MOSCOW, August 10 (RIA Novosti) Russia's arctic expedition annoys West/ Russia's polar expedition causes more harm than good - scientist/ Georgia hastily wipes out traces of "Russian aggression"/ Does Russia need Iraqi oil?/ Russian debtors will not be allowed to travel abroad
Gazeta.ru
Russia's arctic expedition annoys West
Even the most fervent gung-ho patriots would not dare claim that Russia now has legal rights to the North Pole and its subsoil resources. So why has everyone become so agitated about it?
Russia has not made any official claims; and when it does, it will first send its scientific report to the United Nations, not start with a pirate-style takeover. The reason behind such an inadequate response is the West's growing annoyance with Russia, which they take no trouble to hide.
From the Western perspective, the economic upturn in Russia and, say, China, are different in nature. China's steady progress toward economic and geopolitical influence is not at all making the industrially developed nations happy; it is rather seen as an alarming trend. The socio-political model that the country employs inspires little sympathy in the West, too. Still, no one can claim that Beijing owes its success to pure chance or is achieved at the expense of others.
Russia is perceived differently. Its growth has different causes - primarily high world commodity prices - and the Kremlin deserves none of the credit. Russia is seen by the Western public as hybrid between aggressive nouveau-riche at a time of primitive growth and an idle rentier living off a legacy.
The recent arctic expedition involved just about everything that the West finds so annoying. The Kremlin turned a purely scientific endeavor into a high-profile PR event with a nationalistic flavor and used it to consolidate the regime's prestige.
In addition, Russia has shown how rich it is. True, none of the Arctic region countries are poor, but not all of them have the resources to organize an expensive arctic expedition. Finally, Moscow has again reminded the West that despite years of depression, its technological potential is still greater than most countries. The Western nations are forced to take Moscow ever more seriously, however reluctant they might be to do that.
Russia's recent move has once again shown that this century is bound to see fierce competition for mineral resources. No one will be willing to give an inch, as important issues like this usually make even close partners quite uncompromising.
Experts say that the world saw a similar situation 50 years ago when the Antarctic was at stake. Seven countries then laid claims on it, and research parties were as politicized as Russia's Arctic expedition. However, the sides eventually agreed on a legal framework for the icy continent thus removing it from the sphere of geopolitical competition. This process is still possible in the Arctic today.
Nezavisimaya Gazeta
Russia's polar expedition causes more harm than good - scientist
Russia's dive to the North Pole, collection of samples, and placing its titanium flag on the seabed, was a major achievement for Arctic researchers, engineers, and other specialists.
However, it has damaged Russia's chances of claiming the right to that part of the sea shelf, Leopold Lobkovsky, deputy director of the Russian Institute of Ocean Studies, told the popular daily Nezavisimaya Gazeta.
"To prove that the Lomonosov Ridge is a continuation of the continental shelf, which would allow Russia to claim rights over it, we should study it at a depth of 5-7 kilometers, or better still, 10 kilometers," he said. "Samples taken from the surface will prove nothing."
According to the expert, the expedition did not collect any new data to present to the UN Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf.
"We have taken samples from the seabed before. Wells were drilled in the Lomonosov Ridge to a depth of 400 meters several years ago, but nobody wrote much about it then," Lobkovsky said.
Moreover, samples taken by mini submarines cannot be taken seriously, which means that the international community is unlikely to approve Russia's report to the UN Commission, which will be ready in about six months.
On the other hand, the scandal stirred by Russia's attempts to take over an oil- and gas-rich area of more than 1 million square kilometers (over 386,100 square miles) could seriously undermine its image.
Russian scientists hope the government will at long last provide appropriate funding for research, building ice-breakers with a drilling capacity, and so on. But their hopes may be dashed, while Canada, Denmark, Norway, and the United States have the funds and the equipment to work in the Arctic.
Anatoly Kolodkin, honorary vice president of the International Maritime Committee and a judge of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, has a more optimistic view of the issue. He said that any reaction to Russia's report to the UN would benefit the country.
"If the UN Commission makes a positive decision, Russia would have the right to begin shelf exploration and development," he said. "If the decision is negative, I would still recommend the Russian authorities start exploration anyway, as an exception to the rule can always be found."
Vremya Novostei
Georgia hastily wipes out traces of "Russian aggression"
Georgia has claimed that Russia was to blame for a Raduga Kh-58 (AS-11 Kilter) missile falling on its territory on August 6. Tbilisi, drawing support from its Western partners, is insisting on the "Russian connection" and trying to exploit the incident to inflict as much diplomatic harm on Moscow as possible. But an investigation requires evidence, which the Georgian side is quickly trying to destroy. The unexploded missile that dropped from an unidentified aircraft was detonated in a hurry on August 7.
Marat Kulakhmetov, commander of the Combined Peacekeeping Forces in the Georgian-Abkhazian conflict area, has complained that what remained of the missile was disposed of very quickly. "As soon as the Georgian side removed the warhead, they quickly destroyed it," he said. Peacekeepers were not informed. "I do not know why they needed to demolish the missile," he said.
The Defense Ministry of the unrecognized republic of South Ossetia believes that "both the aircraft and the missile belonged to the Georgian army." "That was why they destroyed the missile so quickly. If it had been from a Russian plane, they would not have blown it up at all. It would have made the most prized piece in Tbilisi's 'museum of Russian aggression'," said South Ossetia's Deputy Defense Minister Ibragim Gasseyev.
Chief of the Russian General Staff General of the Army Yury Baluyevsky called the Georgian accusations a "provocation." Tbilisi, he said, "is anxious that a possible decision to grant Kosovo independence may lead to Georgia ultimately losing Ossetia and Abkhazia." He is echoed by Lieutenant General Igor Khvorov, chief of the Air Force Headquarters of Russia. He said Georgia was indulging in "political wishful thinking."
Politicians are now rushing to the notorious area. Members of parliament from the ruling Georgian United National Movement have visited it. Deputies promised to solve local social and community problems and even to build a stadium. But some of the Georgian opposition describe the events as a "spectacle" and doubt that Russia was involved in the incident.
Labor leader Shalva Natelashvili, for example, called attention to the fact that the missile fell at a very opportune time, "becoming an ace of trumps" in saving the Georgian president's popularity rating.
Gazeta
Does Russia need Iraqi oil?
The Iraqi government intends to nationalize most of the country's largest oilfields. Hussain al-Shahrastani, Iraqi minister of oil, said yesterday, while on an official visit to Moscow, that by late September all 27 oilfields currently under development in the country, as well as all major fields where operations were suspended because of the U.S. invasion, will be placed under the control of the Iraq National Oil Company. However, Russian oil companies, especially LUKoil, still hope to get their share of the Iraqi "oil pie." Why?
Valery Yazev, chairman of the State Duma committee for energy, transport and communications, said: "We need Iraqi oil as much as we need Central Asian gas."
Grigory Sergiyenko, executive director of the Russian Fuel Union, said: "Oil is always needed, especially considering the high demand for it on the world market. In any case, it will be in demand irrespective of the place of production.
"It is unlikely that we will import Iraqi oil to Russia, though Iraq's infrastructure is, perhaps, even better than the Russian one. It is important for Russia now to gain a foothold in those regions that will give it advantages and bring profits in the future. This could be a serious reserve, for oil prices will go up and conditions for production will inevitably grow worse. Those who produce oil at lower costs will have advantages on the market."
Sergei Grigoryev, vice-president of Transneft, Russia's oil pipeline monopoly, said: "Why do Americans need Iraqi oil? Why should somebody need someone else's oil at all? This is a matter of business, therefore when Russian companies appear on the world markets it is not at all bad. Perhaps, it is easier for America to export oil to Southeast Asia as they are closer to each other and they could get some compensation there.
"Of course, Iraq has its own pipelines. There is an export oil pipeline to Ceyhan. There is also a pipeline running to the Persian Gulf from which oil could be transported by tankers. That is, oil produced in Iraq could be transported to any location. This is a prospect for the future, for a peaceful life will come one day."
Novye Izvestia
Russian debtors will not be allowed to travel abroad
The Federal Bailiff Service has found a new way to deal with debtors who fail to pay their household bills, alimony and loans. A single database providing information on all non-payers will be set up in Russia October 1. It will help track the migration of insolvent payers, as the Law on the Procedure for Exiting and Entering the Russian Federation bans them from visiting foreign countries.
According to preliminary information, over 10,000-20,000 names could be transferred to the database.
At present, over 27 million cases of non-repayment of alimony, compensation for injury to health and other damages are pending with the service. In St. Petersburg over 700 and in Moscow 500 debtors are not permitted to leave the country.
"We have already started accumulating information about debtors, and now we are monitoring all regions," said Artur Parfenchikov, deputy director of the Federal Bailiff Service.
Russian lawyers support bailiffs.
"It is inconceivable to disobey a court ruling in foreign countries," said lawyer Yuri Dobronravov. "In our country it is a common thing when the debtor lives in clover: officially he is unemployed, drives a decent car by proxy and sneers at his creditor or ex-wife, whom he does not pay child support. Now we have to refuse to defend people who ask to protect their interests in debt cases. We simply understand that although we will win the case, they will not get their money back."
RIA Novosti is not responsible for the content of outside sources.
