by forces beyond human control, mistakes by people, or as terrorist acts by organizations not connected with the Soviet Union.”

“The terrorist acts carried out in the course of the ‘overture’ require very few people, very few weapons and little equipment. In some cases all that may be needed is one man who has a weapon nothing more than a screwdriver, a box of marches or a glass ampoule. Some of the operations can have catastrophic consequences. For example, an epidemic of an infectious disease at seven of the most important naval bases in the West could have the effect of halving the combined naval might of the Soviet Union’s enemies.”

“There is a marked increase in the strength of the peace movement. In many countries there are continual demand to make the country neutral and not to support American foreign policy, which has been discredited. At this point the ‘gray terror’ gathers scope and strength and in the last days of peace reaches its peak.”

Thanks for reading La Russophobe !

The Valdai Club Betrays Democracy, Many Dance as Putin Pulls the Strings

Last Friday, the Moscow Times carried an article by its former editor Lynn Berry. The article relates how she and a group other Western Russia-watchers (whom she misleading refers to as “experts”) talked with “a senior Kremlin official” (whom she refuses to identify) during this year’s round of meetings in Russia by the so-called “Valdai Discussion Club.”In reality, this “club” is a propaganda ruse. It’s merely an opportunity for the Kremlin to wine and dine foreign Russia commentators (who the Kremlin flies to Russia at its expense and allows to hobnob with bigwigs in the Putin administration, stroking their massive egos) and hence win favorable publicity and commentary in the future as the Neo-Soviet Union consolidates its power. La Russophobe has already documented the sycophantic drivel spouted by the JRL’s David Johnson after attending one of these soirees. Unfortunately, the participants who report on their activities make little effort to disclose the perks they received much less to ask whether this results in bias. The mere fact that the participants choose to refer to themselves as “member” of a “club” speaks volumes about their objectivity. You scratch my back, I’ll scratch yours, is apparently the slogan of this “club.”

Now, Berry allows the Kremlin to dupe her into reporting that unless Russia is given WTO entry “bad things” will surely happen. In other words, she allows herself to be the mouthpiece for blackmail. La Russophobe dares to wonder how many tins of caviar and glasses of expensive champagne Ms. Berry was plied with before this “interview” took place. Notice how there is not one critical word about Putin, the Kremlin or anyone associated with it in the piece, and at the same time a strident attack on the Kremlin’s foreign “enemies.” Berry, incidentally, is the MT editor who booted out MT columnist Pavel Felgenhaur, one of the Kremlin’s staunchest Russian critics.

By failing to reach an agreement with Russia on its accession to the World Trade Organization, the United States is undermining President Vladimir Putin and strengthening the hand of the siloviki, a senior Kremlin official said Thursday evening.

The official denied that the siloviki in the Kremlin had won the struggle for power over the more liberal camp represented by Economic Development and Trade Minister German Gref and Finance Minister Alexei Kudrin. The siloviki, he said, had no role in government strategy, only in its implementation.

But if the United States refused to sign off on Russia’s WTO bid soon, it should not be surprised if the siloviki win, the official said, speaking to a group of foreign Russia experts on condition he not be further identified.

“For us young reformers, Putin is our hope,” he said in response to a question from Andrew Kuchins of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.

“The WTO game is directly related to the siloviki,” the official said. “These people who are playing the game don’t understand what’s going to happen if we don’t get a deal at this time.”

Expectations had been high that an agreement on the WTO would be signed in time for the Group of Eight summit in July, but talks broke down on the eve of the summit over the issue of U.S. meat imports. Both sides expressed hope at the time that a deal could be reached by late October, but tensions have only grown since, with Gref warning U.S. trade negotiators that Russia would scrap agreements on all meat imports if the October deadline was not met.

Russian officials have denied that decisions on the participation of U.S. oil companies in the development of Gazprom’s Shtokman field and on Boeing’s bid to sell planes to Aeroflot were linked to a WTO agreement. But the Kremlin official said all three issues were tied in the sense that it was wrong for the United States to expect favorable treatment from Russia on the issues it cares about while denying Russia entry into the WTO.

When asked by Angela Stent, professor of government at Georgetown University, how the WTO negotiations should play forward now, he said a political decision was needed from U.S. President George W. Bush.

“We have to get the message across to Bush: ‘Boys, stop drinking Russian blood,'” the official said.

Ariel Cohen of The Heritage Foundation followed up on the issue, and he and the official traded barbs on the degree of pressure each president was under at home from the agricultural lobby. Cohen said Bush was in a relatively strong position because he was leaving office soon. The Kremlin official said Putin also was leaving office, but there was a difference: “Putin has to leave a person who will continue his policies.”

The group of visiting Russia experts, part of what has come to be called the Valdai Discussion Club, was expected to meet with Putin on Saturday.

Indeed. WE have to get the message across, you and me, Lynn baby. We have to tell the world that the U.S. is “drinking Russian blood.” So, forget about the fact that Russia has the world’s 9th most corrupt economy. Forget that it is obliterating human rights and democracy. Ignore the fact that is providing nuclear technology to Iran, financial support to Hamas and weapons to Venezuela and Hezbollah, while seeking to block U.S. sanctions against those foes. Force the U.S., that “blood sucker,” to admit Russia to the WTO even though it’s not in America’s interest, so that Russia can pretend to be a democracy while “President” Putin consolidates his hold on the nation’s throat.Pretty please, won’t you be so kind?

 

 

Thanks for reading La Russophobe !

Post’s Hoagland not (entirely) Duped by Putin at Valdai

The Washington Post’s columnist Jim Hoagland reports from the Valdai Club on Putin’s wining and dining of foreign Russia “experts” he wants to brainwash (note that Putin’s chef isn’t Russian and didn’t serve Russian cuisine):

What he has done to the once-turbulent Russian political scene Vladimir Putin would like to do to the world’s equally volatile energy markets: Make them as stable and peaceful as the graveyard.

This grand ambition comes through vividly if implicitly as I listen to the Russian president outline in detail the concept of “energy security” that he had presented to world leaders in July at the Group of Eight summit. Putin wants markets built on long-term contracts guaranteeing not only adequate supply (of oil and gas from Russia) but also sustained demand (from consumers willing to pay fixed prices that would hold for decades).

His fellow leaders listened politely but did not commit to an idea that might have seemed quixotic coming from anyone else. Given the year that Putin is having, however, no one was willing to bet that he would fail at grand designs.

He has crushed the vibrant domestic opposition that flourished under Boris Yeltsin. With a 70 percent approval rating, he holds the power to name his successor. He has gained control over the flood of oil dollars pouring into Russia. And perhaps most satisfyingly for him, the political revolution lapping at Russia’s frontiers a year ago has receded as reformers who accomplished Ukraine’s Orange Revolution splintered and as his non-democratic allies in Belarus easily won reelection.

So the wiry former KGB colonel was chipper as he underwent an annual political checkup of sorts by a group of about 40 American, European and Asian policy and academic experts at his sprawling dacha in suburban Moscow yesterday. He took questions between servings of octopus carpaccio, baked sea bass and figs with yogurt sorbet, all prepared by his Italian chef and washed down by an unassuming pinot grigio 2005.

The clearest sign that fortune has smiled broadly on Putin since he met with the same organization, the Valdai Discussion Group, a year ago in the Kremlin was his warm praise for Ukrainian President Viktor Yushchenko, whom he now magnanimously terms “a serious, responsible” leader. Last September, he accused Yushchenko of allowing corruption to flourish in Ukraine while suggesting that the West was fomenting upheaval throughout the former Soviet Union.

President Bush also came in for praise and was offered a carefully hedged olive branch on Iran:”Iran is a special case” located “in a very dangerous area,” Putin said. Other nuclear-capable countries such as Brazil or South Africa “do not establish in their constitutions the goal of destroying another state,” as he said Iran did with Israel.

“Iran should abandon its plans for nuclear enrichment on its soil,” he continued. When asked specifically if Russia would support U.S. calls for sanctions, he declined to rule them out. Economic reprisals should be avoided if possible and adopted only after more discussions between Iran and the six-nation negotiating group that includes Russia and the United States.

But Putin’s remarks, delivered in simultaneous translation, lent weight to reports that Moscow has agreed to support symbolic sanctions if Iran remains adamant.

Putin, however, does not do mellow for long. He remains intense, focused and at times prickly even when munching the octopus carpaccio (quite tasty, by the way). His eyes flare when the subject turns to energy supplies and the vast infrastructure of new pipelines and producing fields that Russia intends to develop over a decade to become the world’s dominant exporter of energy.

Putin and his aides insist that to justify the investment needed to build that infrastructure, consuming nations must begin to sign 20- to 30-year contracts with Russia now to avoid the boom-and-bust cycles of petroleum and natural gas prices of the past three decades.

“We have tremendous potential in energy. Not everybody appreciates that potential,” Russia’s president said in a waspish swipe aimed at the European Union, which is wrangling with Moscow over natural gas supplies. “But it is not their resource. It is Russia’s resource,” which must be developed “under clear rules of behavior .”

Asked by British political theorist Anthony Giddens to consider swift changes that technology could force on energy suppliers because of global warming in that time frame, Putin turned the question away: “Stability is what the world economy needs . . . to become more predictable.”

In his view, the same is true for Russia’s political future. Putin promised again not to change the constitution so he could serve a third term after 2008. “Public opinion wants a country that will be stable, and stability is not assured by one man alone,” Putin said. It comes instead from following Moscow rules.

For more insights on how Putin manipulates the Western media, check out this insightful item on Vilhelm Konnander’s blog.

Hoagland, at least, reminds readers about Putin’s brutal crackdown on democracy; as noted above, many other participants at Valdai seem just as starstruck by Putin as Chamberlain was at Munich by Hitler. Yet, not even Hoagland pays enough attention to the potential for this event to constitute outright bribery, to lull the senses of the unwary, to be a trap set by a cunning KGB spy who has spent his life learning how to deceive.

Hoagland loses sight, however, like the rest, of Russia’s current litany of desperate problems. The population is rapidly declining; AIDS will infect 10% within 15 years; personal incomes hover at $300 per month, with millions living in third-world poverty. Russia is on the fast track to total disaster, repeating all the errors that brought the USSR to its knees, a Potemkin village easily blown down by the first economic storm. In short, Hoagland ought to spend a bit less time at Valdai and a bit more at La Russophobe.

Thanks for reading La Russophobe !

Post’s Hoagland not (entirely) Duped by Putin at Valdai

The Washington Post’s columnist Jim Hoagland reports from the Valdai Club on Putin’s wining and dining of foreign Russia “experts” he wants to brainwash (note that Putin’s chef isn’t Russian and didn’t serve Russian cuisine):

What he has done to the once-turbulent Russian political scene Vladimir Putin would like to do to the world’s equally volatile energy markets: Make them as stable and peaceful as the graveyard.

This grand ambition comes through vividly if implicitly as I listen to the Russian president outline in detail the concept of “energy security” that he had presented to world leaders in July at the Group of Eight summit. Putin wants markets built on long-term contracts guaranteeing not only adequate supply (of oil and gas from Russia) but also sustained demand (from consumers willing to pay fixed prices that would hold for decades).

His fellow leaders listened politely but did not commit to an idea that might have seemed quixotic coming from anyone else. Given the year that Putin is having, however, no one was willing to bet that he would fail at grand designs.

He has crushed the vibrant domestic opposition that flourished under Boris Yeltsin. With a 70 percent approval rating, he holds the power to name his successor. He has gained control over the flood of oil dollars pouring into Russia. And perhaps most satisfyingly for him, the political revolution lapping at Russia’s frontiers a year ago has receded as reformers who accomplished Ukraine’s Orange Revolution splintered and as his non-democratic allies in Belarus easily won reelection.

So the wiry former KGB colonel was chipper as he underwent an annual political checkup of sorts by a group of about 40 American, European and Asian policy and academic experts at his sprawling dacha in suburban Moscow yesterday. He took questions between servings of octopus carpaccio, baked sea bass and figs with yogurt sorbet, all prepared by his Italian chef and washed down by an unassuming pinot grigio 2005.

The clearest sign that fortune has smiled broadly on Putin since he met with the same organization, the Valdai Discussion Group, a year ago in the Kremlin was his warm praise for Ukrainian President Viktor Yushchenko, whom he now magnanimously terms “a serious, responsible” leader. Last September, he accused Yushchenko of allowing corruption to flourish in Ukraine while suggesting that the West was fomenting upheaval throughout the former Soviet Union.

President Bush also came in for praise and was offered a carefully hedged olive branch on Iran:”Iran is a special case” located “in a very dangerous area,” Putin said. Other nuclear-capable countries such as Brazil or South Africa “do not establish in their constitutions the goal of destroying another state,” as he said Iran did with Israel.

“Iran should abandon its plans for nuclear enrichment on its soil,” he continued. When asked specifically if Russia would support U.S. calls for sanctions, he declined to rule them out. Economic reprisals should be avoided if possible and adopted only after more discussions between Iran and the six-nation negotiating group that includes Russia and the United States.

But Putin’s remarks, delivered in simultaneous translation, lent weight to reports that Moscow has agreed to support symbolic sanctions if Iran remains adamant.

Putin, however, does not do mellow for long. He remains intense, focused and at times prickly even when munching the octopus carpaccio (quite tasty, by the way). His eyes flare when the subject turns to energy supplies and the vast infrastructure of new pipelines and producing fields that Russia intends to develop over a decade to become the world’s dominant exporter of energy.

Putin and his aides insist that to justify the investment needed to build that infrastructure, consuming nations must begin to sign 20- to 30-year contracts with Russia now to avoid the boom-and-bust cycles of petroleum and natural gas prices of the past three decades.

“We have tremendous potential in energy. Not everybody appreciates that potential,” Russia’s president said in a waspish swipe aimed at the European Union, which is wrangling with Moscow over natural gas supplies. “But it is not their resource. It is Russia’s resource,” which must be developed “under clear rules of behavior .”

Asked by British political theorist Anthony Giddens to consider swift changes that technology could force on energy suppliers because of global warming in that time frame, Putin turned the question away: “Stability is what the world economy needs . . . to become more predictable.”

In his view, the same is true for Russia’s political future. Putin promised again not to change the constitution so he could serve a third term after 2008. “Public opinion wants a country that will be stable, and stability is not assured by one man alone,” Putin said. It comes instead from following Moscow rules.

For more insights on how Putin manipulates the Western media, check out this insightful item on Vilhelm Konnander’s blog.

Hoagland, at least, reminds readers about Putin’s brutal crackdown on democracy; as noted above, many other participants at Valdai seem just as starstruck by Putin as Chamberlain was at Munich by Hitler. Yet, not even Hoagland pays enough attention to the potential for this event to constitute outright bribery, to lull the senses of the unwary, to be a trap set by a cunning KGB spy who has spent his life learning how to deceive.

Hoagland loses sight, however, like the rest, of Russia’s current litany of desperate problems. The population is rapidly declining; AIDS will infect 10% within 15 years; personal incomes hover at $300 per month, with millions living in third-world poverty. Russia is on the fast track to total disaster, repeating all the errors that brought the USSR to its knees, a Potemkin village easily blown down by the first economic storm. In short, Hoagland ought to spend a bit less time at Valdai and a bit more at La Russophobe.

Thanks for reading La Russophobe !

Post’s Hoagland not (entirely) Duped by Putin at Valdai

The Washington Post’s columnist Jim Hoagland reports from the Valdai Club on Putin’s wining and dining of foreign Russia “experts” he wants to brainwash (note that Putin’s chef isn’t Russian and didn’t serve Russian cuisine):

What he has done to the once-turbulent Russian political scene Vladimir Putin would like to do to the world’s equally volatile energy markets: Make them as stable and peaceful as the graveyard.

This grand ambition comes through vividly if implicitly as I listen to the Russian president outline in detail the concept of “energy security” that he had presented to world leaders in July at the Group of Eight summit. Putin wants markets built on long-term contracts guaranteeing not only adequate supply (of oil and gas from Russia) but also sustained demand (from consumers willing to pay fixed prices that would hold for decades).

His fellow leaders listened politely but did not commit to an idea that might have seemed quixotic coming from anyone else. Given the year that Putin is having, however, no one was willing to bet that he would fail at grand designs.

He has crushed the vibrant domestic opposition that flourished under Boris Yeltsin. With a 70 percent approval rating, he holds the power to name his successor. He has gained control over the flood of oil dollars pouring into Russia. And perhaps most satisfyingly for him, the political revolution lapping at Russia’s frontiers a year ago has receded as reformers who accomplished Ukraine’s Orange Revolution splintered and as his non-democratic allies in Belarus easily won reelection.

So the wiry former KGB colonel was chipper as he underwent an annual political checkup of sorts by a group of about 40 American, European and Asian policy and academic experts at his sprawling dacha in suburban Moscow yesterday. He took questions between servings of octopus carpaccio, baked sea bass and figs with yogurt sorbet, all prepared by his Italian chef and washed down by an unassuming pinot grigio 2005.

The clearest sign that fortune has smiled broadly on Putin since he met with the same organization, the Valdai Discussion Group, a year ago in the Kremlin was his warm praise for Ukrainian President Viktor Yushchenko, whom he now magnanimously terms “a serious, responsible” leader. Last September, he accused Yushchenko of allowing corruption to flourish in Ukraine while suggesting that the West was fomenting upheaval throughout the former Soviet Union.

President Bush also came in for praise and was offered a carefully hedged olive branch on Iran:”Iran is a special case” located “in a very dangerous area,” Putin said. Other nuclear-capable countries such as Brazil or South Africa “do not establish in their constitutions the goal of destroying another state,” as he said Iran did with Israel.

“Iran should abandon its plans for nuclear enrichment on its soil,” he continued. When asked specifically if Russia would support U.S. calls for sanctions, he declined to rule them out. Economic reprisals should be avoided if possible and adopted only after more discussions between Iran and the six-nation negotiating group that includes Russia and the United States.

But Putin’s remarks, delivered in simultaneous translation, lent weight to reports that Moscow has agreed to support symbolic sanctions if Iran remains adamant.

Putin, however, does not do mellow for long. He remains intense, focused and at times prickly even when munching the octopus carpaccio (quite tasty, by the way). His eyes flare when the subject turns to energy supplies and the vast infrastructure of new pipelines and producing fields that Russia intends to develop over a decade to become the world’s dominant exporter of energy.

Putin and his aides insist that to justify the investment needed to build that infrastructure, consuming nations must begin to sign 20- to 30-year contracts with Russia now to avoid the boom-and-bust cycles of petroleum and natural gas prices of the past three decades.

“We have tremendous potential in energy. Not everybody appreciates that potential,” Russia’s president said in a waspish swipe aimed at the European Union, which is wrangling with Moscow over natural gas supplies. “But it is not their resource. It is Russia’s resource,” which must be developed “under clear rules of behavior .”

Asked by British political theorist Anthony Giddens to consider swift changes that technology could force on energy suppliers because of global warming in that time frame, Putin turned the question away: “Stability is what the world economy needs . . . to become more predictable.”

In his view, the same is true for Russia’s political future. Putin promised again not to change the constitution so he could serve a third term after 2008. “Public opinion wants a country that will be stable, and stability is not assured by one man alone,” Putin said. It comes instead from following Moscow rules.

For more insights on how Putin manipulates the Western media, check out this insightful item on Vilhelm Konnander’s blog.

Hoagland, at least, reminds readers about Putin’s brutal crackdown on democracy; as noted above, many other participants at Valdai seem just as starstruck by Putin as Chamberlain was at Munich by Hitler. Yet, not even Hoagland pays enough attention to the potential for this event to constitute outright bribery, to lull the senses of the unwary, to be a trap set by a cunning KGB spy who has spent his life learning how to deceive.

Hoagland loses sight, however, like the rest, of Russia’s current litany of desperate problems. The population is rapidly declining; AIDS will infect 10% within 15 years; personal incomes hover at $300 per month, with millions living in third-world poverty. Russia is on the fast track to total disaster, repeating all the errors that brought the USSR to its knees, a Potemkin village easily blown down by the first economic storm. In short, Hoagland ought to spend a bit less time at Valdai and a bit more at La Russophobe.

Thanks for reading La Russophobe !

Post’s Hoagland not (entirely) Duped by Putin at Valdai

The Washington Post’s columnist Jim Hoagland reports from the Valdai Club on Putin’s wining and dining of foreign Russia “experts” he wants to brainwash (note that Putin’s chef isn’t Russian and didn’t serve Russian cuisine):

What he has done to the once-turbulent Russian political scene Vladimir Putin would like to do to the world’s equally volatile energy markets: Make them as stable and peaceful as the graveyard.

This grand ambition comes through vividly if implicitly as I listen to the Russian president outline in detail the concept of “energy security” that he had presented to world leaders in July at the Group of Eight summit. Putin wants markets built on long-term contracts guaranteeing not only adequate supply (of oil and gas from Russia) but also sustained demand (from consumers willing to pay fixed prices that would hold for decades).

His fellow leaders listened politely but did not commit to an idea that might have seemed quixotic coming from anyone else. Given the year that Putin is having, however, no one was willing to bet that he would fail at grand designs.

He has crushed the vibrant domestic opposition that flourished under Boris Yeltsin. With a 70 percent approval rating, he holds the power to name his successor. He has gained control over the flood of oil dollars pouring into Russia. And perhaps most satisfyingly for him, the political revolution lapping at Russia’s frontiers a year ago has receded as reformers who accomplished Ukraine’s Orange Revolution splintered and as his non-democratic allies in Belarus easily won reelection.

So the wiry former KGB colonel was chipper as he underwent an annual political checkup of sorts by a group of about 40 American, European and Asian policy and academic experts at his sprawling dacha in suburban Moscow yesterday. He took questions between servings of octopus carpaccio, baked sea bass and figs with yogurt sorbet, all prepared by his Italian chef and washed down by an unassuming pinot grigio 2005.

The clearest sign that fortune has smiled broadly on Putin since he met with the same organization, the Valdai Discussion Group, a year ago in the Kremlin was his warm praise for Ukrainian President Viktor Yushchenko, whom he now magnanimously terms “a serious, responsible” leader. Last September, he accused Yushchenko of allowing corruption to flourish in Ukraine while suggesting that the West was fomenting upheaval throughout the former Soviet Union.

President Bush also came in for praise and was offered a carefully hedged olive branch on Iran:”Iran is a special case” located “in a very dangerous area,” Putin said. Other nuclear-capable countries such as Brazil or South Africa “do not establish in their constitutions the goal of destroying another state,” as he said Iran did with Israel.

“Iran should abandon its plans for nuclear enrichment on its soil,” he continued. When asked specifically if Russia would support U.S. calls for sanctions, he declined to rule them out. Economic reprisals should be avoided if possible and adopted only after more discussions between Iran and the six-nation negotiating group that includes Russia and the United States.

But Putin’s remarks, delivered in simultaneous translation, lent weight to reports that Moscow has agreed to support symbolic sanctions if Iran remains adamant.

Putin, however, does not do mellow for long. He remains intense, focused and at times prickly even when munching the octopus carpaccio (quite tasty, by the way). His eyes flare when the subject turns to energy supplies and the vast infrastructure of new pipelines and producing fields that Russia intends to develop over a decade to become the world’s dominant exporter of energy.

Putin and his aides insist that to justify the investment needed to build that infrastructure, consuming nations must begin to sign 20- to 30-year contracts with Russia now to avoid the boom-and-bust cycles of petroleum and natural gas prices of the past three decades.

“We have tremendous potential in energy. Not everybody appreciates that potential,” Russia’s president said in a waspish swipe aimed at the European Union, which is wrangling with Moscow over natural gas supplies. “But it is not their resource. It is Russia’s resource,” which must be developed “under clear rules of behavior .”

Asked by British political theorist Anthony Giddens to consider swift changes that technology could force on energy suppliers because of global warming in that time frame, Putin turned the question away: “Stability is what the world economy needs . . . to become more predictable.”

In his view, the same is true for Russia’s political future. Putin promised again not to change the constitution so he could serve a third term after 2008. “Public opinion wants a country that will be stable, and stability is not assured by one man alone,” Putin said. It comes instead from following Moscow rules.

For more insights on how Putin manipulates the Western media, check out this insightful item on Vilhelm Konnander’s blog.

Hoagland, at least, reminds readers about Putin’s brutal crackdown on democracy; as noted above, many other participants at Valdai seem just as starstruck by Putin as Chamberlain was at Munich by Hitler. Yet, not even Hoagland pays enough attention to the potential for this event to constitute outright bribery, to lull the senses of the unwary, to be a trap set by a cunning KGB spy who has spent his life learning how to deceive.

Hoagland loses sight, however, like the rest, of Russia’s current litany of desperate problems. The population is rapidly declining; AIDS will infect 10% within 15 years; personal incomes hover at $300 per month, with millions living in third-world poverty. Russia is on the fast track to total disaster, repeating all the errors that brought the USSR to its knees, a Potemkin village easily blown down by the first economic storm. In short, Hoagland ought to spend a bit less time at Valdai and a bit more at La Russophobe.

Thanks for reading La Russophobe !

Post’s Hoagland not (entirely) Duped by Putin at Valdai

The Washington Post’s columnist Jim Hoagland reports from the Valdai Club on Putin’s wining and dining of foreign Russia “experts” he wants to brainwash (note that Putin’s chef isn’t Russian and didn’t serve Russian cuisine):

What he has done to the once-turbulent Russian political scene Vladimir Putin would like to do to the world’s equally volatile energy markets: Make them as stable and peaceful as the graveyard.

This grand ambition comes through vividly if implicitly as I listen to the Russian president outline in detail the concept of “energy security” that he had presented to world leaders in July at the Group of Eight summit. Putin wants markets built on long-term contracts guaranteeing not only adequate supply (of oil and gas from Russia) but also sustained demand (from consumers willing to pay fixed prices that would hold for decades).

His fellow leaders listened politely but did not commit to an idea that might have seemed quixotic coming from anyone else. Given the year that Putin is having, however, no one was willing to bet that he would fail at grand designs.

He has crushed the vibrant domestic opposition that flourished under Boris Yeltsin. With a 70 percent approval rating, he holds the power to name his successor. He has gained control over the flood of oil dollars pouring into Russia. And perhaps most satisfyingly for him, the political revolution lapping at Russia’s frontiers a year ago has receded as reformers who accomplished Ukraine’s Orange Revolution splintered and as his non-democratic allies in Belarus easily won reelection.

So the wiry former KGB colonel was chipper as he underwent an annual political checkup of sorts by a group of about 40 American, European and Asian policy and academic experts at his sprawling dacha in suburban Moscow yesterday. He took questions between servings of octopus carpaccio, baked sea bass and figs with yogurt sorbet, all prepared by his Italian chef and washed down by an unassuming pinot grigio 2005.

The clearest sign that fortune has smiled broadly on Putin since he met with the same organization, the Valdai Discussion Group, a year ago in the Kremlin was his warm praise for Ukrainian President Viktor Yushchenko, whom he now magnanimously terms “a serious, responsible” leader. Last September, he accused Yushchenko of allowing corruption to flourish in Ukraine while suggesting that the West was fomenting upheaval throughout the former Soviet Union.

President Bush also came in for praise and was offered a carefully hedged olive branch on Iran:”Iran is a special case” located “in a very dangerous area,” Putin said. Other nuclear-capable countries such as Brazil or South Africa “do not establish in their constitutions the goal of destroying another state,” as he said Iran did with Israel.

“Iran should abandon its plans for nuclear enrichment on its soil,” he continued. When asked specifically if Russia would support U.S. calls for sanctions, he declined to rule them out. Economic reprisals should be avoided if possible and adopted only after more discussions between Iran and the six-nation negotiating group that includes Russia and the United States.

But Putin’s remarks, delivered in simultaneous translation, lent weight to reports that Moscow has agreed to support symbolic sanctions if Iran remains adamant.

Putin, however, does not do mellow for long. He remains intense, focused and at times prickly even when munching the octopus carpaccio (quite tasty, by the way). His eyes flare when the subject turns to energy supplies and the vast infrastructure of new pipelines and producing fields that Russia intends to develop over a decade to become the world’s dominant exporter of energy.

Putin and his aides insist that to justify the investment needed to build that infrastructure, consuming nations must begin to sign 20- to 30-year contracts with Russia now to avoid the boom-and-bust cycles of petroleum and natural gas prices of the past three decades.

“We have tremendous potential in energy. Not everybody appreciates that potential,” Russia’s president said in a waspish swipe aimed at the European Union, which is wrangling with Moscow over natural gas supplies. “But it is not their resource. It is Russia’s resource,” which must be developed “under clear rules of behavior .”

Asked by British political theorist Anthony Giddens to consider swift changes that technology could force on energy suppliers because of global warming in that time frame, Putin turned the question away: “Stability is what the world economy needs . . . to become more predictable.”

In his view, the same is true for Russia’s political future. Putin promised again not to change the constitution so he could serve a third term after 2008. “Public opinion wants a country that will be stable, and stability is not assured by one man alone,” Putin said. It comes instead from following Moscow rules.

For more insights on how Putin manipulates the Western media, check out this insightful item on Vilhelm Konnander’s blog.

Hoagland, at least, reminds readers about Putin’s brutal crackdown on democracy; as noted above, many other participants at Valdai seem just as starstruck by Putin as Chamberlain was at Munich by Hitler. Yet, not even Hoagland pays enough attention to the potential for this event to constitute outright bribery, to lull the senses of the unwary, to be a trap set by a cunning KGB spy who has spent his life learning how to deceive.

Hoagland loses sight, however, like the rest, of Russia’s current litany of desperate problems. The population is rapidly declining; AIDS will infect 10% within 15 years; personal incomes hover at $300 per month, with millions living in third-world poverty. Russia is on the fast track to total disaster, repeating all the errors that brought the USSR to its knees, a Potemkin village easily blown down by the first economic storm. In short, Hoagland ought to spend a bit less time at Valdai and a bit more at La Russophobe.

Thanks for reading La Russophobe !

Kommersant Exposes Russian Energy Imperialism

Kommersant reports that Russia is engaged in a full-scale cold war against Ukraine, with several outrageously imperlialistic goals: (a) seize control of existing gas and oil pipelines in Ukraine; (b) seize control of Ukraine’s energy sector; (c) block the development of pipelines from central Asia to Europe through Ukraine. This naked Neo-Soviet aggression against Ukraine, when added to the recent Russian effort to foment a coup d’etat against Georgia, is terrifying and cries out for immediate and concerted action by the world if it wishes to avoid another protracted period of struggle with a totalitatarian Russia. Kommersant paints the ugly picture:

Kommersant has learned that Gazprom has promised Ukraine to keep gas prices at $95 per thousand cubic meters until the end of the year. In return, the gas giant is demanding a share in the country’s assets and a return to the question of control over its main gas pipelines. Russia’s position is so harsh that Ukraine has apparently joined the global ranks of Gazprom’s foes. Yesterday Ukrainian president Viktor Yushchenko announced that the country’s new energy strategy calls for the beginning of gas deliveries from a shelf in the Caspian Sea and participation in a project to deliver gas from the region to Europe via a pipeline that would bypass Russia.

Talks between Gazprom chief manager Aleksey Miller and Ukrainian prime minister Viktor Yanukovych concerning the regularization of the energy balance between Ukraine and Russia for late 2006 and early 2007 were concluded on Thursday. According to Kommersant‘s sources, Ukraine was assured that it would not be left without gas and that, despite the fact that Gazprom will begin to buy Turkmen gas for $100 per cubic meter in October, Ukraine will still be able to purchase its gas for $95 until the end of the year. However, this does not come without a cost. In return, Gazprom is demanding control over Ukraine’s major gas arteries and the opportunity to purchase stakes in the country’s fuel and energy sectors. Ukraine’s leadership is opposed to both demands, and it is possible that the situation could lead to another escalation of the conflict over gas between the two countries. The workings of both countries’ gas industries still happen behind closed doors, with few comments from either side. However, yesterday Yushchenko announced that he had reached an agreement with Azeri president Ilham Aliyev to create a gas transport network to deliver gas from the Caspian Sea to Western Europe. The planned network would cut Russia out of the loop entirely. Russia is, unsurprisingly, taking steps to head off such construction. In May, Russian president Vladimir Putin even promised to buy gas from Kazakhstan for $140 per thousand cubic meters (the current price is $65) in exchange for reassurances that the country will not build pipelines that would cut Russia out of its delivery network. A similar offer was made to the president of Turkmenistan. On September 6, Aleksey Miller signed an agreement with Turkmen president Saparmurat Niyazov to buy 162 billion cubic meters of Turkmen gas for $100 per cubic meter (the current price is $65) in 2006-2009. During the signing, President Niyazov assured the Gazprom chief that all of the gas will be delivered through Russia and that Turkmenistan is not interested in a trans-Caspian pipeline. However, the US, which has good relations with Ukraine and Poland, is lobbying hard for the pipeline. According to the Polish media, the country’s prime minister will visit Washington next week to discuss financing (Poland needs to commit $5 billion to the project). Similar negotiations with Ukraine are possible, meaning that the chances of such a pipeline being built are increasing slowly but surely.

Thanks for reading La Russophobe !

How do you become the greatest Russian female tennis player of all time? Well, first you move to the United States and then . . .

Over the weekend two women met in the finals of the U.S. Open tennis tournament in New York City.

One of them entered the match with five prior tournament wins this season plus two Fed Cup match wins for her country. What’s more, she was making history by having appeared in the finals of all four grand slam tournaments this year, already having prevailed in one.

The other? She had won two tournaments, appeared in no other Grand Slam finals and never played for her country in the Fed Cup series. Oh yeah, but she was a better little piece of ass than the first.

Guess which woman got more attention from the media? Guess who had commercials regularly fashing across the screen and a puff piece before the action began, while the other was totally ignored? Yup, the second of course!

Maria Sharapova, woman number two, became unquestionably the greatest “Russian” female tennis player of all time, winning her second grand slam title and having once held, for a few months, the number-one ranking. No other “Russian” woman can boast these achievements.

Yet, as with most things concerning Russia, when we look even a little carefully at the details we see that there is virtually no good news for Russia at all. Not only did Maria move out of Russia when she was a child and acquire her game in the United States, but her game is in reality just a sham.

The pattern of ignominious defeat, and wretched unengaging play even when winning, by the Russian lady tennisistkas continued apace at the U.S. Open last week. Half of its seeded contingent was ejected by lower-ranked players and the world gaped in slack-jawed horror at the robotic play of those that advanced. You know the ladies had it rough when more Russian men made the semis than did women, yet none of the men advanced to the finals. The only good news for Russia was that so-called Russian Sharapova won the ladies’ title, but as shown below this was a wolf in sheep’s clothing to say the least.

Russia put ten seeded players into the ladies draw and four reached the quarter finals. There, #4 seed Elena Dementieva lost in straight sets to a player not ranked in the world’s top 15 (taking only three games out of 15 played). #12 Dinara Safina lost in straights as well, but she lost to the world #1 so she was one of Russia’s standout performers.

The result was that a Russian made the semi-finals only because it was guaranteed when the luck of the draw caused #27 Tatiana Golovin met #3 Sharapova (though Golovin officially plays for France and Sharapova lives in the United States, where she owns a good deal of real estate and derives all her income, so it could be argued that all the “real” Russians were eliminated before the semis and only two reached the quarters – that is unless you are a Slavic Russian who doesn’t recognize a name like “Safin,” which is Tatar and not Slavic; in that case, only one “real Russian” got past the fourth round). As described below, the all-quasi-Russian match proved to be yet another total disaster for the fans unlucky enough to have watched it (especially those who paid for the privilege).

Golovin dismissed #5 seed Petrova in the third round and #23 Anna Chakvetadze in the fourth round, so Chakvetadze is the third Russian who didn’t lose to a lower-ranked player (if you count Frenchwoman Golovin — but Chakvetadze is really a Georgian, so maybe that doesn’t count either). #32 Likhovtseva and #33 Zvonareva both also lost to higher-ranked players (Sharapova and Dementieva, respectively).

#6 Kuznetsova lost to the same player who crushed Dementieva, Russian-killer and #19 seed Jelena Jancovic of Serbia.

#11 Myskina lost to an unseeded player in the first round.

#20 Kirilenko lost to an unseeded player in the third round.

Here’s how the U.S. Open website ridculed the shameful and unwatchable Sharapova-Golovin match:

Feeling Pretty, Playing Shaky, Sharapova Into Semis
by Aimee Berg
Wednesday, September 6, 2006

Wednesday night in Arthur Ashe Stadium, two teenagers in pretty cocktail dresses frequently lost their serves and nerves and played one-dimensional power games, knowing one of them was guaranteed a berth in the semifinal round. In the end, No. 2 seed Maria Sharapova won a grudge match against her friend Tatiana Golovin, 7-6 (4), 7-6 (0). Afterward, Sharapova acknowleged, “I’ll definitely need to improve before my next one” against top-seeded Amelie Mauresmo. Twenty-one minutes into the first set, fans whispered with concern as Sharapova struggled against the No. 27 seed and trailed 1-3. Luckily for the “It Girl,” Golovin was equally tense. The two broke each other’s serve six times in the first 10 games. Then, at 5-all, they each held serve to force a tiebreak. In the tiebreak, Sharapova led 3-0 when Golovin unexpectedly summoned doctors to treat a foot blister. During the time-out, Sharapova turned Arthur Ashe Stadium into a personal practice court by rehearsing serves into an empty service box. The rules allow it, but the gesture seemed a tad gauche for a multi-millionaire who styles herself after Audrey Hepburn. The blister treatment helped Golovin rally and tie it at 4, but Sharapova won the next three points to capture the set. In the second set, both players managed to hold serve until the sixth game. After that, they took turns breaking each other for the next four. Golovin finally held to tie it at 5. They each won their next service game to force another tiebreak, in which Sharapova blanked Golovin, 7-0. In all, Sharapova won 22 of her 91 points from Golovin’s errors, and Golovin could thank Sharapova for 32 of the 81 points she collected. Neither player approached the net more than 10 times during the 2-hour, 11-minute match, and they shared similar serving power with identical top speeds (114 mph), matching first-serve averages (104 mph) and first serve accuracy (64 percent), as well as double faults (6). Sharapova is now 4-0 against the hot-tempered Golovin, who at one point blasted a ball into the crowd, whizzing past a woman’s head, to vent her frustration.

The “feeling pretty” reference is to Sharapova’s latest commercial, wherein she is called pretty by dozens on her way to a match and then, at the first point, awes everyone into silence with her brutal power. Watching this commercial over and over again while Sharapova repeatedly lost her serve and was nearly eliminated by a player not ranked in the world’s top 25, who was coming back after a horrific on-court injury, made Sharapova seem even more absurdly lacking in substance than ever. Naturally, the U.S. Open commentator couldn’t resist raking her over the coals for her outrageous hubris unsupported by her level of play.

Even more outrageous, though, was the illegal coaching Sharapova received from her father in the stands. The TV commentators documented Mr. Sharapov holding up a cup telling Sharapova when to drink and a banana telling her when to eat, blatantly ignoring the rule forbidding such conduct. Why does Sharapova, seeded #3, need such help against a player not ranked in the world’s top 25? Can’t she win on her own? Apparently not, since Golovin took Sharapova to two tiebreakers and had numerous chances to take the match. What’s next for Maria, steroids? Time will tell.

And then there was the screaming. Sharapova’s high-pitched wailing, perhaps a tactic to conceal the sound of the ball striking her racket from her opponent, makes it nearly impossible to watch an entire match, certainly it can’t be done without repeated wincing.

So with ten seeded players in the draw only one Russian reached the semi-finals, a “Russian” who speaks English on the court and lives in the United States. Not exactly a breathtaking result.

Sharapova would go on to defeat world #1 Amelie Mauresmo in a truly bizarre semi-final match, winning the first and third sets at love while being easily beaten in the second and taking the match despite having 20% more unforced errors than winners. Mauresmo, the greatest choke player in the history of the women’s game, made nearly 40 unforced errors and handed the match to Sharapova in a true laugher, the kind of thing that is seriously underming the sport’s fan base.

The news wasn’t much better on the men’s side. Russia’s male hero Marat Safin (brother of Dinara and not, by the standards of Slavic race relations, a “real Russian” at all) was ejected before the quarter finals by a non-top-ten opponent. Unseeded Mikhail Youzhny was a standout, eliminating the number two six in the fourth round and the number two in the quarters before losing honorably to #9 American Andy Roddick in the semis. Youzhny also did well in doubles, his unseeded team ousting the top seeds in the fourth round before being ousted in the quarters. Finally there was #7 seed Nikolai Davydenko, who in the quarters faced the same (lower ranked) player that eliminated Safin and struggled to beat him in five after losing the first two sets. Davydenko went on to lose honorably, as everyone does, to #1 juggernaut Roger Federer, and is another “Russian,” since he was born in the Ukraine and lived most of his life in Germany; he now resides in Monte Carlo. How he gets denominated “Russian” along with Youzhny, born and currently residing in Moscow, is anybody’s guess.

As for Sharapova, her 6-4, 6-4 win over Justine Henin-Hardenne was a real outrage, and not just because of the excrutiatingly unwatchable quality of Sharapova’s one-dimensional play. The TV network hyped Sharapova’s pretty face continuously while ignoring Henin-Hardenne’s existence, even though Justine had just completed one of the most amazing achievements in the sport’s history, appearing in the finals of all four grand-slam events this year; instead, it sought to market the match based on Sharapova’s sex appeal. At the trophy ceremony after Sharapova’s victory, the presenter called upon the audience to give a round of applause for the match and had to ask twice just to force a smattering of clapping out of those assembled, because the match was just about as boring as they get (a clear pattern where Sharapova is concerned). Weirdly, Sharapova had once again struck 20% more unforced errors than her opponent, just like in the Mauresmo match, yet still managed to prevail by relying on the same uncanny dumb luck that allowed her to emmigrate to the U.S. as a child from Siberia.

So now this is “Russia’s” greatest player, someone who owns homes in Florida and California but not in Russia, who speaks English without an accent on the court but not Russian and who has lived her entire life in the U.S. and acquired her game from American coaches, and never once played for the Russian national team. In other words, her victory is really just an embarrassment for Russia and bad for the sport as well, pushing true champions to the sidelines and elevating form over substance.

And so it goes in Russia.

Thanks for reading La Russophobe !

Did you give thanks for tanks on Sunday?

If not, shame on you. As Itar-Tass reported, Sunday was “tank day” in Russia, yet another Soviet holiday to commemorate militarism, aggression and imperialism that Russia has not only not seen fit to abolish but still officially celebrates.

Thanks for reading La Russophobe !