Quote: The presidents and prime ministers and their spouses had gathered at the Athenee Palace Hilton hotel for a gala dinner on the final night of the NATO summit when suddenly an unexpected visitor crashed the party -- Russian President Vladimir Putin.
Although Russia does not belong to the alliance, and Putin had not been invited to the dinner, he showed up anyway, to everyone's surprise. The NATO leaders politely made room for him -- as it happened, Afghan President Hamid Karzai had backed out at the last minute, leaving an open seat -- but they were all buzzing at the breach of protocol and its larger meaning.
Putin is the man who came to dinner in more ways than one. Putin's Russia loomed over the summit that ended Friday much as it increasingly looms over Europe these days, an inescapable force that may not be as menacing as during the Cold War but is no longer the docile international welfare recipient of the 1990s either. The Russia he built during an eight-year presidency ending next month has forced its way to the table of European politics, even if uninvited, and competes for influence with the United States.
Full article: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/04/04/AR2008040401197_pf.html
Another link with very interesting comments: The Uninvited Guest
.
Saturday, April 5, 2008
Friday, April 4, 2008
Ukraine President: Kiev Free To Forge Own Security Policy
Quote: Ukrainian President Viktor Yushchenko stressed Friday that Kiev was free to forge its own security policy as the North Atlantic Treaty Organization reaffirmed his country would become a member despite Russian opposition.
"Ukraine is not a product of the Cold War. Ukraine is a sovereign, independent state and it has its own right to formulate its own security policy," he told reporters at a NATO summit in Bucharest.
His remarks came minutes before leaders of the military alliance sat down to talks with Russian President Vladimir Putin, amid deep tensions over the aspirations of Ukraine and Georgia to enter NATO.
NATO Secretary General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer said a decision by leaders Thursday that the former Soviet republics "will become members" was the start of a process that would see Kiev brought into the fold.
"I think that it was the launch of a process that will lead to Ukrainian membership of NATO. That is a conclusion that we should not underestimate," he said after a meeting of the NATO-Ukraine Commission.
Full article: http://www.nasdaq.com/aspxcontent/NewsStory.aspx?cpath=20080404%5cACQDJON200804040549DOWJONESDJONLINE000539.htm&&mypage=newsheadlines&title=Ukraine%20President:%20Kiev%20Free%20To%20Forge%20Own%20Security%20Policy%20-%20AFP
.
"Ukraine is not a product of the Cold War. Ukraine is a sovereign, independent state and it has its own right to formulate its own security policy," he told reporters at a NATO summit in Bucharest.
His remarks came minutes before leaders of the military alliance sat down to talks with Russian President Vladimir Putin, amid deep tensions over the aspirations of Ukraine and Georgia to enter NATO.
NATO Secretary General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer said a decision by leaders Thursday that the former Soviet republics "will become members" was the start of a process that would see Kiev brought into the fold.
"I think that it was the launch of a process that will lead to Ukrainian membership of NATO. That is a conclusion that we should not underestimate," he said after a meeting of the NATO-Ukraine Commission.
Full article: http://www.nasdaq.com/aspxcontent/NewsStory.aspx?cpath=20080404%5cACQDJON200804040549DOWJONESDJONLINE000539.htm&&mypage=newsheadlines&title=Ukraine%20President:%20Kiev%20Free%20To%20Forge%20Own%20Security%20Policy%20-%20AFP
.
Keep away from our borders, Putin tells Nato
Quote: Vladimir Putin yesterday told Nato that it would become a "direct threat" to Moscow if it expanded further east.
Emboldened after routing the alliance's plans to offer membership to Ukraine and Georgia, the Russian president yesterday gave warning that the countries must be locked out permanently. "The emergence of a powerful military bloc at our borders will be seen as a direct threat to Russian security," Mr Putin told Nato heads of state at a summit in the Romanian capital, Bucharest.
"The efficiency of our co-operation will depend on whether Nato members take Russia's interests into account."
While the tone of his speech was typically strident, Mr Putin refrained from the insults with which he often pepper his foreign policy speeches.
Nor, however, was he as conciliatory as some Western European countries had hoped after their retreat on membership. Many analysts described Nato's capitulation as the biggest foreign policy victory of Mr Putin's presidency. Mr Putin, who switches jobs to become prime minister next month, offered no substantial compromises in return and ties with the West will consequently remain strained over a number of potentially explosive issues.
Full article: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2008/04/05/wnato105.xml
.
Emboldened after routing the alliance's plans to offer membership to Ukraine and Georgia, the Russian president yesterday gave warning that the countries must be locked out permanently. "The emergence of a powerful military bloc at our borders will be seen as a direct threat to Russian security," Mr Putin told Nato heads of state at a summit in the Romanian capital, Bucharest.
"The efficiency of our co-operation will depend on whether Nato members take Russia's interests into account."
While the tone of his speech was typically strident, Mr Putin refrained from the insults with which he often pepper his foreign policy speeches.
Nor, however, was he as conciliatory as some Western European countries had hoped after their retreat on membership. Many analysts described Nato's capitulation as the biggest foreign policy victory of Mr Putin's presidency. Mr Putin, who switches jobs to become prime minister next month, offered no substantial compromises in return and ties with the West will consequently remain strained over a number of potentially explosive issues.
Full article: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2008/04/05/wnato105.xml
.
Thursday, April 3, 2008
Europe endorses missiles plan
Quote: Nato’s European leaders endorsed US plans to build a missile defence system in Europe, strengthening President George W. Bush’s hand as he prepares for talks at the weekend with Russia’s President Vladimir Putin.
The leaders, meeting at a Nato summit in Bucharest on Thursday, decided that the alliance should welcome the system and extend it to Turkey and areas in the Balkans that would not be covered by current US plans.
The decision marks a big shift within Nato over an issue that until early last year divided the alliance. US and European officials said the change followed intensified US efforts to consult with its allies – and with Russia – over the system’s configuration.
“People said this would be the latest wedge issue between the US and Europe,” a US official said. “The Europeans have come to the view that our offer was clearly a very serious one, very detailed and open to working with the Russians.”
Ironically, the consultations intensified after a bellicose speech by Mr Putin last February in Munich in which he attacked US missile defence, expressing the fear that it was directed against Russia.
Washington said the system needed to deal with Iran’s missile and nuclear ambitions, and was too small and in the wrong place to affect Russia’s nuclear deterrent.
Nato statement on Thursday indicates that allies share the US view that Iran poses a potential threat to Europe.
Full article: http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/64bd6614-01bf-11dd-a323-000077b07658.html
.
The leaders, meeting at a Nato summit in Bucharest on Thursday, decided that the alliance should welcome the system and extend it to Turkey and areas in the Balkans that would not be covered by current US plans.
The decision marks a big shift within Nato over an issue that until early last year divided the alliance. US and European officials said the change followed intensified US efforts to consult with its allies – and with Russia – over the system’s configuration.
“People said this would be the latest wedge issue between the US and Europe,” a US official said. “The Europeans have come to the view that our offer was clearly a very serious one, very detailed and open to working with the Russians.”
Ironically, the consultations intensified after a bellicose speech by Mr Putin last February in Munich in which he attacked US missile defence, expressing the fear that it was directed against Russia.
Washington said the system needed to deal with Iran’s missile and nuclear ambitions, and was too small and in the wrong place to affect Russia’s nuclear deterrent.
Nato statement on Thursday indicates that allies share the US view that Iran poses a potential threat to Europe.
Full article: http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/64bd6614-01bf-11dd-a323-000077b07658.html
.
Why France and Britain must join forces
Quote: Summits, like familiarity, can easily breed contempt. Promises readily made are quickly forgotten. Projects announced with a flourish prove rhetorical not real. We hope this week’s Franco-British summit will be different, putting work in hand that will be good for Britain and France; and good, too, for Europe and the transatlantic relationship.
Franco-British relations often fall victim to tabloid treatment. Watch out for the focus on the French president’s glamorous new wife. Spats are usually played up, differences exaggerated and emotions aroused. Long memories on both sides – and a French perception that Britain has something of a complex about France – ensure that the past frequently casts a cold shadow over the future. Occasionally the lows give way to entente cordiale and there is a burst of enthusiasm for working together. Usually, quite quickly, the optimism fades and old reflexes and stereotypes reassert themselves.
Nicolas Sarkozy, the French president, and Gordon Brown, the British prime minister, can hardly be expected to cure the manic-depressive nature of Franco-British relations at their first summit. But they can make another attempt at reducing the debilitating mood swings. Both have come relatively recently to their jobs and have the chance to forge a new relationship at the top of government. Both are unencumbered by past Franco-British differences over Iraq. Both, in their respective ways, appear fundamentally agnostic as far as Europe is concerned. Finally, both lead countries that are joined at the hip in dealing with foreign policy challenges, from Afghanistan to the Balkans and the need to define a common approach to China and to the Russia of Vladimir Putin and Dmitry Medvedev.
The day-to-day relationship is much better than headlines pretend. Our militaries usually work easily together. So do our intelligence services on critical issues such as counter-terrorism, illegal immigration and people trafficking. Successive French governments have worked hard to stem the flow of illegal immigrants across the Channel, an issue that was on the front pages a few years ago but has largely disappeared thanks to the co-operation between UK and French enforcement agencies. On wider international issues there is often close co-operation: at the United Nations, Britain and France have been at the heart of efforts to find a negotiated solution to the Iranian nuclear issue. But, for many years, bilateral co-operation has .been much less good in another international forum – Nato.
Full article: http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/9cf55dfa-fa9b-11dc-aa46-000077b07658.html
Franco-British relations often fall victim to tabloid treatment. Watch out for the focus on the French president’s glamorous new wife. Spats are usually played up, differences exaggerated and emotions aroused. Long memories on both sides – and a French perception that Britain has something of a complex about France – ensure that the past frequently casts a cold shadow over the future. Occasionally the lows give way to entente cordiale and there is a burst of enthusiasm for working together. Usually, quite quickly, the optimism fades and old reflexes and stereotypes reassert themselves.
Nicolas Sarkozy, the French president, and Gordon Brown, the British prime minister, can hardly be expected to cure the manic-depressive nature of Franco-British relations at their first summit. But they can make another attempt at reducing the debilitating mood swings. Both have come relatively recently to their jobs and have the chance to forge a new relationship at the top of government. Both are unencumbered by past Franco-British differences over Iraq. Both, in their respective ways, appear fundamentally agnostic as far as Europe is concerned. Finally, both lead countries that are joined at the hip in dealing with foreign policy challenges, from Afghanistan to the Balkans and the need to define a common approach to China and to the Russia of Vladimir Putin and Dmitry Medvedev.
The day-to-day relationship is much better than headlines pretend. Our militaries usually work easily together. So do our intelligence services on critical issues such as counter-terrorism, illegal immigration and people trafficking. Successive French governments have worked hard to stem the flow of illegal immigrants across the Channel, an issue that was on the front pages a few years ago but has largely disappeared thanks to the co-operation between UK and French enforcement agencies. On wider international issues there is often close co-operation: at the United Nations, Britain and France have been at the heart of efforts to find a negotiated solution to the Iranian nuclear issue. But, for many years, bilateral co-operation has .been much less good in another international forum – Nato.
Full article: http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/9cf55dfa-fa9b-11dc-aa46-000077b07658.html
Did France make this deal to not accept Ukraine and Georgia?
In my opinion, seems Bush might've made this deal previously, to satisfy his needs in Afghanistan. The US doesn't cause a stink about denying Ukraine and Georgia of its NATO MAP aspirations, in order to get the support it desparately needs currently in Afghanistan.
Many would compare the situation in Iraq along with Afghanistan, and conclude there's not much difference. The root of 9/11 was based from Afghanistan, where Bin Laden was based. To have France assist in Afghanistan, I would find it justifiable. But, can anyone understand why after all this time, why would France decide to join the US force's? Is it due to a new French leader? I doubt this is a last minute decision. Is France playing both the US and the Kremlin?
Why would France want to save face after denying MAP entry to these post-soviet countries? There are many question's to be answered. Perhaps these French leader's will be able to clarify their decision.
Mr. M
Actual article: http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/3c19441e-01a4-11dd-a323-000077b07658.html
.
Many would compare the situation in Iraq along with Afghanistan, and conclude there's not much difference. The root of 9/11 was based from Afghanistan, where Bin Laden was based. To have France assist in Afghanistan, I would find it justifiable. But, can anyone understand why after all this time, why would France decide to join the US force's? Is it due to a new French leader? I doubt this is a last minute decision. Is France playing both the US and the Kremlin?
Why would France want to save face after denying MAP entry to these post-soviet countries? There are many question's to be answered. Perhaps these French leader's will be able to clarify their decision.
Mr. M
Actual article: http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/3c19441e-01a4-11dd-a323-000077b07658.html
.
Why the euro is unlikely to eclipse the dollar
Quote: Judging from commentary by international economists, one would think that the dollar was on its deathbed. America’s financial crisis and the dollar’s depreciation are bringing us to a tipping point where the greenback will lose its international currency mantle to the euro. A few more losses on dollar investments, it is said, and central banks will learn to hold their reserves in euros. Other investors will follow. America’s “exorbitant privilege” will be no more.
To paraphrase Mark Twain, these reports of the dollar’s death are greatly exaggerated. They are based on a model of the demand for international reserves that does not apply to our 21st-century world.
The chief idea of this model is that international currency status is a source of network effects. Just as it pays to use the same computer software as other people in your network, it pays to use the same international currency as other official and private market participants.
Central banks thus find it attractive to hold dollars because other central banks hold dollars. With everyone doing likewise, the market in dollars is deep and liquid. Because trade is denominated in dollars, central banks find them convenient to smooth the balance of payments. This network externality is the source of the exorbitant privilege that the dollar has enjoyed for half a century.
Full article: http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/14049bf2-00b1-11dd-a0c5-000077b07658.html
.
To paraphrase Mark Twain, these reports of the dollar’s death are greatly exaggerated. They are based on a model of the demand for international reserves that does not apply to our 21st-century world.
The chief idea of this model is that international currency status is a source of network effects. Just as it pays to use the same computer software as other people in your network, it pays to use the same international currency as other official and private market participants.
Central banks thus find it attractive to hold dollars because other central banks hold dollars. With everyone doing likewise, the market in dollars is deep and liquid. Because trade is denominated in dollars, central banks find them convenient to smooth the balance of payments. This network externality is the source of the exorbitant privilege that the dollar has enjoyed for half a century.
Full article: http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/14049bf2-00b1-11dd-a0c5-000077b07658.html
.
Yuschenko Cancels Decree On Appointment Of Stanik As Constitutional Court Judge
Quote: President Viktor Yuschenko has cancelled a decree of March 25, 2004 on appointment of Siuzanna Stanik as Constitutional Court judge.
This is disclosed in the presidential decree No.297/2008 of April 3.
The decree was abolished due to violation of office taking procedure.
As Ukrainian News earlier reported, on April 2, Yuschenko reinstated Siuzanna Stanik as a judge of the Constitutional Court.
On March 25, the collegiate body for administrative affairs of the Supreme Court reinstated Stanik as a judge Constitutional Court.
The Party of Regions considers that new Constitutional Court judges can take the oath only after courts rule reinstatement of Stanik as the Constitutional Court judge.
On October 26, 2007, Kyiv Administrative Appeal Court cancelled the award of Kyiv Shevchenkivskyi District Court on reinstatement of Stanik as a judge of the Constitutional Court.
http://www.ukranews.com/eng/article/114236.html
.
This is disclosed in the presidential decree No.297/2008 of April 3.
The decree was abolished due to violation of office taking procedure.
As Ukrainian News earlier reported, on April 2, Yuschenko reinstated Siuzanna Stanik as a judge of the Constitutional Court.
On March 25, the collegiate body for administrative affairs of the Supreme Court reinstated Stanik as a judge Constitutional Court.
The Party of Regions considers that new Constitutional Court judges can take the oath only after courts rule reinstatement of Stanik as the Constitutional Court judge.
On October 26, 2007, Kyiv Administrative Appeal Court cancelled the award of Kyiv Shevchenkivskyi District Court on reinstatement of Stanik as a judge of the Constitutional Court.
http://www.ukranews.com/eng/article/114236.html
.
Wednesday, April 2, 2008
Bush signals softening on EU defence
Quote: President George W. Bush on Wednesday signalled a softening of long-standing US resistance to stronger European Union defence capabilities, suggesting for the first time this could help rather than weaken Nato.
The signal came in a speech ahead of Wednesday’s Nato summit in Bucharest, in which Mr Bush said European governments should spend more on defence – but suggested it did not matter whether it was to support Nato or EU operations.
Video: Nato summit
The FT’s James Blitz talks to key Nato players about tensions with Russia over its expansion
Washington has long seen the EU’s plans to develop independent military capabilities as subtracting from capabilities that should properly lie with Nato.
But in recent months US diplomats have indicated that this suspicion of the European Security and Defence Policy was coming to an end. Victoria Nuland, US ambassador to Nato, has said that the ESDP was now being viewed as complementing rather than supplanting Nato.
But for the first time, Mr Bush signalled support for the approach: “Building a strong Nato alliance also requires a strong European defence capacity. So at this summit I will encourage our European partners to increase their defence investments to support both Nato and EU operations.
Full article: http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/96460838-00a4-11dd-a0c5-000077b07658.html?nclick_check=1
.
The signal came in a speech ahead of Wednesday’s Nato summit in Bucharest, in which Mr Bush said European governments should spend more on defence – but suggested it did not matter whether it was to support Nato or EU operations.
Video: Nato summit
The FT’s James Blitz talks to key Nato players about tensions with Russia over its expansion
Washington has long seen the EU’s plans to develop independent military capabilities as subtracting from capabilities that should properly lie with Nato.
But in recent months US diplomats have indicated that this suspicion of the European Security and Defence Policy was coming to an end. Victoria Nuland, US ambassador to Nato, has said that the ESDP was now being viewed as complementing rather than supplanting Nato.
But for the first time, Mr Bush signalled support for the approach: “Building a strong Nato alliance also requires a strong European defence capacity. So at this summit I will encourage our European partners to increase their defence investments to support both Nato and EU operations.
Full article: http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/96460838-00a4-11dd-a0c5-000077b07658.html?nclick_check=1
.
Tuesday, April 1, 2008
SHOCK! Ministry of Agricultural Policy - Protection Racket of International Drug Traffic!
Quote:
Yesterday in the evening audience of Ukraine heard a sensation. It even overshadows the visit of U.S. President George Bush to Ukraine. Valery Kravchenko, former mayor-general of Security Service of Ukraine (SBU), well-known person concerned with a few scandals reported it…
… Generally speaking, Ukraine is lucky. After a scandal concerned with the records represented by ex-mayor of National Security Nickolay Melnichenko, many officials try to win fame of “chief unmaskers”. But information given yesterday by Kravchenko is rather interesting anyway. Anyway there are two ideas about it: if Kravchenko said the truth, then we are on the verge of colossal international scandal. If he told a lie, there is a question: where else one can say in public: “Ministry of Agricultural Policy is an official protection racket of international trade” (!) Ex-mayor-general made such a statement.
He states the whole of drugs trade turn over in Europe goes through Ukraine. According to him, poppy-seed is being planted on special fields in our country. “Everything is under control of Ministry of Agricultural Policy and also department on struggle against illegal drugs turn over at the Interior Ministry”, we cite him as saying.
These two organizations are official protection rackets of drugs sale, Valery Kravchenko stresses.
http://mignews.com.ua/en/articles/297511.html
.
Yesterday in the evening audience of Ukraine heard a sensation. It even overshadows the visit of U.S. President George Bush to Ukraine. Valery Kravchenko, former mayor-general of Security Service of Ukraine (SBU), well-known person concerned with a few scandals reported it…
… Generally speaking, Ukraine is lucky. After a scandal concerned with the records represented by ex-mayor of National Security Nickolay Melnichenko, many officials try to win fame of “chief unmaskers”. But information given yesterday by Kravchenko is rather interesting anyway. Anyway there are two ideas about it: if Kravchenko said the truth, then we are on the verge of colossal international scandal. If he told a lie, there is a question: where else one can say in public: “Ministry of Agricultural Policy is an official protection racket of international trade” (!) Ex-mayor-general made such a statement.
He states the whole of drugs trade turn over in Europe goes through Ukraine. According to him, poppy-seed is being planted on special fields in our country. “Everything is under control of Ministry of Agricultural Policy and also department on struggle against illegal drugs turn over at the Interior Ministry”, we cite him as saying.
These two organizations are official protection rackets of drugs sale, Valery Kravchenko stresses.
http://mignews.com.ua/en/articles/297511.html
.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
