Nezavisimaya Gazeta
Bratislava Summit: An Atmosphere Of Cold Calculation
President Vladimir Putin and President George Bush will meet in Slovakia in late February. The infatuation with "sudden alliance" is over. The sides have returned to the era of cold calculation, Professor Alexei Bogaturov, the deputy director of the Institute of International Security Problems, says in an interview with Nezavisimaya Gazeta.
Today, Vladimir Putin needs the support of George Bush more than President Bush needed his support at the initial stage of the operation in Iraq.
The two presidents will discuss a compromise between the Russian government and "moderate Chechen warlords." For the past year, Mr. Putin's adversaries, including in the US, have used the media to fan a full-scale scandal over the situation in Chechnya.
The transfer of the US strategy of regime change to the CIS is a painful issue. The events in Ukraine are a vivid example of the civilian version of that policy, and "orange" methods are being widely applied in countries adjacent to Russia. This is an important and painful issue for the Kremlin. There are no reasons to assume that Moscow will not consider measures to protect its interests in these countries.
Oil and gas reserves in Greater Central Asia, from the Caspian Sea to China, worry the Americans more than the Russian energy resources. A clash of Russian and American interests there would be particularly dangerous given NATO's tendency to reach out into the Eurasian region. Russian presence in that part of the world does not suit Washington, but the US administration is aware of the impossibility and dangers of trying to push it out.
And lastly, the two leaders will most probably discuss the nuclear programs of Iran and North Korea. The US is not risking anything in Iran - just as it did not risk anything in Iraq. It is the neighboring countries that will face the risks. Russiahas solid reasons to try to prevent a US attack against Iran, because the country is too close to Russia's borders. This will put Mr. Putin and Mr. Bush at loggerheads over Iran.
Kommersant, Vremya Novostei, Vedomosti
North Korea: Nuclear Bluff Or Real Threat?
The Foreign Ministry of North Korea announced yesterday that the country had nuclear weapons. Pyongyang explained that the treat emanating from the US had prompted the announcement and the country's withdrawal from the six-party talks on the settlement of the nuclear programs crisis. North Korea did not provide proof that it had nuclear weapons, but Washington and Moscow regard its statements seriously. Kommersant, Vremya Novostei and Vedomosti all comment on the story.
Professor Alexei Bogaturov, the deputy director of the International Security Institute of the Russian Academy of Sciences, says the threat of an external attack dictates the logic behind Pyongyang's actions. "The US invasion of Iraq prompted all threshold countries to accelerate their nuclear weapons programs," he said. "They decided that the US would not have launched the war if Iraq had had nuclear weapons."
The expert believes that US attacks at Iran over its nuclear program could have provoked Pyongyang's dramatic decision. But "the US will hardly resort to military force" in this case, Mr. Bogaturov said. "Russia and China will be against it."
It is a fact that North Korea has not held nuclear tests. "The probability that the country has working nuclear devices, let alone nuclear weapons, is minimal," believes Yevgeny Myasnikov of the Center for Disarmament Problems. In his opinion, the North Korean statement might be a bluff. But other experts point out that a primitive nuclear charge can be built without tests and the probability that it will explode "is rather large."
Observers admit that the presumed North Korean nuclear charge could be small enough to be carried by a transport plane. But they do not rule out that the country may have nuclear warheads, because it could get technical documents from some other country, such as Pakistan.
The inclusion of North Korea in the "axis of evil" three years ago forced the communist preserve to elaborate a survival strategy for the presidency of George Bush. Yesterday's announcement is probably designed to strengthen the core that allows the national leaders to keep the public in check. They must show the people that they will not bow to foreign pressure and will not pay for their right to self-determination by making concessions to the US.
Kommersant
Kiev Raises Moscow Air Defense Tariffs
Yesterday, Moscow hosted a session of the CIS coordinating committee for air-defense issues, where Ukraine demanded that Russia pay more for information received by its early-warning stations, writes Kommersant.
The joint CIS air-defense system's current state and development prospects were examined at the session. This air-defense system was established ten years ago by nine CIS countries. However, it became clear that only Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia and Tajikistan were continuing to improve the system. Ukraine and Uzbekistan cooperate with Moscow on a bilateral basis alone, while Georgia and Turkmenistan have not been involved in interaction over the last seven years.
General of the Army Vladimir Mikhailov, who commands the Russian Air Force, said yesterday that Moscow and Minsk would establish a joint regional air-defense system in 2005. He said that the Supreme Council of the Belarus-Russia Union State would appoint a general in charge of this bilateral air-defense system and its forces and resources would be subordinated to him.
This contrasted with statements from Colonel-General Anatoly Toropchin, commander of Ukraine's Air Force. Kiev demanded that Moscow pay more for information received by the Russian early-warning network from Dnieper radars in Mukachev and Sevastopol. Kiev now gets $1.2 million for this information each year.
General Toropchin believes that this sum total does not cover the Ukrainian Defense Ministry's expenses. First of all, this concerns the spending on personnel that cater to Russian needs. "Russia annually pays $5 million for the Daryal radar in Azerbaijan, bur Ukraine receives only $1.2 million for its two radars," the general complained. Consequently, the presidents and governments of the two countries must rectify the situation.
Izvestia, Kommersant
Foreigners Barred From Bidding For Russia's Best Oilfields
The Russian Natural Resources Ministry's liberal policy is not really that liberal. Natural Resources Minister Yury Trutnev announced on Thursday that neither foreign companies nor Russian businesses controlled from offshore areas would be admitted to auctions for Russia's best oil and gas fields. Izvestia and Kommersant take up this matter.
What is behind this move? The fields are strategically important, so only companies with no less than 51% of Russian capital will be allowed to bid. The fields in question are Sakhalin-3 (over 600 million tons of crude) and several sites in the Barents Sea (more than 977 million tons) and the Yamal-Nenets Autonomous Area and the Timan-Pechora oil basin (aggregate resources of at least 250 million tons).
In all, more than 250 licenses are on the 2005 sales list, and the "Russians-only" short list includes the Udokanskoye copper deposit and the Sukhoi Log gold field. The latter's reserves are estimated at over 1,000 tons of gold, which puts the minimum starting price at $150 million.
The Natural Resources Ministry has put many major companies on a black list. One is Sibneft, whose controlling stake belongs to six Cyprus-based offshore companies managed by Millhouse Capital. Another is TNK-BP, a 50/50 joint venture between Russia's Alfa Group and Access/Renova and Britain's BP. The ministry acknowledges that Surgutneftegaz and Norilsk Nickel might also be in a difficult situation.
Given the ministry's latest moves, such international players as Shell, Total, CNPC, Chevron, and ExxonMobil have few prospects for expanding their business in Russia. The only hope for them is to set up Russian subsidiaries, which is not something every company can afford.
Non-Russian companies were shocked by Mr. Trutnev's statement. Shell Russia press secretary Maksim Shub said he did not understand what was going on. Other companies refused to comment.
Rossiiskaya Gazeta
Could Russia End Up Without Ammunition?
The world's largest arms fair, IDEX-2005, is to open on February 2 in the United Arab Emirates. The Russian exposition will, as usual, be interesting, but the munitions industry will not be the leader it once was, Rossiiskaya Gazeta informs its readers.
Nikolai Gorokhov, the president of the Development of the Munitions Industry and Specialized Chemistry branch at the Academy of Economic Recovery Problems says the munitions industry, as well as gunpowder production and specialized chemistry, are on the brink of disaster. He believes Russia will be unable to produce gunpowder and ammunition unless drastic measures are implemented. Many sectoral factories have already closed and another 20 enterprises may go bankrupt.
High hopes had been pinned on privatization, but they were not justified.
Why has Russia failed to convert its munitions factories and specialized-chemistry enterprises to civilian production? Sectoral specifics were not taken into account. Due to their unique design, factory buildings and other related structures used to produce explosives cannot be used for civilian purposes. Moreover, their highly specialized equipment does not recoup diversification expenses. Sectoral enterprises can no longer master production processes, so they are in no position to make certain warhead types. The munitions industry has lost its most active and promising engineers and workers between 30 and 40. And, finally, specialists training in colleges and universities do not want to join the sector.
The state of sectoral science is also a sad story. Ammunition samples have not been renewed for 15 years, while Russian R&D projects lag behind other countries by 20-25 years. We may even lose valuable forms and records because they are not stored correctly.
There is only one way to ensure the gunpowder industry's stabilization and development. Its enterprises must be converted into state-run factories, and science and production associations set up on their premises.
Noviye Izvestia
Majority Of Russians Ready To Protest
On Thursday, ROMIR Monitoring published the results of a public opinion poll conducted in January. Sociologists asked Russians what forms of protest they would be ready to take up, if they felt their rights had been diminished, writes Noviye Izvestia.
Only 2% of the respondents had difficulty answering the question. Another 31% conceded they were not willing to take any action. However, 67% of Russians stated they would defend their rights if necessary.
Twenty-six percent of Russians still consider going to court as an appropriate way to battle against injustice; this was the most common answer. Another 20% believe in sending letters to President Putin. Just under 18% are willing to write collective letters to their members of parliament, although this group of respondents soon will have to search for an alternative means of solving their problems because there will be no one-mandate deputies in the next State Duma.
Overall, 30% of Russians are willing to participate in various protests. Half of them express rather moderate attitudes. They consider temporarily downing tools or prolonged labor strikes as appropriate protest actions. Another 15% are radicals. They are ready not only to stop working, but also to go as far as blocking roads and rail tracks.
Thirteen percent of Russians believe in the power of the media. They claimed that they would definitely use television and the press to defend their rights. Another 7% would appeal to labor unions, and 7% stated they would go on hunger strike.
Finally, 5% of the respondents claimed they would choose "something else." The sociologists responsible for the survey did not know exactly what they meant.
