The Mazeika Report
from June 21 - 13, 2008
go to "blog" link to www.TonyMazeika.blog.com or
http://mazeikabloginternationalnews.blogspot.com/
Pass this link on to other readers!
Breaking stories.....your comments are welcome....
Place this "blog link" into your computer favorites for easy access.
=======================================================
Visit our interactive website and new featured listings....at www.tonymazeika.com
Ocean to Mountains Real Estate for all Orange County
Tony & Danute Mazeika...... 949 721-3445 949 929-9051 cell
Celebrating 21 years and more than 500 successful real estate transactions...
Don't miss incredible market opportunities....... Prices are at Year 2002 level...
May home sales up significantly ...Positive signs of market recovery is here.
Inventory is decreasing. Conforming & FHA Loan Limits Raised...Best home buys since 2002!
Demand for home inventory is up significantly. For those delaying a purchase, now is the time to consider selecting the home of your choice from the best available inventory in years- at historic rates and terms.
.You may qualify for a credit on closing costs and savings on escrow fees...Ask us how......
Don't delay..call us today! 949 721-3445
================================================================
Please support this unique blog.....Buy your ....Books, Dvds, and CDs
on our special link access to Amazon.Com
Tony & Danute
=====================================================================
Breaking news & commentary
===============================================================
The Destruction of Sarposa
June 18, 2008 1829 GMT
By Fred Burton and Scott Stewart
Friday June 13 turned out to be an unlucky day for the guards at Sarposa prison in Kandahar, Afghanistan. At approximately 9:20 p.m. local time, some 30 Taliban insurgents launched a complex and highly coordinated attack on the facility. The operation freed all 1,100 inmates incarcerated there, including a reported 350 to 400 Taliban militants. The attack also resulted in the deaths of several guards — reports on the actual number vary between six and 15.
The assault reportedly began with the detonation of a massive vehicle-borne improvised explosive device (VBIED) at the prison’s main gate. The suicide device reportedly was concealed inside a tanker truck and, according to a Taliban spokesman, contained 1,800 kilograms of explosive material. The powerful device shattered the prison’s front gate and guardhouse, causing substantial damage to shops and other buildings in the neighborhood.
Either shortly after or at the same time as the attack on the main gate, a second suicide bomber approached the back gate of the compound on foot and detonated his device, breaching the gate and neutralizing the guards. A Taliban assault team armed with machine guns, rocket-propelled grenades (RPGs) and small arms then stormed the prison. According to some eyewitness reports, many of the attackers entered the prison on motorcycles — a form of transport frequently used by the Taliban to move personnel. Some fighters reportedly engaged the surviving guards while others broke open the cell doors.
The prisoners were then rushed through the gate to a caravan of waiting vehicles staged by the Taliban to transport them to safety. In recent days, the Taliban have taken over several villages in the Arghandab district, located just northwest of the city of Kandahar, where they reportedly laid mines, destroyed bridges and prepared fighting positions in the area. At least some of the Taliban fighters participating in these recent activities are possible Sarposa escapees.
Many observers have expressed shock over the storming of Sarposa prison. But the attack — and its success — is not at all surprising when viewed in the context of historical operations undertaken to free jihadist prisoners in Afghanistan and elsewhere and given conditions on the ground in the Kandahar area, the general preparedness of Afghan security elements and the construction and location of this particular prison.
A Focus on Prisoners
Jihadists have long placed a high importance on their imprisoned comrades. This emphasis became publicly evident by the number of statements and threats generated following the arrest of Sheikh Omar Abdul-Rahman (the “Blind Sheikh”) in New York in 1993. However, even prior to his arrest, Abdul-Rahman and his followers had discussed plans for a different prison break. They considered several possible approaches, one of which was a truck bomb attack combined with an armed assault, to rescue El Sayyid Nosair from Attica State Prison in New York. The group had even conducted detailed surveillance of the facility. Nosair was serving a sentence in Attica after being convicted on weapons charges relating to the assassination of Rabbi Meir Kahane. Although convicted of assault and firearms possession, Nosair was acquitted of the murder charges.
The jihadist emphasis on colleagues in captivity has continued to the present day. In addition to propaganda decrying the captivity of their comrades, jihadists have also conducted a number of operations to free imprisoned colleagues, such as the December 1999 hijacking of Indian Airlines flight 814, which eventually ended up in Kandahar after short stops in Pakistan and the United Arab Emirates. More recently, Taliban forces have kidnapped foreigners and held them in exchange for their imprisoned comrades.
In April 2005, al Qaeda in Iraq militants under the command of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi launched a remarkably similar attack against the Abu Ghraib prison west of Baghdad. Like the Sarposa incident, the attack on Abu Ghraib included a suicide VBIED attack against the prison’s main gate followed by an attempt to storm the prison by an assault team. In the Abu Ghraib case, the initial VBIED attack was unable to reach or breach the prison’s gate, and the assault team was prevented from entering the facility. However, the assault team displayed a great deal of determination and continued the attack on the prison for several hours before finally being repelled. The al Qaeda assault team suffered heavy casualties, but not before wounding 18 U.S. servicemen and 12 prisoners during the protracted battle.
In addition to armed assaults, there have also been many clandestine attempts to free jihadist prisoners from captivity. Several of these attempts have involved tunnels, such as in the February 2006 jailbreak in Sanaa, Yemen, or the October 2003 break from Sarposa prison in Kandahar in which 41 Taliban prisoners, including the brother of the Taliban defense minister, escaped through a tunnel. High-profile jihadists have also managed to escape from prisons in places as diverse as Pakistan and Singapore.
Escapes are not confined to prisons with sand cell floors, poorly trained personnel or revolving doors and complicit prison guards, as it would seem in the case of Yemeni prisons. In addition to the Singapore incident, militants have also escaped from U.S.- and British-run prisons in Iraq. In Afghanistan, four high-profile al Qaeda militants escaped from a U.S. detention facility at the Bagram Air Base outside Kabul. The escapees, dubbed the “Bagram Four,” included Abu Yahya al-Libi, a charismatic and credentialed al Qaeda theologian who has since become one of the organization’s main spokesmen.
Location, Location, Location
Like in real estate sales, in insurgency and counterinsurgency operations, location is vital — and Kandahar is quite an interesting location. While Kabul is the capital of Afghanistan, Kandahar has been the spiritual and physical capital of the Taliban. Even when the Taliban controlled most of Afghanistan and assumed control of the government, their real headquarters remained in Kandahar, the place where they first emerged as a force in Afghan politics and where their leader Mullah Omar resided. Osama bin Laden also resided in Kandahar with many of his al Qaeda followers. Although the Taliban and al Qaeda militants were quickly forced to flee the city following the U.S. invasion in October 2001, much of the population in the area has remained ideologically committed to the Taliban, and we have long considered Kandahar city and province to be Taliban strongholds. From the perspective of the Afghan government and coalition forces, Kandahar is very much hostile territory.
This attack against Saraposa prison was well-planned and executed with a great deal of precision. The location of the attack, Kandahar, allowed the Taliban to play on their home field and provided advantages they have lacked when conducting operations in places such as Kabul. Even though not all of the residents in the Kandahar area support the Taliban, most fear them and do not believe that coalition forces can protect them from Taliban retribution. Therefore, even people who are not strong Taliban supporters would be grudgingly willing to assist them rather than risk reprisals.
This base of contacts and ideological supporters in Kandahar made it easy for the Taliban to conduct surveillance on sites such as the Sarposa prison, and is also very helpful in the logistical aspects of planning and executing attacks there. Smuggling the Taliban assault team into the city, along with their weapons and a large VBIED, was undoubtedly accomplished with the aid of these sympathizers, as was the escape of the released prisoners.
In the end, this home-field advantage allowed the Taliban to launch their attack without detection and gain the crucial element of tactical surprise. It also allowed them to get all of their elements into the fight at the right time, something they were unable to accomplish in the April 27 attack in Kabul.
Another factor leading to the success of the Sarposa attack was the nature of the facility itself and the guards in charge of its integrity. The prison was very old and its mud brick and rock-and-mortar construction was not designed to withstand a serious military attack. Even with some of the recent upgrades to its guard towers, the facility was incapable of withstanding the explosion of an 1,800 kilogram VBIED in close proximity to its front gate. In fact, few facilities in the United States could withstand such an attack, but U.S. facilities typically have concentric rings of security that must be breached in order to get to the main gate. The Sarposa prison is located right on the street and did not have much room to provide standoff space or for such concentric rings.
There are reports that the attack on the prison was coordinated with the prisoners on the inside via a cell phone. This is not beyond the realm of possibility, as the smuggling of cell phones into prisons is a problem faced by authorities in many countries, including the United States.
While the guards at Sarposa prison had reportedly received guidance from Canadian corrections officials, they had neither the training nor the weaponry to withstand the type of assault the Taliban launched against them. Prison guards are not trained or equipped to serve as combat troops. We have not seen reliable reports on the number of guards who fled, survived or perhaps called in sick the night of the attack. The commander of the prison reportedly has been placed in custody and is under investigation, though Afghan officials assert that this move is merely standard procedure. In any such case, the possibility of collusion on the part of the guards must be considered.
The vulnerability of the Sarposa facility and the limitations of the guards defending it is further highlighted when compared with a similarly executed but unsuccessful attack. On March 3, the Taliban launched an attack against a compound housing a better-prepared force of NATO and Afghan troops in Khost. In the March incident, the VBIED was engaged before it could get close to the gate. While two NATO soldiers were killed in the assault, the remaining troops were able to repel the attackers before they could overrun the complex.
Although Sarposa is the largest prison in southern Afghanistan, due its relative lack of security, most high-value Taliban prisoners are kept at Afghanistan’s main prison, Pol-e-Charkhi in Kabul, or at the U.S. detention facility at Bagram. However, even those facilities are not in the best condition, as evidenced by the escape of the Bagram four and violent jihadist-fomented riots and escapes at Pol-e-Charkhi.
The United States has long recognized the vulnerability of Afghan prisons, including its own facility at Bagram. It has reportedly paid more than $20 million to add a high-security wing at the Pol-e-Charkhi facility.
Last month, Afghan lawmakers strenuously objected when a Pentagon spokesman announced a plan to replace the deteriorating facility at Bagram, which currently holds some 630 al Qaeda and Taliban prisoners, with a new facility capable of holding 1,100 prisoners. At the time, Afghans called the plan an illegal affront to the country’s sovereignty. It will be interesting to see if the tone of the debate changes after the destruction of Sarposa.
www.stratfor.com
==============================================================
HOMELAND INSECURITY
WorldNetDaily ExclusiveU.S. military fights drug war on Mexican borderJoint Task Force North assists federal law enforcement
Posted: June 19, 200811:15 pm Eastern
By Jerome R. Corsi
WorldNetDaily
OH-58D Kiowa Warrior helicopters deployed via C-5 from Fort Carson to Fort Bliss to conduct aviation reconnaissance operations
The U.S. military today plays a little-recognized role fighting the drug war in support of federal law enforcement agencies along the border with Mexico.
Joint Task Force North, or JTF North, is a U.S. joint service military command organized under U.S. Northern Command, or USNORTHCOM, based at Biggs Army Airfield in Fort Bliss, Texas.
"Our mission is to employ military capabilities to support law enforcement agencies and synchronization in the Northern Command's area of responsibility," Brig. Gen. Anthony R. Ierardi, commander of JTN North, told WND. "The purpose of all that is to deter and prevent what we describe as transnational threats to the homeland."
Initially named Joint Task Force-6, the command was established by Gen. Colin Powell, then commanding general of the U.S. Army's Forces command, Nov. 13, 1989, in response to President George H.W. Bush's declaration of the "War on Drugs."
JTF-6 was renamed JTF North in a ceremony Sept. 28, 2004, and its mission was expanded beyond the drug war to include providing homeland security support to the nation's federal law enforcement agencies.
Ierardi explained his boss is Air Force Gen.Victor Renuart, commander of USNORTHCOM."
"We are a subordinate command, so we work for Northern Command in providing the support that is requested by federal law enforcement in an appropriate way to deter and prevent threats to the homeland," Ierardi said.
A major focus of JTF North traces back to the unit's original purpose, to bring military support to federal law enforcement agencies fighting the drug war along the border with Mexico.
"Our principal customer is the U.S. Border Patrol," Ierardi affirmed. "Our missions are for the most part along our southern border with Mexico, but also include missions along our northern border. We employ various military capabilities from the time the federal agency requests the support through the conclusion of the mission."
FLIR equipped OH-58D Kiowa Warrior helicopters were used to conduct nighttime aviation reconnaissance operations and UH-60 Blackhawk helicopter support (in background) was provided by the 1st Combat Aviation Brigade, 1st Infantry Division, based at Fort Riley, Kan.
JTF North has no operational military units assigned permanently to the command.
In a typical mission, a federal law enforcement agency requests military support along the border. If the request is deemed appropriate and within its authority, JTF North will then call upon military units, including Army, Air Force, Navy and Marines, as needed, to volunteer to participate in the mission.
Many of the military participating units see the JTF North mission as an opportunity to train in advance of a scheduled assignment to Iraq or Afghanistan.
Ierardi explained: "So, for example, if an Army aviation unit is in a cycle where they are preparing for deployment to Iraq, or Afghanistan, or anywhere for that matter, their commanders might deem that volunteering for a mission at JTF North might be good training, because of the opportunity to operate in a relevant environment that would replicate what they will face in the Middle East."
Ierardi pointed to the Border Patrol as an example.
"An Army aviation unit participating in a Border Patrol mission organized by JTF North might see an increase in their night surveillance capabilities as a result of the experience," he said. "And so it's a neat way to match the need of the law enforcement agency with the extant capabilities that the military services can provide."
Ierardi said it's equally important to spell out what JTF North does not do.
Seabees from Naval Mobile Construction Battalion 24, based in Huntsville, Ala., constructed low water crossings, fences and roads along the Arizona-Mexico border
"We don't arrest, apprehend or detain any persons that would be involved in potentially illegal activities," he said. "We are not involved in searches and seizures. We don't direct the operations of law enforcement agencies – again, we are in support."
He also emphasized JTF North does not "collect or retain any information about U.S. persons, in accordance with very strict guidance that we have for intelligence oversight."
Ierardi stressed JTF North operates within the restraints of the Posse Comitatus Act, 18 USC 1385, a Reconstruction Era law that restricts the use of U.S. military services to enforce civilian laws, except where expressly authorized by Congress or the Constitution.
The JTF North website lists the following capabilities as "operational support" the unit is prepared to offer federal law enforcement agencies: aviation transportation, including both insertion and extraction of personnel; aviation reconnaissance; air and maritime surveillance radar; unmanned aircraft systems; ground surveillance radar; listening post and observation post surveillance; ground sensor operations; and ground transportation.
In addition to operational support, JTF North is ready to provide intelligence and engineering support. It also offers general support, which includes mobile training teams in a wide range of areas from basic marksmanship training, to counter-drug field tactical police operations, to integrated mission planning and even tunnel detection.
Several illustrative missions are featured on the JTF North website.
In February, March and April 2007, JTF North provided Seabee engineering support from Naval Mobile Construction Battalion 24, based in Huntsville, Ala., assigned to construct low-water crossings, fences and roads along the Arizona-Mexico border.
In the same time period, a second JTF North mission, Operation Night Owl, involved the 1st Squadron, 6th Air Cavalry Regiment supporting the U.S. Border Patrol in the El Paso Sector by deploying OH-58D Kiowa Warrior helicopters via C-5 transport aircraft from Fort Carson to Fort Bliss to conduct aviation reconnaissance operations.
Operation Night Owl also coordinated the involvement of UH-60 Blackhawk helicopter support provided by the 1st Combat Aviation Brigade, 1st Infantry Division, based at Fort Riley, Kan.
"Our mission is to coordinate and employ Department of Defense support to federal law enforcement," Ierardi said. "One of the sub-roles under USNORTHCOM's mission is for support to civil authorities. We employ capabilities that seek to enhance law enforcement activities to interdict the threats, and we work with federal law enforcement investigative agencies to share information that would be appropriate to share."
Federal law enforcement agencies seeking JTF North support must first provide written requests for support.
"We will collaborate with the partners that we support and they will provide us with written requests for support that allow them to increase capability in a particular area for a particular duration of time," Ierardi said.
"The Department of Defense has rules for how we operate," he explained. "In terms of all of the military that may participate in a particular support mission, Joint Task Force North has tactical control of military forces that might be employed in this mission. So, it's my responsibility to ensure the safe and effective deployment of the units, while providing the commanders of that organization the opportunity to increase their readiness."
Ierardi said that at the same time, JTF North "manages the interface with the federal law enforcement agencies to ensure those agencies are being employed correctly."
"Our DNA, if you will, and the predominant gene that we carry today, is a counter-drug headquarters," he stressed, referring back to the original reason the unit was created in 1989. "After 9/11 and the creation of Northern Command, it really made sense to take JTF-6, which was the preceding organizational name, and reorient the command to operate within the entire USNORTHCOM area of operational responsibility, not just along the southern border. Today, we also have the responsibility to monitor all transnational threats, including terrorists' opportunities."
Ierardi said the resources and the funding for JTF North's operations still have a counter-drug emphasis.
"So, when we receive a request for support from law enforcement," he said, "the first thing we have to determine is that there is a nexus to a counter-drug, or to international narcotics trafficking, and that it comes from an authorized federal law enforcement official to ask for that support, and that there is a distinct gain by a Department of Defense military component for providing that support."
Last Tuesday, U.S. Army Col. Sean B. MacFarland assumed command of JTF North, replacing Brig. Gen. Ierardi, who has been reassigned to Afghanistan, where he will assist in the training and equipping of Afghan military and national security units.
http://wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.printable&pageId=67495
==================================================================
Venezuela: The United States Turns the Screws
Stratfor Today » June 19, 2008 2236 GMT
EVARISTO SA/AFP/Getty Images
Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez
Summary
The U.S. Treasury Department on June 17 accused a Venezuelan diplomat and head of the Caracas-based Shia Islamic Center of giving Hezbollah financial support. The United States, which is targeting other Venezuelan nationals suspected of involvement with Hezbollah, is working to increase the pressure on Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, who is already weakening under the weight of domestic problems.
Analysis
The U.S. Treasury Department on June 17 accused Ghazi Nasr al-Din, a Venezuelan diplomat and president of a Caracas-based Shia Islamic center, of giving financial assistance to Hezbollah. The United States has also targeted Fawzi Kanan and two Venezuelan-based travel agencies that he allegedly owns or controls. Although the United States has made accusations of involvement with Hezbollah before, in taking the step to target Venezuelan nationals, the United States is ramping up pressure on already-weakened Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez.
The most recent set of accusations against Chavez’s government were released by U.S.-based Venezuelan reporter Patricia Poleo in a report that gave detailed accounts of Hezbollah, al Qaeda and other Arab movements in Venezuela. The report alleged that Venezuela is hosting at least five camps in various parts of the country where Venezuelan and Lebanese Hezbollah members learn to use munitions, and that those members plan to use Venezuela as a launching point for attacks on the United States. The report is suspiciously detailed in its descriptions of alleged terrorist training activities in Venezuela’s jungles. The information would have been very hard to come by without the aid of a sophisticated intelligence agency.
Washington has long been concerned about security threats originating in Venezuela. A well-known transit point for illegal drugs and arms, Venezuela also poses a serious risk to U.S. security because of its lax visa regulations and rampant corruption. Furthermore, Venezuela has been the most significant port of entry for illegal immigrants from the Eastern Hemisphere since before Chavez took control of the country.
Although Stratfor has no direct evidence that Hezbollah is operating in Venezuela, it would not be much of a surprise. In fact, Venezuela’s close relationship with Iran makes it almost inevitable. Most of Venezuela’s “joint” programs with Iran — such as a recently announced joint bank — make little sense because, depending on the project, Venezuela and Iran lack the cash, technology and/or organic market to launch them. Both countries are exporters of oil, with very little other economic strength, so trading between the two is largely superfluous. But helping Iran by supporting Hezbollah only requires some land in the jungle and lax security with passports — two things Venezuela has in spades.
What Venezuela would get out of such a partnership is not entirely clear. A core part of Chavez’s domestic security strategy has been to develop local militias that he can call on to support him in case the Venezuelan military turns against him. But harboring terrorist training camps in one’s backyard is like painting a big bullseye on one’s country and inviting the U.S. Air Force to take their best shot. But it is possible Iran is worth the risk, whether it is able to offer money or political favors in return.
Whether or not it is true that Venezuela is helping Hezbollah, the possibility for such cooperation has existed for several years. But the timing of this asset seizure poses some interesting possibilities, as it coincides with some dramatic shifts in Chavez’s behavior. These shifts include an apparent decision to deny public support to the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) and a move to revise a key intelligence law that would have strengthened his authoritarian control over Venezuela.
Chavez’s support of the FARC has been unpopular in Venezuela; in an April poll by Venezuelan polling firm Datanalisis, more than 70 percent of Venezuelans expressed disapproval of the FARC. This fact no doubt played a large part in his decision to reverse support for the group. With support for a second terrorist organization coming to light, Chavez’s credibility will only suffer more.
At the same time, Chavez is experiencing serious challenges on other fronts.
Inflation in Venezuela is skyrocketing, in part because of monetary inflation partially driven by massive government spending. Coupled with rising global food prices, the inflation has made life measurably harder for Venezuelans (especially poor Venezuelans), and dissatisfaction with Chavez’s policies is increasing.
Furthermore, Chavez’s social programs that service his support base rely on funding from Venezuelan state-owned energy company Petroleos de Venezuela (PDVSA) — and things are not looking so good for PDVSA. Burdened with the financial responsibilities of the entire state, the company is at risk of not being able to maintain its oil production, much less increase it to meet rising fiscal needs. And all this is with oil at $130 per barrel; any price drop and Chavez immediately will have to choose who not to give subsidies to.
Demands on PDVSA will not slacken soon, either. With local elections approaching, Chavez is under pressure to bring his party — the United Socialist Party of Venezuela — under his control. Designed to unite all leftist parties in Venezuela under one banner, the party is not as united as Chavez would like it to be. The upcoming November elections have exposed deep disagreements among party members and have provoked Chavez to go so far as to kick prominent figures out of the party. The elections will test his ability to hold the country together, and Chavez will need all the help he can get from his costly social programs to secure public support.
The bottom line is that Chavez is vulnerable like never before. With food prices soaring, local elections approaching and criticism of his policies mounting, the implication that Chavez’s government is aiding a second terrorist organization is well-timed to take advantage of his already-declining popularity.
The kind of moves the United States is making to undermine Chavez’s popular support are well in line with Stratfor’s projection that outside forces — including the United States — are supporting the unity of the Venezuelan opposition. What remains to be seen is where exactly the break point is for Chavez’s supporters, and whether or not the military will support Chavez in the face of a concerted attempt by the opposition to throw a revolution.
www.stratfor.com
======================================================================================
TRANSITIONS ONLINE: The Military: School for Sadists
by Galina Stolyarova19 June 2008
When recruits complain of physical and sexual abuse in the armed forces, guess who gets scrutinized. ST. PETERSBURG The letters come in by the dozens, desperate pleas from young men say they have been raped, tortured, or enslaved. Some by now have taken their own lives.It was the contents of one letter in particular, sent to the St. Petersburg pressure group Soldiers' Mothers, that ignited a scandal last year over forced prostitution in the military. The matter is now officially closed, having been settled at great cost to the whistleblowing group. But the letters keep coming."Those who did not have money and failed to give it to the senior recruits on demand were sent to sell themselves on the street at the Catherine Garden,” wrote one recently demobilized recruit from the signal force of the Russian Interior Ministry corps, headquartered opposite the world-famous Hermitage Museum in the heart of St. Petersburg. “They could either use one of the lists of clients that were always available from the older recruits, or try and pick someone up using their own devices.”The garden surrounding the monument of Catherine the Great overlooking Nevsky Prospekt is a notorious cruising area for those who seek the services of male prostitutes.
Full report via this active link: The Military: School for Sadists
==============================================================
Vladimir Putin hailed as virile vampire
By Adrian Blomfield in Moscow
Last Updated: 1:43AM BST 20/06/2008
EPA
Vladimir Putin has enhanced his image as Russia's leading sex symbol after a commemorative magazine wholly dedicated to his virility and reputation as a "vampire" rapidly sold out in the kiosks of Moscow.
Feeding on an almost cult-like obsession among the Russian people for their inscrutable prime minister, the celebrity gossip magazine Secrets of the Stars released a special edition eulogising the ex-KGB officer.
The cover, carrying a picture of Mr Putin looking unnaturally youthful accompanied by the headline "My heart is on my sleeve", alone seemed sufficiently tantalising to appeal to most patriotic Russians.
Add to that a free poster of the topless prime minister fishing and sub-headlines promising revelations of his wild youth including a visit to a stripclub in Hamburg, romances with women and a guide on "how to become Putin", and the magazine looked set to break circulation records for a single issue.
Most intriguingly of all, the cover promised a story about Mr Putin's wife titled: "Ludmila Putin: My husband is a Vampire".
The issue, which has flown off news stands, is a further demonstration of how Mr Putin, prime minister for less than a month, has eclipsed Dmitry Medvedev, his successor as president.
"We have created a monument to Putin for the common people," the magazine's chief editor, Roman Popov, said. "We wanted to show him as a pragmatic man who likes a good joke and who is strong and beautiful." Earlier in the year, the magazine easily broke its circulation record when it released an issue with a bare-chested Mr Putin on its cover that sold over 400,000 copies.
This time the magazine has outdone itself, carrying numerous photos of the prime minister in heroic poses, kayaking, swimming with dolphins and arm wrestling, under the headline: "Sometimes He's Just So Cool".
"There's not a single woman who would not dream of embracing and kissing Vladimir Vladimirovich and hearing his declaration of love," the article opined.
A great deal of attention was given to Ludmila Putin, his wife who won praise for her ability to "cook, clean and knit".
Quoting a German friend, Mrs Putin reportedly praised the prime minister as a model husband because he did not beat her, but also noted that he was an unemotional "vampire" who "sucked all the juices" out of her.
Alongside the magazine's many photographs, articles charted the noble course of Mr Putin's life.
Under one, headlined "I severed its head with one blow", the magazine approvingly reported how Mr Putin killed rats and once beheaded a duck with an axe as a boy. Showing his merciful side the young Vladimir also rescued three kittens from being drowned.
Another story entitled "I like all Russian women" looked at his love life. Among his admirers was Vera, who was attracted to Mr Putin's "charisma and charm" and whom Mr Putin liked in return for "her ability to do house chores well".
The magazine even carried a photograph of Alina Kabayeva, the 25-year-old rhythmic gymnast with whom Mr Putin has denied having an affair. The dubious reports of the relationship appear to have enhanced Mr Putin's popularity.
While some of its content may have seemed risque, the magazine actually revealed nothing that the Kremlin had not approved as information for the public domain.
Ordinary Russians do not seem to mind, however, with many readers lapping up the minutiae of Mr Putin's life detailed in the magazine.
"I like to read about what Putin wears," said Galina, a Moscow businesswoman reading a copy of the magazine on a park bench.
"I like to know that he enjoys eating fried cabbage and ham. It somehow makes me feel closer to him."
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/russia/2158556/Vladimir-Putin-hailed-as-virile-vampire.html
================================================================
Three More Charged In Journalist's KillingRussia Doesn't Divulge Alleged Roles
By Peter FinnWashington Post Foreign ServiceThursday, June 19, 2008; A14
Politkovskaya was a critic of the Kremlin before
being silenced. (Itar Tass - AP)
MOSCOW, June 18 -- Three men were charged Wednesday with involvement in the October 2006 killing of investigative reporter Anna Politkovskaya, but investigators said nothing about who ordered the assassination or why. A man formally identified by authorities last month as the shooter remains at large, as does the unknown person who organized the murder.
Politkovskaya, a critic of the Kremlin known for crusading reports on human rights abuses in Chechnya, was shot in the lobby of her apartment building in central Moscow as she was returning home with groceries. Police immediately described it as a contract killing. The murder weapon was dropped beside the body.
The killing chilled public opinion in the West, where Politkovskaya, 48, was lauded for her work. But it made little impression in Russia, drawing some derisive comments from then-President Vladimir Putin about the lack of impact the journalist had with her work in her home country.
Officials suggested that the killing was ordered by an exiled enemy of the Kremlin -- long-standing code for Boris Berezovsky, the London-based tycoon. Berezovsky denied any involvement, and Politkovskaya's colleagues said the person behind the killing was almost certainly in Russia.
Prosecutors charged Sergei Khadzhikurbanov, a former police officer, and two brothers from Chechnya, Dzhabrail Makhmudov and Ibragim Makhmudov, with involvement in the crime but gave no details as to their alleged roles. The men have been in custody since their arrest last August.
A fourth man, Pavel Ryaguzov, an officer in the domestic security agency FSB, was charged with extortion and abuse of office. Prosecutors said the charges against Ryaguzov relate to a "separate crime," but officials previously said that he provided Politkovskaya's address to the killers.
Investigators said in May that they believe Politkovskaya was shot by Rustam Makhmudov, the eldest of the Makhmudov brothers. He had been identified in news reports as early as March. Makhmudov remains at large and prosecutors said their investigation of him continues.
Eleven people were initially detained in connection with the killing, but all but those charged Wednesday have been released. A fourth Makhmudov brother was released last month but ordered not to leave Russia.
The editor of Novaya Gazeta, the newspaper where Politkovskaya worked, welcomed Wednesday's announcement but said the probe is far from complete. "The case has not been solved. . . . This announcement does not satisfy the newsroom or members of Anna Politkovskaya's family," said Dmitry Muratov, according to the online Gazeta daily. "We insist that this case is followed through."
Muratov also said Wednesday that leaks during the investigation had allowed Rustam Makhmudov to evade capture.
Since 2000, 14 journalists have been murdered in Russia because of their work, making the country the third deadliest in the world for journalists, according to the Committee to Protect Journalists. There has been only one conviction in those cases and none of a person accused of ordering a killing, according to the New York-based advocacy group.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/06/18/AR2008061801542_pf.html
======================================================
U.S. Mulls Lithuania as Option on Missile Shield
Poland’s chances of hosting the United States’ ballistic missile shield faded further this week with signs Washington may be looking to Lithuania as a possible alternative after months of stalemates in talks with Poland on the project.
“Lithuania has invited the United States to build an anti-missile shield on its territory,” Deputy Foreign Minister Witold Waszczykowski, Poland’s chief negotiator in the deal, told the Gazeta Wyborcza daily.
According to Interfax, U.S. Acting Under Secretary for Arms Control and Security John Rood travelled to Lithuania in May, saying that if Poland decides not to host parts of the U.S. missile shield on its soil then the U.S. will respect its decision. However, he did not comment on a possible alternative for the missile base.
U.S. officials initially denied the links with Vilnius but have already made clear that they are also looking at the Czech Republic as an alternative for the planned systems. The project would see the deployment of 10 interceptor missiles in Poland and a radar site in the Czech Republic.
Russia has opposed the project from the start, prompting concerns in Warsaw that it cannot accept the project without substantial compensation from the U.S. because of the damage it would inflict on its relations with the Kremlin.
======================================================
US Denies Talking to Lithuania on Hosting Missile Defense Site
By Al Pessin Pentagon17 June 2008
U.S. officials say there are no talks with Lithuania about hosting a missile defense site, even though talks with Poland's new government have been moving more slowly than the United States would like. But the Pentagon spokesman says time is running out on the Bush administration and officials might be forced to move to what he calls "a backup option." VOA's Al Pessin reports from the Pentagon.The Pentagon and State Department spokesmen are disputing a statement attributed to Poland's chief negotiator (Witold Waszczykowski) by the Reuters News Service. The report says the United States has opened a parallel set of talks with Lithuania in case the effort to negotiate the placement of missile interceptors in Poland fails. But State Department Spokesman Tom Casey says recent meetings in Lithuania were only "general conversations" about the missile defense system and that the United States "expects and hopes" negotiations with Poland will succeed. He described agreement as "very close."
Pentagon Press Secretary Geoff Morrell, 11 Jun 08Pentagon Press Secretary Geoff Morrell put it this way."I think they want an agreement, but it's a question of what price," said Geoff Morrell. "And that's what a negotiation is all about, and that's what we're in the midst of right now."U.S. officials say that price includes a significant upgrade of Poland's air defense system using the latest American military technology, which U.S. officials have been reluctant to provide.Morrell says Defense Secretary Robert Gates met with his Polish counterpart in Brussels last week and came away convinced that Poland does want an agreement. But Morrell also raised the possibility the United States could look elsewhere if the talks fail."We are hopeful that we can soon reach a deal with the Poles, but we have always said that there are other options available to us," he said. "There are several other European nations that could host the interceptors, and Lithuania is one of them. That said, we have not entered into negotiations with any other country, and hope that that does not become necessary."But the Pentagon press secretary says "time is of the essence," in part because the Bush Administration will leave office in January."We want to get a deal done," said Morrell. "We believe it is imperative, given the security threat that we believe is looming for Europe based upon the Iranian missile threat, that we move on this as soon as possible. And that is why we continue to aggressively pursue talks with the Poles. But that is also why we do not close the door on perhaps having to pursue a backup option."Morrell would not say how long the administration will let the talks with Poland continue. He says the United States will not pursue other options as long as the Poland talks are going well, which he says they are.Morrell also says U.S. officials expect to finalize an agreement for another missile defense site in the Czech Republic next month. The United States wants to put a sophisticated radar installation in the Czech Republic, and link it to interceptor missile launch sites in Poland, or at an alternative site if necessary. ==================================================================
The USA is Looking for a Spare Rocket Airfield in Lithuania
// in case it doesn’t manage to deploy its AMD system in Poland
A possible deployment of the American anti-missile defense system in Lithuania, rather than in Poland, caused quite a scandal yesterday. The reason for it is Polish Deputy Foreign Minister’s sensational statement that Washington, fearing a failure in its AMD negotiations with Warsaw, has launched talks with Vilnius. The Lithuanian party denied the fact of conducting talks with Washington. However, according to diplomatic sources, the USA has started probing for an opportunity of deploying its AMD systems in Lithuania – consultations have already been held.
The scandal was created by Polish Deputy Foreign Minister Vitold Vashchikovsky’s statement published by Reuters (the official is the chief negotiator in the AMD talks). “I can prove that the USA is conducting negotiations with Lithuania. As early as May the Lithuanian side proper took the initiative, and Warsaw is aware of it,” Mr Vashchikovsky told Reuters Warsaw correspondent Gabriela Bachinska. The high-ranking Polish diplomat explained that the USA regards Lithuania a “spare variant” in case the stalled negotiations about the deployment of the U.S. base for ten anti-missiles in the north-east of Poland bring no results. It need be said that Warsaw requires that Washington give $20 bln to Poland as a compensation for the deployment of the AMD elements on the territory of the country. The money is due to be spent on modernizing the Polish AMD system. But the demand aroused irritation of the American party.Yesterday Vilnius tried to disavow the statement of the Polish diplomat. “Lithuania is not conducting negotiations about the deployment of AMD elements on its territory,” Lithuanian Foreign Office spokesperson Violetta Gayzhauskayte stated. At the same time she underscored that Lithuania “shows much interest” in the U.S. AMD project in Europe at its current stage, and it “consults with its allies and partners about the matter.”Lithuania’s Defense Minister Yuozas Olekas commented on the statement of the Polish official. He said that Vilnius believes in the success of the “Polish project,” which will be “a significant shield for the USA, Europe and Lithuania.” At the same time Mr Olekas made a confession, “If Lithuania receives such a proposal (about AMD deployment – Kommersant), we’ll consider all variants discussing its benefits and challenges.” In its turn, the British Financial Times published another statement of Lithuania’s Ambassador to the USA Andrews Bruzga, according to which, Vilnius hasn’t launched official talks with Washington, but “has discussed with the American party a number of questions concerning security and AMD in particular.”However, the uncertain denial of the Lithuanian party hasn’t settled the matter. Yesterday Vitold Vashchikovsky even reiterated his statement adding that the U.S. parallel talks with Lithuania may be “an instrument of exerting pressure” on the intractable Poland. The sensational confession of the Polish high-ranking diplomat, which was reported by the world’s mass media, aroused much speculation in Warsaw and Vilnius as well as a number of world capitals.For example, U.S. State Department Spokesman Tom Casey’s commentary is evidence of the fact that the present discussion is more of terminological character. According to Mr Casey, waiting for the U.S.-Polish negotiations to get accomplished, Washington and Vilnius have been discussing “the basics of the AMD issue.” At the same time the U.S. State Department representative doesn’t rule it out that in case of a failure in the Polish direction the USA will have to use “a spare variant.”It need be said that Lithuania perfectly suits for becoming a place like that. Lithuania inherited many military bases from the USSR, which have been abandoned. Among them, there is an anti-aircraft defense system at the town of Platelyay in the north-west of the country. It has an underground control center and four shafts 27 meters each for launching thermonuclear-tipped missiles, and another base in Shateykyay, which has eight launchers. After repair works, these bases, together with a number of others, can be exploited.The echo of the scandal reached Moscow, too. “The very fact that Lithuania, as Polish and American sources confirm, is regarded an alternative to Poland, can’t help arousing Russia’s concerns,” Chairman of the Duma International Affairs Committee Konstantin Kosachev stated yesterday. “Seems like they want to cross the line marking challenges for our security, and they want our natural concerns to appear aggressive policy towards our neighbors,” Mr Kosachev concluded.
Kommersant
=================================================================
Eastern Europe sees bluff in reports the US is eyeing Lithuania for missile defense base
(Associated Press WorldStream Via Acquire Media NewsEdge) WARSAW, Poland_As talks on building an American missile defense site in Poland have bogged down over Polish demands for massive military aid, word emerged this week that Washington is eyeing Lithuania as an alternative site.
But observers in Eastern Europe are skeptical that Washington would consider Lithuania seriously, suggesting it's a stratagem to ratchet up pressure so President George W. Bush gets a deal before he leaves office in January."I think it's just a political game," said Fyodor Lukyanov, editor of the magazine Russia in Global Affairs. "I think it's an attempt to show Poland that if they continue to resist, then the contract could go other places." The Bush administration would face a huge hurdle persuading the Democratic-controlled Congress to approve funding for a site in Lithuania. In the waning months of his presidency, it's unlikely Bush has the time or political capital to start from scratch on missile defense.Russian opposition to Washington's plans also makes Lithuania an unrealistic choice, analysts say. Not only is Lithuania geographically closer to Moscow, but unlike Poland and the Czech Republic, it was once part of the Soviet Union.To Russians, it "will be perceived as even more provocative than Poland or the Czech Republic," Lukyanov said.Washington wants to set up two missile defense bases in Eastern Europe _ a site with 10 interceptors in Poland and a linked radar installation in the Czech Republic. His administration says the system is meant to protect the U.S. and Europe from possible Iranian attacks.Russia, however, is furious at the idea of U.S. military installations so close to its borders, in a region it controlled during the Cold War. It sees them as initial steps in a longer-term plan that would undermine its own security.Already, Moscow has threatened to target prospective missile defense sites with nuclear missiles.In a sign of Russia's concern over the Lithuania reports, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said Friday that Moscow has asked Washington about its intentions in the Baltic country."We so far haven't received any information," he told reporters.Washington opened formal negotiations in early 2007 with Prague and Warsaw and is close to a deal with the Czechs _ though a question mark hangs over whether the Czech parliament will approve the plan.But talks with Poland aren't going as smoothly as when they began under former Prime Minister Jaroslaw Kaczynski, who was staunchly pro-American and deeply suspicious of Russia.Last fall, Kaczynski was replaced by Donald Tusk, whose government has waged a much stronger fight to get massive military aid in return for allowing the Americans to set up the facility at Redzikowo, a sprawling former Soviet-era base in northern Poland.Defense Minister Bogdan Klich said last month that, if the U.S. is investing hundreds of millions of dollars in allies like Egypt and Pakistan, it shouldn't be cheap with Poland."Poland is becoming as important for the U.S. in this region as Pakistan in Central Asia or Egypt in the Middle East. We expect to be equally treated," Klich. He said he envisions aid in the tens of millions of dollars. "It's not a specially excessive amount," he said.U.S. officials are clearly getting exasperated. The U.S. now gives Poland $27 million per year in military funding, the highest to any European ally, and Bush earlier this year offered to add on $20 million more per year. But that still hasn't swayed the Poles.Grzegorz Holdanowicz, a prominent defense analyst in Warsaw, said he believes "the Lithuanian proposal is for sure a kind of tactical discussion ... It's a signal to Poland that if we do not reduce our expectations, we may lose everything."___Associated Press writer Desmond Butler contributed reporting from Washington.
=====================================================
Moscow ‘anxiety’ over US-Lithuania talks
By Neil Buckley in Moscow and Daniel Dombey in Washington
Published: June 18 2008 22:28 Last updated: June 18 2008 22:28
A senior Russian lawmaker warned on Wednesday that discussions between the US and Lithuania over co-operating on Washington’s missile defence system “could not but provoke anxiety” in Moscow.
Konstantin Kosachev, head of the international committee of Russia’s lower house of parliament, said the development confirmed Russia’s fears about the creation of a Baltic “grey zone”, in which the US could deploy “serious” weapons close to its borders – in countries formerly part of the Soviet Union.
Such concerns were part of the reason Russia last year suspended implementation of the Conventional Forces in Europe treaty, one of the cornerstones of the post-cold war security architecture, he said.
Mr Kosachev told Interfax news agency that Russia had previously been assured that there were no plans to site even conventional weapons covered by the CFE treaty in the Baltics, let alone advanced missile defence equipment.
“It seems that, through such little steps, people are trying to cross the ‘red line’ beyond which problems begin for the security of our country,” he said.
Washington has long insisted that European bases for the missile defence system are intended to counteract a threat from Iran and would have no impact on Russia’s strategic nuclear development.
The US is currently in negotiations with Poland over siting 10 missile interceptors on Polish soil and has almost wrapped up similar discussions with the Czech Republic about placing a missile defence radar system in that country.
But US officials are dismayed that the negotiations with Poland have not yet concluded, despite their earlier expectations, amid concern found in Polish public opinion that hosting the sites could antagonise Russia, as well as what Washington sees as unrealistic demands by the Polish government for greater military assistance.
As a result, officials say the US is increasingly looking at other options for hosting the interceptor base – particularly Lithuania.
However, Poland remains the focus of Washington’s attention, not least because the Bush administration wants to start construction on the interceptor base this year, a step which would make it harder for the next administration to reverse policy on missile defence.
Russia’s foreign ministry played down the news of contacts between the US and Lithuania, saying it had “no information confirming” it. Novosti, a state-controlled Russian news agency, also highlighted denials by the US and Lithuania that they were “formally” discussing deploying elements of the missile defence system in the Baltic state.
The US has previously made similar denials about formal negotiations with the UK over hosting missile interceptors, but it was later revealed that informal discussions had taken place.
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2008
============================================================
Canadian killed in stunt plane crash in Lithuania
Last Updated: Thursday, June 19, 2008 10:07 AM ET Comments2Recommend9
CBC News
A Canadian was killed after a two-seat stunt plane crashed in Lithuania late Tuesday.
Verne Heiderich, 72, died when the single engine turboprop plane crashed near an airstrip in northern Lithuania. The pilot, Spanish citizen Pedro Telleri, suffered a serious back injury.
Airfield owner Aurimas Bezaras said the Russian-made Su-29 plane had been flying dangerously low while performing circular patterns.
The 47-year-old Spanish pilot was training for an international acrobatic flying tournament.
========================================================
Lithuania split by the atom
Jun 19th 2008 From Economist.com
Energy security in the Baltics is getting worse
Get article background
IT was a mistake to start with, compounded by procrastination. The consequences for the security of one of Europe’s most vulnerable corners are potentially appalling.
As part of the deal to join the European Union, Lithuania agreed to close its perfectly serviceable nuclear-power station at Ignalina. No engineering or safety case for this was ever made: the requirement was a political one, sprouting from a neurotic strand of greenery in western Europe.
Lithuanians can feel cross about that. But they should be furious with politicians of all stripes, who have failed to plan for the now imminent deadline of 2009. After that, Lithuania will be 90% dependent on fossil fuel, with around half of its supplies coming from Russia. Unscrambling the agreement on Ignalina would require the consent of every EU member, at a time when their patience has been taxed by Lithuania’s brave but unpopular veto on new talks with Russia.
AFP
March to shutdown at Ignalina
Lithuanian officials are looking for wiggle-room—for example, starting to close the power station in 2009, but not actually taking it off-stream. Few would bet much on that bearing fruit. The populist parties that are hoping to take power in this autumn's elections have a simpler message: they will simply ignore the requirement to close Ignalina. That would mean an almighty bust-up with Brussels.
The only bright side is that Lithuanian politicians will finally face the consequences of their actions, or lack of them. The sensible thing would have been to start several years ago building a new nuclear plant on the same site, to replace Ignalina. But the countries involved in the plan (Lithuania and the other two Baltic states, with the belated addition of Poland) still cannot agree how big it should be, or on shareholding structure. That exasperates those who urgently want the Baltic “energy islands” hooked up into the rest of Europe. But nobody seems able to bang heads together with sufficient force.
Other vital projects such as power links to Sweden and Poland are also woefully behind schedule. Lithuania still squanders energy; a programme to improve home insulation is pitifully inadequate.
Matters are even worse because Venezuela has stopped supplies of orimulsion, a bitumen-based fuel that formed an important part of Lithuania's energy imports. Whether that is due to Hugo Chavez's friendship with Vladimir Putin is a matter of dark speculation in Vilnius.
The immediate danger for Lithuania is that Russia will drive a hard bargain for the extra gas, most likely by demanding a bigger stake in Lithuania’s energy industry. In the long run, Russia says it will build a new nuclear power station in Kaliningrad, the exclave of territory it holds between Lithuania and Poland.
The truly galling prospect is that this gets built and hooks up to the European energy network, while the Lithuanians and their EU allies continue dithering about a replacement for Ignalina. That would be yet another victory for Russia's push into Europe, and yet another humiliating defeat for those who try to oppose it.
As so often in European security, hopes for a rescue rest on America. Lithuania is not only offering to host America's missile-defence base if the Poles decide they don't want it. It is also hoping that an American company will build the new nuclear reactor.
Perhaps—but these things don't happen overnight and Russia is hardly likely to find extra gas to heat a country set on hosting a missile base that it sees as a direct threat. It looks like 2009 will be a year of hot diplomacy and cold radiators in Lithuania.
==================================================================
Lithuania, Belarus establish state borders
19/06/2008 10:22 VILNIUS, June 19 (RIA Novosti) - Foreign ministries of Lithuania and Belarus have exchanged notes confirming the demarcation of borders between the two countries, the Lithuanian Foreign Ministry said in a press release.
The demarcation process was launched in 1996. In 2007 the two countries signed a final protocol and other documents, which were later approved by the two countries' governments.
The Belarusian-Lithuanian border is 679 km (421 miles) long, of which 380 km (236 miles) runs across land and 299 km (186 miles) across water.
======================================================
New bill ‘discriminates’ against single parents
May 28, 2008Adam Mullett
No father means no benefits, if the new bill becomes lawVILNIUS - Legislation drafted by conservative politicians is set to discriminate against single parents if it becomes law, family rights campaigners claimed. Conservatives have drafted a parliamentary bill which legally defines the family as a man and woman legally married in the traditional sense. This would disregard other family types – such as single parents, unmarried or divorced parents or legal guardians caring for children.
=============================================
Inflation Worse in Ukraine and Latvia
Russia’s inflation rate was high compared to most of Europe in the first five months of the year. It was higher only in Ukraine and Latvia. According to Rosstat, the Federal State Statistics Service, Ukraine has the highest rate. Price growth on the consumer market has reached 14.6 percent there. It was 7.7 percent in Russia, and 8.5 percent in Latvia, which was the worst in the European Union.
Germany and Norway had the lowest inflation in that period, at 1 percent. The most significant rises in prices in May over the previous month were 1.5 percent in Turkey (6.4% for the year) and 1.2-1.3 percent in Slovenia, Belarus and Ukraine (3.2%, 6.6% and 14.6%, respectively since the beginning of the year). Rosstat based its material on those published by Eurostat and the data of national statistics services taken from the Internet in keeping with IMF standards.
Friday, June 20, 2008
Wednesday, June 18, 2008
Baltic Blog......Security & Intelligence Briefs, International, Baltic & Russia News June 19- 13, 2008
The Mazeika Report
from June 19 - 13, 2008
go to "blog" link to www.TonyMazeika.blog.com or
http://mazeikabloginternationalnews.blogspot.com/
Pass this link on to other readers!
Breaking stories.....your comments are welcome....
Place this "blog link" into your computer favorites for easy access.
=======================================================
Visit our interactive website and new featured listings....at www.tonymazeika.com
Ocean to Mountains Real Estate for all Orange County
Tony & Danute Mazeika...... 949 721-3445 949 929-9051 cell
Celebrating 21 years and more than 500 successful real estate transactions...
Don't miss incredible market opportunities....... Prices are at Year 2002 level...
May home sales up significantly ...Positive signs of market recovery is here.
Inventory is decreasing. Conforming & FHA Loan Limits Raised...Best home buys since 2002!
Demand for home inventory is up significantly. For those delaying a purchase, now is the time to consider selecting the home of your choice from the best available inventory in years- at historic rates and terms.
.You may qualify for a credit on closing costs and savings on escrow fees...Ask us how......
Don't delay..call us today! 949 721-3445
================================================================
Please support this unique blog.....Buy your ....Books, Dvds, and CDs
on our special link access to Amazon.Com
Tony & Danute
=====================================================================
Breaking news & commentary......................
Islamic school draws fire
Protest follows arrest of top official on obstruction charge
Gary Emerling (Contact)Wednesday, June 18, 2008
The arrest of a top official at a Saudi-financed school in Northern Virginia has fueled further criticism of the institution following findings released last week that say its textbooks contained violent and intolerant language.
Photo by Astrid Riecken
Christine Brim of Fairfax County, an official with the District-based Center for Security Policy, joins a protest at the Islamic Saudi Academy in Alexandria on Tuesday. "They don't have a First Amendment right in this country to incite violence against other groups," she said.
"They're free to come here and worship, but they are not free to come here and teach hate," said Andrea Lafferty, executive director of the Traditional Values Coalition and one of about 15 protesters that gathered Tuesday morning outside the Islamic Saudi Academy's main campus in Alexandria.
The academy - a 900-student private school with campuses in Alexandria and Fairfax - has been the subject of renewed scrutiny after an investigation by the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom found that textbooks used in the school contained passages that blame Jews for "discord" and say it is sometimes permissible to kill non-Muslims.
The school's director general, Abdalla Al-Shabnan, was arrested June 9 and charged with obstruction of justice - a misdemeanor count that follows accusations that he failed to report an allegation of child abuse made by a student at the school.
A 5-year-old girl at the academy's campus in Fairfax said she had been sexually assaulted by a family member, according to court documents. Mr. Al-Shabnan, 52, met with the child's parents, documents show, but did not notify authorities of the complaint within a 72-hour period required by Virginia law.
"At no time did [Mr. Al-Shabnan] report the allegations to any child protective agency or law enforcement agency," an affidavit for a search warrant filed in Fairfax County Circuit Court says. "He further stated that he was not aware that he was required to make such a report."
Court documents also say Mr. Al-Shabnan "stated he did not believe [the girl's] complaint and felt she may be attempting to gain attention." He ordered a written report of the incident deleted from a secretary's computer at the Fairfax campus, documents say.
As part of the investigation, Fairfax County Police searched school offices last month and seized computers, notebooks, student files and disks.
Mr. Al-Shabnan, who is scheduled to appear in court Aug. 1, could not be reached for comment. An academy administrator also declined to comment on the arrest.
Protesters on Tuesday said the director's arrest was another sign of trouble at the academy. The textbook review conducted by the federal panel focused on 17 books used during the last school year and obtained from independent sources.
Astrid Riecken/The Washington Times An armed guard guides visitors to the school Tuesday while monitoring the Islamic Saudi Academy grounds.
The passages found in the review include a 12th-grade Koranic interpretation textbook that states it is permissible for a Muslim to kill those who have left the faith and one that says "the Jews conspired against Islam and its people."
"They don't have a First Amendment right in this country to incite violence against other groups," said Christine Brim, an official with the District-based Center for Security Policy.
At one point, staff and children affiliated with the academy brought bottles of water to the protesters, who gathered near a sidewalk in front of the school holding signs with slogans like "Murder is not a religious freedom" and "Stop Teaching Kids Jihad." But the groups soon began arguing.
"That's absolutely not true," said Rahima Abdullah, the school's education department director. "What we teach here is love and tolerance."
The school has since released a statement calling the panel's report "erroneous" and saying it "contains mistranslated and misinterpreted texts."
"We have new books now, and the ones the commission is talking about have been out of use for some time, and were misinterpreted then," Ms. Abdullah said.
=================================================================
The Marines Vs. Haditha Smear Merchants
By Michelle MalkinWednesday, June 18, 2008
Yet another U.S. Marine, Lt. Col. Jeffrey Chessani, had charges dropped Tuesday in the so-called Haditha massacre -- bringing the total number of Marines who've been cleared or won case dismissals in the Iraq war incident to seven. "Undue command influence" on the prosecution led to the outcome in Chessani's case. Bottom line: That's zero for seven for military prosecutors, with one trial left to go.
I repeat: Haditha prosecution goes 0-7. But you won't see that headline in the same Armageddon-sized font The New York Times used repeatedly when the story first broke.
The Times, Rep. John Murtha, D-Pa, and the rest of the anti-war drum-pounders who fueled the smear campaign against the troops two years ago should hang their hands in shame. They won't, of course. Perpetuating the "cold-blooded Marines" narrative means never having to say you're sorry.
It means never having to look Lt. Col. Chessani (charges dismissed), Lt. Andrew Grayson (acquitted), Lance Cpl. Stephen Tatum (charges dismissed), Capt. Lucas McConnell (charges dismissed), Lance Cpl. Justin Sharratt (charges dismissed), Sgt. Sanick Dela Cruz (charges dismissed), Sgt. Frank Wuterich (awaiting trial) and their families in the eyes and apologize for the preemptive character assassination they all faced at the hands of the hyperventilating, noose-hanging press.
Murtha and company applied Queen of Hearts ("Off with their heads!") treatment to our own men and women in uniform while giving more benefit of the doubt to foreign terror suspects at Gitmo. It is worth recalling, because the press won't do it for you, what they concluded about the now-crumbling Haditha case in the summer of 2006 before a single formal charge had been filed.
-- MSNBC hangman Keith Olbermann, who couldn't wait to define the entire war in Iraq by a single moment about which he knew nothing, inveighed that the incident was "willful targeted brutality." Due process? For convicted cop-killer Mumia Abu-Jamal, of course. For our military? Never mind.
-- Far-left The Nation magazine railed, "Enough details have emerged … to conclude that … members of the 3rd Battalion, 1st Marine Regiment perpetrated a massacre." The publication also judged the event "a willful, targeted brutality designed to send a message to Iraqis." Not content with hanging the troops, the Nation pinned blame on the president and a so-called "culture of impunity" that supposedly permeates the most accountable military in the world.
-- Singing the same tune as The Nation, The New York Times spilled a flood of front-page ink on the case and took things a step further in a lead editorial blaming not just President Bush, but also top Pentagon brass for the "nightmare" killings in Haditha. Times reporter Paul von Zielbauer filed over 30 stories on the case, which the paper wishfully called the "defining atrocity" of the Iraq war.
-- Hoping to facilitate a self-fulfilling prophecy, media tools around the world likened Haditha to the Vietnam War's most infamous atrocity -- from The Guardian ("My Lai on the Euphrates?") to the Daily Telegraph ("Massacre in Iraq just like My Lai") to the Los Angeles Times ("What happened at the Iraqi My Lai?") to The New York Times' Maureen Dowd ("My Lai acid flashback") and the Associated Press, which reached into its photo archives to run a 1970 file photo of My Lai to illustrate a Haditha article.
-- And, of course, there's the permanent stain left by the slanderous propaganda of Rep. Murtha -- the stab in the Marines' backs heard 'round the world: "Our troops overreacted because of the pressure on them, and they killed innocent civilians in cold blood."
Relatives of the Haditha Marines have called for Congress to censure Murtha, who cuts and runs to the nearest elevator when questioned about the Haditha dismissals. He and the Haditha smear merchants have skated while the men and their families suffered global whippings on the airwaves and eternal demonization in print. Whose "culture of impunity"?
Michelle Malkin makes news and waves with a unique combination of investigative journalism and incisive commentary. She is the author of Unhinged: Exposing Liberals Gone Wild .
===================================================
Geopolitical Diary: Ireland's Vote and the Fate of the EU
Ireland on Thursday became thus far the only country of the European Union’s 27-member bloc to hold a referendum over the Treaty of Lisbon. The outcome of Ireland’s vote will not be made public until the close of the day on June 13, leaving many EU bureaucrats anxiously waiting to know the fate of their union. The treaty has a slight majority of support inside of Ireland, though the low voter turnout has left it a coin toss of an outcome.
When the European Union was established in 1993 from the European Community, it was made up of only 15 western European countries that were all at around the same level of development. The purpose of the European Union was to be a unified governing and economic body — a hybrid of intergovernmentalism and supranationalism, transcending the different nations’ differences.
Speed forward to today: Now the European Union’s 27 members range from densely populated and wealthy states such as France and Germany to the poor new members such as Romania and Bulgaria. The union now is a mixture of members that have agricultural, industrial or service-based economies and new members that spent half of the last century under the Iron Curtain.
In short, the EU member states have different views of politics, security and economic models; not to mention, many EU members do not exactly fully trust the others — especially those they have been to war with on the continent in the past century.
But, at least symbolically, the EU nations are attempting to come together in creating a framework of how exactly this union should govern. Thus far, no treaty or constitution has been finalized because there has had to be a unanimous decision by every member state. The newest attempt, called the Treaty of Lisbon, is the EU replacement for the union’s constitution, which was rejected by France and the Netherlands in 2005. The new treaty combines bits and pieces from not only its predecessor but also the treaties of Rome in 1957 and Maastricht in 1992. Because so much of the Treaty of Lisbon comes from existing treaties negotiated before the 2004 round of accessions of the Eastern European states, it has had to be seriously watered down in order for there to be any semblance of an agreement.
To sum it up, the Treaty of Lisbon is the European Union’s weak effort to prove it is indeed a union and not just a fractured and ineffective club of independent states. If Ireland votes against the treaty, it is a public demonstration of the latter. But even if the treaty is approved by the Irish, it won’t save the European Union from its troubles.
Ironically, on Thursday — the same day of Ireland’s referendum — the European Union demonstrated the fact that it is not a governing body, but merely a coordinating one, in its discussions on how to react to high energy prices that are leading to strikes and protests in many European countries.
The union has attempted to formulate a response to Europe’s energy dilemmas in the past, but it has always been hit by a roadblock from one of its member states, meaning that decision-making has reverted back to a state-by-state basis. The concept of the European Union seems as if it should allow for some states to share in other states’ pain over any major challenges –- such as high energy prices — but the EU Council announced Thursday that it will hold discussions June 19-20 on loosening the restrictions on each state’s ability to make its own choice on a specifically short-term response.
Each state is most likely going to follow its own path anyway, but the European Union is trying to show it still has some hold on its members, even if it doesn’t. When facing a crisis, especially over fuel, that hits all other areas such as manufacturing, food and transportation, a state will always look out for its own first and not another nation that is on the other side of the continent — unless the ties binding that nation to another are so strong as to be necessary for the survival of both. Right now, none of the EU members know exactly what they can expect to get from the links they have to other members, and thus will likely pursue their own goals.
In the end, the European Union is undermining its own credibility and viability, just as a vote is taking place to show it is still a functioning governing body.
www.stratfor.com
Geopolitical Diary: Implications of Overt U.S. Operations in Pakistan
Speaking at a joint press conference with British Prime Minister Gordon Brown on Monday, U.S. President George W. Bush expressed support for Afghan President Hamid Karzai’s June 15 remarks that Kabul would send forces into Pakistan to prevent the Taliban from using the South Asian country as a launchpad for attacks in Afghanistan. Karzai, who spoke after a major jailbreak in Kandahar in which hundreds of Taliban fighters escaped, specifically mentioned the Waziristan-based Pakistani Taliban chief Baitullah Mehsud and Maulana Fazlullah, the jihadist leader in the district of Swat in the North-West Frontier Province (NWFP). Pakistani authorities have been negotiating peace agreements with these two jihadist leaders.
It is no coincidence that Bush’s and Karzai’s statements come just days after a U.S. airstrike against a paramilitary outpost in Pakistan that killed 11 Pakistani soldiers. Afghan forces alone clearly lack the ability to conduct cross-border operations in Pakistan, regardless of Karzai’s wishes; Afghanistan can barely secure its own capital. U.S. forces — most likely operating outside the aegis of NATO’s International Security Assistance Force — probably would carry out any such move.
Afghanistan and Pakistan are undergoing a shift Stratfor mentioned in May in which the United States is no longer relying on Pakistan to rein in Islamist militants on its side of the border, but is imposing a situation in which it will become the norm for U.S.-led coalition forces to conduct operations openly inside Pakistan. While U.S. special operations forces and CIA teams have been operating covertly in Pakistan essentially since the beginning of the U.S.-jihadist war, this operational tempo appears to have increased to the point that it is poised to become overt. From the U.S. point of view, Pakistan’s new civil-military leadership is failing to respond to the jihadist threat aggressively, and there is growing U.S. mistrust of the South Asian country’s military and intelligence apparatus.
This perception could help explain the U.S. position that the airstrike on (what Pakistan maintains is) a well-established Pakistani outpost was justified. While U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates called for a joint inquiry into the incident, U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Adm. Mike Mullen maintained that U.S. forces took action against hostile forces and that the operation was carried out in keeping with operational protocol. It is no secret that Pakistan’s Frontier Corps, whose outpost was hit, is viewed as sympathetic to the Taliban and its allies. This apparently led the United States to take matters into its own hands.
Though it is very difficult to describe the nature of U.S. operations on Pakistani soil, Karzai’s comments offer some insight. By threatening not just Mehsud but also Fazlullah, Karzai was hinting that such operations might not be limited to the Federally Administered Tribal Areas but could extend to the NWFP. This leaves the Pakistanis in a very difficult position.
Islamabad could pre-empt the U.S. move by giving Washington exactly what it wants and engaging in a massive action against the militants and their sympathizers within the Pakistani security establishment. Given Pakistan’s performance thus far, this is probably not likely, however. But the inability to make such a move is contributing to the growing international perception of Pakistan as a dysfunctional state, and only pushes the United States further toward taking unilateral action.
Routine U.S. raids on Pakistani soil could lead to clashes not only with militants but also with local tribesmen and others who might not support the Taliban. This very well could create a major uprising in Pakistan, with a strong nationalist reaction from a population that already harbors highly anti-American sentiments. Worse, such raids could create fissures and possibly even fractures with the Pakistani army. This would be especially true if Pakistani troops end up clashing with U.S. forces — something certainly not impossible, considering the deteriorating situation in Pakistan.
Rifts within its army would greatly destabilize the Pakistani state. The military is the only robust institution in Pakistan, and is the cornerstone of whatever stability remains in the South Asian country. But the recent turn of events means Islamabad must choose between confrontation with the United States and confrontation with the jihadists.
==============================================================
Lithuanian ban on Soviet symbols
Lithuania's parliament has passed the toughest restrictions anywhere in the former Soviet Union on the public display of Soviet and Nazi symbols.
It will now be an offence in the Baltic state to display the images of Soviet and Nazi leaders.
This includes flags, emblems and badges carrying insignia, such as the hammer and sickle or swastika.
Correspondents say equating Soviet and Nazi symbols in this way is certain to infuriate Russia.
The new law also prohibits the Nazi and Soviet national anthems but does not specify if this extends to the modern-day Russian national anthem, which uses the Soviet music with different lyrics.
BBC Russian affairs analyst Steven Eke says these are the toughest bans on symbols from the Soviet past adopted in any of the 15 countries that emerged from the USSR.
'Blasphemous'
The measures go further than neighbouring Estonia's ban on Soviet symbols, he says.
Estonia's decision to put the swastika and hammer and sickle on an equally prohibited footing was described by Russia as "blasphemous", and an attempt to rewrite history.
Moscow's official interpretation of history is that Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia were liberated from Nazi Germany by, then voluntarily joined, the Soviet Union.
This account is rejected by those three Baltic States and most other European nations, says our correspondent.
They believe the Soviet Union illegally occupied the Baltic republics as a result of a secret agreement - the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact - between the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany.
The occupation continued until the collapse of the Soviet state itself at the end of 1991.
Story from BBC NEWS:http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/europe/7459976.stm
================================================================
President Valdas Adamkus at a news conference in Trakai, Lithuania, June 16, 2008.
Lithuania Will Take the Missiles
The United States is in negotiations with Lithuania on the placement of elements of its missile defense system in that country, according to Polish Deputy Foreign Minister Witold Waszczykowski. Washington views Lithuania as a possible alternative in the event negotiations with Poland are unsuccessful, Waszczykowski said. Vilnius initiated the negotiations last month. Spokesmen for the American embassy in Warsaw have denied that information, and Lithuanian Foreign Minister Petras Vaitiekunas declined to comment on the claims.
At the end of last month, the Lithuanian National Defense Ministry denied reports that National Defense Minister Juozas Olekas has urged the U.S. to place part of its missile defense system on Lithuanian territory. Lithuania, which is a member of NATO, issued a statement at that time saying that the system in the Czech Republic and Poland will strengthen the security of Lithuania, Europe and Russia. The U.S. plans to place ten interceptor missiles in Poland to defend Europe and the U.S. against attack by such states as Iran and North Korea. Washington signed an agreement with the Czech Republic on May 21 on the placement of radar facilities for the system in that country. Negotiations with Poland have taken a turn for the worse since Donald Tusk became the country’s prime minister. Tusk is determined to maintain good relations with Russia as well as the U.S. Poland is also asking for $20 billion to modernize its army in compensation for the risks associated with the missiles. The U.S. has offered the symbolic sum of $200 million.
No, Lithuania Won’t Take the Missiles
The Lithuanian Foreign Ministry has denied reports that Vilnius is in negotiations with Washington over the placement of elements of the U.S. missile defense system on Lithuanian territory. “Lithuania is not conducting negotiations on the placement of the missile defense system on its territory,” Violetta Gaizauskaite, head of the information and public relations department of the Lithuanian Foreign Ministry told local LTV television. She added that Lithuania “assesses the possibility of the placement of the missile defense system in Poland positively.”
On Tuesday, Polish Deputy Foreign Minister and chief missile negotiator Witold Waszczykowski stated that the U.S. had entered into negotiations with Lithuania on Lithuanian initiative on the placement of elements of the defense system in that country should negotiations with Poland fail. Official U.S. State Department representative Tom Casey told journalists that negotiations with Poland should soon be concluded and no alternatives are needed for the placement of U.S. interceptor missiles. The U.S. plans to place ten interceptor missiles in Poland and the radar equipment for the system in the Czech Republic as defense against the threat posed by Iran. Russia is concerned that the system could be a threat to its security, however. Warsaw is expecting U.S. aid for modernizing its army in return. Warsaw has expressed particular interest in obtaining Patriot PAC-3, THAAD or AMRAAM short- or medium-range missile complexes.
www.kommersant.com
=====================================================================
Lithuania open to U.S. shield talks if Poland refuses
Wed Jun 18, 2008 11:14am EDT
VILNIUS (Reuters) - Lithuania has held no talks on hosting a U.S. missile shield, but would consider the idea if Washington's negotiations with Poland failed and the Americans suggested it, officials said on Wednesday.
Polish chief negotiator Witold Waszczykowski told Reuters on Tuesday the United States was already in talks with Lithuania. Diplomats say Washington has become exasperated by Warsaw's tough negotiating stance.
"Only if no bilateral agreement was reached between Poland and the U.S. and an official proposal was sent to Lithuania would our country look at it with due attention and responsibility," Lithuania's Defense Ministry said.
It added in a statement that it supported the idea of a missile shield in Europe and was following the negotiations closely. It said it had been informed by U.S. representatives at a meeting in Vilnius in May about the course of the talks.
But it added: "Lithuania does not hold any talks with the U.S. on installation of elements of anti-missile defense systems."
The United States said on Tuesday that only "general conversations" with the Lithuanians had taken place.
President George W. Bush's administration wants to install interceptor rockets in Poland and a tracking radar in the Czech Republic to shield the United States and allies from attack by what it calls "rogue states", particularly Iran.
Russia is strongly opposed to the idea, seeing it as a threat to its own security.
Poland has set tough conditions for agreeing to base 10 U.S. interceptor rockets on its soil. It wants Washington to spend billions of dollars to upgrade Polish air defenses after Russia said it would point missiles at Poland in case of deployment.
The United States has said it would seek another site for its European missile defense project if talks with Poland fail. Poland, the Czech Republic and Lithuania are members of NATO.
(Reporting by Patrick Lannin; Editing by Charles Dick)
Reuters
================================================
Czech official "not surprised" by Baltic shield talks claims (Extra)
By DPAJun 18, 2008, 14:12 GMT
Prague - Czech Deputy Prime Minister Alexandr Vondra said Wednesday that he was not surprised by claims that the United States is in talks with Lithuania on installing a part of a planned US missile shield in the Baltic state.
'We don't want to comment (on) what belongs to Lithuania or Poland, but I was not very surprised by that statement,' Vondra said.
Vondra reacted to a statement by Polish top missile shield negotiator Witold Waszczykowski, who said Tuesday that the United States were negotiating with Lithuania about a possibility to place 10 interceptor missiles, intended as the Polish arm of the system, in the Baltic state.
Both Washington and Vilnius have since denied holding such talks.
The Pentagon said that the US hopes to strike a deal with Poland but would look elsewhere, including at Lithuania, if the talks in Warsaw fail, while Lithuanian officials confirmed they are open to negotiations on hosting the base.
Washington is close to completing talks with the Czech Republic on placing a tracking radar in a military zone south-west of Prague. The talks in Poland have lagged behind after Warsaw's demands for military aid.
The plan to put the missile shield bases, allegedly designed against the so-called rogues states such as Iran, in the former Soviet satellites has irked Russia, which has threatened to aim its missiles at central Europe if the shield is installed there.
=====================================================
Medvedev Employs Communists
Russia’s President Dmitry Medvedev proceeded with meetings with heads of State Duma’s factions. The yesterday’s guest in the Kremlin was Gennady Zyuganov, leader of the Communist Party of the RF (CPRF).
Gennady Zyuganov was the third party leader that met with the new president. State Duma Vice Speaker from Fair Russia Party Alexander Babakov and Civil Force leader Mikhail Barshchevsky had had their rendezvous with the president already. Civil Force has no faction of its own in the lower house of Russia’s parliament but it had been amid the parties that nominated Medvedev the presidential candidate.The sources say Medvedev will meet with LDPR leader Dmitry Zhirinovsky and Yabloko leader Grigory Yavlinsky in the nearest future. As to the meetings with spokesmen of United Russia’s faction, the leader of the latter and today’s PM of the country Vladimir Putin promised to see about it.In the Kremlin yesterday, Medvedev proposed to communists to take part in the matter of national significance. “We have nowhere to step back, it’s time to pass all those documents,” the president said referring to the national program for corruption fighting. “In essence, it’s clear what should be there… But there are nuances, both legal and economic, which could be debated.” The CPRF faction is the second in the State Duma “in terms of significance and authority” and it has its own ideas, so it should be also involved in the process, according to the president.So, the communists were urged to come up with their own counter-corrupt amendments and to join the elaboration of judicial reform. Zyuganov accepted the offer, specifying that the faction has not only the experts and ideas but also the ready bills.
www.kommersant.com
===========================================================
MAN IN CHARGE Prime Minister Putin in May.
AFP
Putin's Giant Chess Game: 'Petrostate'
Books Review of: Petrostate: Putin, Power, and the New Russia
By MARTHA MERCERJune 18, 2008
Over the weekend, at a meeting in Osaka, finance ministers from the Group of Eight industrialized nations warned that high commodities prices are a threat to the world economy. With the price of oil passing $130 a barrel, the American Treasury secretary, Henry Paulson, singled out oil-rich countries for not investing enough in production.
As news outlets pointed out, most of the G-8 countries have little control over production. One, however, does, and it has leveraged that control, and its enormous reserves, to regain status as a world power.
Russia's re-emergence as a "Petrostate" is the subject of Marshall Goldman's new book of the same name (Oxford University Press, 244 pages, $27.95). An emeritus professor of economics at Wellesley College and senior scholar at the Davis Center for Russian and Eurasian Studies at Harvard University, Mr. Goldman has spent decades delving into Russian and Soviet economics, and his latest in a dozen books offers critical insight into the country's energy sector.
After the tsarist reconquest of what is now Azerbaijan and the Caucuses in the mid-19th century, Russia began a cycle that has repeated itself in various forms to the present day. Foreign concerns, beginning with the Swedish Nobel family and Rockefeller's Standard Oil, were allowed in to exploit the petroleum reserves and lend their advanced technology, but after the Bolsheviks took over, the foreigners were forced out.
In "Petrostate," Mr. Goldman takes a detailed look at oil production in the Soviet era, and especially the political leverage that ownership of some of the world's largest petroleum and gas reserves offered: the use of oil to gain influence in countries such as Cuba and Pakistan, and the opportunity presented by the 1973 oil embargo, when Western Europe sought to reduce its dependence on uncertain imports from the Middle East. The West throughout the Cold War had held back its advanced drilling technology from the Soviet Union, which oversaw colossal waste through its emphasis on quantity over quality, but by the early 1980s, a natural gas pipeline linking the U.S.S.R. with Western Europe was in the offing, over the objections of President Reagan. It was completed in 1985.
The breakup of the Soviet Union and the division of its spoils provides Mr. Goldman with his meatiest material. While the Ministry of the Gas Industry was preserved whole as a hybrid state corporate entity — in 1989, it became Gazprom, with the gas minister, Viktor Chernomyrdin, installed as its CEO — the Ministry of Petroleum privatized its oil fields.
The chaos that ensued, Mr. Goldman writes, was foreseeable. As many Russians traded away the vouchers they received from President Yeltsin's government for a bottle of vodka instead of using them to purchase stock in the country's new companies, a small group of men was preparing the ground for takeovers on a huge scale.
Through the tainted Loans for Shares program, for example, Mikhail Khodorkovsky and his Bank Menatep were able, by way of a rigged auction, to gain control of the huge oil fields of Yukos for a mere $309 million, Mr. Goldman writes. The company, one of many controlled by the country's new "oligarch" class, soon had a market share of $15 billion.
With production and the price of oil dropping as the 1990s progressed, Russia again turned to foreign partners, allowing British Petroleum to buy part of the Russian oil concern TNK, and permitting the signing of production sharing agreements with Royal Dutch Shell and Total, among others, to drill in the inhospitable fields off the island of Sakhalin.
But after Russia hit rock bottom with the August 1998 default and crash, commodities prices began to rise again, as did demand for oil and gas in India and China. A year later, and five months after the economy began its turnaround, Mr. Goldman writes, an unknown from St. Petersburg named Vladimir Putin was appointed prime minister.
As president, and now again as prime minister, Mr. Putin has presided over economic growth approaching 8% a year. He laid out his economic strategy in a dissertation in 1997: Instead of allowing Russia's oligarch-controlled corporations to focus exclusively on making a profit, they should be used to advance the country's national interests. Russia should welcome direct foreign investment, but Russia alone should retain operating control.
Sibneft and Yukos, which was flirting with the idea of selling itself to ExxonMobil and Chevron, were reined in, and the oligarchs who controlled them were jailed or fled abroad. Production sharing agreements in Sakhalin, which Mr. Putin had referred to as "a colonial agreement," were adjusted in Russia's favor. Companies known as "national champions," such as Gazprom and Rosneft, now check in advance with Mr. Putin before selling assets to a foreign company.
In a welcome contrast to aggrieved Western press reports about Mr. Putin's economic strategy and the subsequent fall of oligarchs such as Mr. Khodorkovsky, Mr. Goldman takes an agnostic view on these developments. "In all fairness," he writes, "the way the Russian government reacts when foreign investors attempt to buy their energy resources is not that atypical of how other countries react in a similar situation. If anything, most members of OPEC, for example, are even more protective."
He does have a stern warning for Western Europe, however. The region has become dangerously dependent on Russia for natural gas, he writes. With its spreading network of pipelines, Gazprom now has the power to let Europe freeze if it so chooses.
Although the deputy chairman of the state-controlled gas giant, Alexander Medvedev, proclaims that "what is good for Gazprom is good for the world," Mr. Goldman points out that over the years, the Soviet Union and now Russia have not hesitated to reduce or halt the flow of gas. Squabbles with Ukraine, Belarus, and Georgia over the last few years have made hollow Gazprom's pledges that it is a reliable energy partner. While the Europeans and Americans have sought to break Gazprom's pipeline monopoly by promoting the construction of a bypass gas pipeline under the Caspian through Azerbaijan and Georgia to Turkey, they are getting a late start to what Mr. Goldman calls Mr. Putin's "giant chess game." Russia's power today, he writes, now exceeds the military might it had during the Cold War. With no mutually assured destruction, there is no mutually assured restraint, giving Russia more economic clout than Europe or even the kingdom with the world's largest proven oil reserves, Saudi Arabia.
The chess game continues.
mmercer@nysun.com
=====================================================
Divided village reflects a deeper divide in Europe
By YURAS KARMANAU
The Associated Press
PYATSKUNY, Belarus — When Stanislava Subach wants to lay flowers on her husband's grave, she puts them in a plastic shopping bag and adds some stones for weight.
The package is then tossed over a metal fence and into what is now another country, to be picked up by former neighbors and placed on the grave.
The border between Belarus and Lithuania, two countries that were part of the Soviet Union, was once little more than a line on a map.
Now a fence runs along the border, representing a new version of the Iron Curtain that separated Eastern and Western Europe until communism collapsed. The autocratic regime of Belarus portrays this heavily policed border as the last line of defense against an encroaching West, represented by Lithuania, now a member of the European Union and NATO.
Here the fence cuts right through the village, separating Pyatskuny on the Belarus side from its Lithuanian half, Norviliskes. Villagers are cut off from the neighbors, the parish church and the cemetery, just a few steps but a whole world away.
People living across the fence can travel visa-free throughout Europe and work there. Those who stay in Norviliskes are paid by the EU to farm their land, and have money to fix up their homes and buy new clothes.
Those on the Belarusian side have little choice but to work on the local collective farm, and they depend on their gardens for food.
Belarus' President Alexander Lukashenko, who permits no real economic or political reform, uses the fortified border much as the Soviet bloc once did: as a way to keep people in as much as keep them out.
The Lithuanian border police operate as any in Europe: guarding the frontier with patrol cars and video cameras, chiefly to catch smugglers and illegal immigrants. But on the Belarus side, armed guards patrol with dogs and are authorized to shoot.
Villagers cannot even walk to the fence to talk to neighbors or pass parcels. Just leaving a footprint in the 10-foot-wide raked dirt track along the fence can mean a fine or 10 days in jail.
"Our hearts were left on the other side of the fence," said Subach, 67, as she sat on the border watching a service through the open door of the Catholic church and joining in the prayers. She has not visited her husband's grave for more than two years, nor can she attend Mass in her church.
To travel there, she would have to journey 90 miles to the nearest Lithuanian consulate, wait in line for several days, pay about $90 for a visa (almost her entire monthly pension), travel 60 miles north to a border checkpoint and another 60 miles south before finally arriving in Norviliskes.
Fear rules on Belarus side
This is the only border village that is cut in two. As under Soviet rule, border guards and secret-service agents keep tabs on everyone in the border region, and those traveling here from elsewhere in Belarus need permission.
Three men in leather jackets who introduced themselves as border guards accompanied two journalists throughout a recent visit. Some villagers said they were afraid to speak in the men's presence.
Elderly villagers joke that they have lived in three countries without ever leaving home. Once part of Poland, the village was taken over by the Soviet Union in 1939, which gave one half to Belarus and the other to Lithuania.
After the Soviet collapse in 1991, the border with Lithuania became an international one, but travel rules remained relatively lax and Belarusian villagers were able to cross over to the Lithuanian side on religious holidays.
Then, in 2004, Lithuania joined the EU and NATO, and required visiting Belarusians to have visas, since it had become part of the EU's border-free zone.
Many Belarusians would like to travel west, but the European Union says it will ease travel restrictions only after Lukashenko frees political prisoners and holds free elections.
Yanina Yanovich, 61, says she shouts across the border to communicate with her nephew, Stanislav, who lives in the first house on the Lithuanian side.
"This is one thing the government can't stop us from doing," said Yanovich, wearing old rubber boots and a darned sweater with the lettering U.S.A.
In Norviliskes, many of the 35 inhabitants have cellphones. Pyatskuny's 50 people have only the phone in the grocery.
The store's clerk, Tereza Turkevich, says she often sells food to villagers on credit. "Some survive on bread and water so they can save enough money to travel to Lithuania," she said.
Norviliskes has a recently restored a 16th-century castle that draws tourists year-round, and a summer music festival that attracts thousands.
Marja Dudowicz, 68, who lives next to the castle, sells milk to tourists to supplement her monthly pension of about $275. She also receives more than double that sum from the EU for sowing wheat, rapeseed and oats on her 37 acres of land, some of which she rents out.
"We have problems, but I can't complain after looking across the fence at our Belarusian neighbors," said Dudowicz. She has renovated her house and has groceries delivered to her door. She plies her guests with Brazilian coffee, Belgian amaretto, ham, homemade sausage and fresh brown bread.
For 50-year-old Leokadija Gordiewicz, living in the EU means being able to talk politics without fear. She named her dog Landsbergis, after Lithuanian independence leader Vytautas Landsbergis. Her cat's name is Lukashenko.
"I could be jailed for this in Belarus," she said.
Youth move out
Despite Norviliskes' relative prosperity, most of the young Lithuanian villagers have left, either for Vilnius, the capital, about 50 miles away, or farther afield.
Yan Mikul, 24, grew up in the village but for the past two years has been working in Dublin, Ireland as a plumber, where, he says, he earns up to $4,500 a month.
"Only a fool would not take advantage of the opportunities of a Europe without borders," said Mikul, who was wearing a new green sweater and red jacket. He had driven back to Norviliskes in his used BMW to tend his grandparents' graves, and was also helping to collect the flowers thrown across the fence and placing them on the graves.
Giedrius Klimkevicius, the Lithuanian businessman who restored the village's castle with EU help, would have liked to place the stage for the music festival right on the border as a gesture of unity, but says the Belarusian authorities forbade it.
"The iron fence on the border has become a symbol of the division of two civilizations, to our deep regret," he said.
Copyright © 2008 The Seattle Times Company
===================================================================
Belarus: Study Brands Minsk Worst City In Europe
Minsk ranked last in living standards
(Bymedia.net)
Belarus seems to have a knack for breaking dubious records.U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice once famously called Belarus "the last dictatorship in Europe," an epithet that has stuck to the authoritarian regime of President Alyaksandr Lukashenka.Now, the country's capital has been branded the European city with the worst living standards.A study released last week by Mercer, a global human-resources consultancy, says expatriates in Minsk are worse-off than anywhere else in Europe. The city ranked last in Mercer's annual living-standards tally, trailing 182 other European cities. Slagin Parakatil, a senior researcher at Mercer, says Minsk fared poorly in most of the 39 criteria examined for the report."One of the criteria in which it didn't get very good scores is consumer goods -- the availability of fruit, meat, and fish; there's also the infrastructure -- we're looking at reasonable, expatriate-standard housing facilities," Parakatil says. "If an expatriate needs to have emergency surgery, the score is relatively low for services provided by both private and public hospitals."The city also got bad marks for its recreational facilities, economic and political environment, airport facilities, and transport connections.Unlike most other Eastern European cities, which have moved up the list since Mercer's previous study, Minsk remains last with consistently low scores.'Nowhere To Go'Do Minsk residents share this unflattering view of their city?Some, such as Valmen Aladau, an architect and professor at the Belarusian National Technical University, have denounced the Mercer study as slander."Minsk is one of the most interesting cities in Europe, everyone who's been here has said so publicly," Aladau says. "This is pure political vileness that is probably targeted against our government and ends up hurting the whole population. We don't have enough hotels. But in terms of being interesting, there should be more such cities in Europe."But a poll carried out by RFE/RL's Belarus Service in the streets of Minsk shows that many residents do agree with Mercer, particularly with regard to their city's recreational facilities."In all European cities, if you're not in a hurry to go home in the evening, there are clubs and cafes where you can spend some time," says one woman. "Here, the only places open at night are the casinos and train station.""Nothing open at night" (Bymedia.net)"There aren't enough places to drink coffee from a nice cup, not a plastic one," says another woman."For children, for instance, there's the Ice Palace, but it would be nice to have something other than just the Ice Palace," a third woman says. "There's almost nowhere to take kids during the summer holidays."Syarhey Khareuski, a Belarusian cultural analyst, agrees that city authorities have done little to preserve and embellish Minsk's historical city center."Take a walk in the center of Minsk, what is there to see? Two churches, and that's all. Museums that were once planned were never built. Instead of museums and exhibition halls, you have ordinary pubs. The efforts of the current authorities have concentrated on selling every square meter of space in the city center, lining their pockets, and allowing as many vehicles as possible to pass through the city center."RFE/RL's Belarus Service contributed to this report
=================================================================
Window on Eurasia: Russian Politicians Seen Hijacking Construction of Monument to Victims of Communism
Paul Goble
Vienna, June 17 – Just as Vasily Grossman foresaw in his classic work, "Forever Flowing," Russian politicians who openly admire Stalin are now the very people calling for a minute of silence or a monument to his millions of victims, an act of hypocrisy that does no honor to the former and insults the memory of the latter.
Last week, "Novaya gazeta" featured an article suggesting that the Russian government may at long last be prepared to build a monument to the victims of communism in that country, thus ending what the article's author, Vladimir Ryzhkov, suggested is an anomalous and even dangerous situation (www.novayagazeta.ru/data/2008/41/28.html).
Russia today, he noted, "remains almost the only country in the former socialist camp" where there is not a national memorial to the victims of communism. That shortcoming " puts Russia in a hypocritical position: making it appear that we are shamefully justifying the crimes of Stalinism and even in part acting as successors of [his] criminal regime."
But now, Ryzhkov continued, this situation is changing. Former Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev has raised the issue twice. Various fractions of the Duma have called for a memorial. And now Boris Gryzlov, the speaker of the Duma and the number two official in the ruling United Russia Party, is backing the idea.
Such "growing support for the initiative of establishing a memorial center," Ryzhkov concluded, "offers hope that in the near future it will be possible to achieve all the necessary political and organization decisions and include the forces of both society and state in the creation of a monument, memorial and museum worthy of the victims and of the new Russia."
In an essay posted online today, however, Moscow historian Irina Pavlova argues that Ryzhkov's upbeat stance is misplaced for at least three reasons. First, she notes, the politicians pushing the idea of a memorial to the victims of Stalin are admirers of the dictator, a combination that insults the dead and the living (grani.ru/Politics/Russia/m.137810.html).
Second, she points out, these same politicians are interested in using such a monument to legitimate the regime of which they are a part rather than deal honestly with the crimes of their predecessors, again a travesty against the memory of the millions upon millions of people who suffered under Soviet rule.
Indeed, she writes, "the establishment of a memorial to the victims of Stalinist repression today would serve only one thing – the legitimation of the current powers that be that in essence have reproduced the Stalinist mechanism of administration under the cover of 'sovereign democracy.'"
And third, Pavlova suggests, the Russian government is trying to hijack the construction of such a memorial, to reduce to a minimum the role of society and thus to gut the meaning of such a monument for the population as a whole even while the regime seeks to use it to present itself as having "overcome" the past.
It is this last point that clearly concerns her most. Involved with the collection of memoirs of the victims of Stalin's rule for more than 20 years, Pavlova a decade ago published an article arguing that the time was not yet ripe for such a monument because it would be "an indulgence" for the regime and elicit only feelings of "anger, regret, and protest" among the population.
Today, the Moscow historian says, "the atmosphere in the country is worse than it was ten years ago," with the current regime "having cultivated the image of Stalin as an outstanding statesman," a view that public opinion polls show has had a serious impact on the views of the Russian people.
Ryzhkov is of course correct, Pavlova says, when he suggests that Russia is "just about the only country in the former socialist camp" without such a memorial. But he is profoundly wrong when he suggests that such a situation risks creating the impression that Russia is today "a successor of [Stalin's] criminal regime."
That is not an impression, she says; it is a reality. To give but one example: the FSB has not declassified many of the documents about that period in violation of Boris Yeltsin's order of August 24, 1991, and historians working for the organs continue to churn out books and articles celebrating Stalin and his contributions to the country and the world.
Moreover, she asks, "why should we be talking about a memorial to the victims only of Stalin and not of all political repressions? Even in the time of perestroika, the question was framed more broadly. And why should this memorial complex be hidden in the Butyrka prison [as some have proposed] and not stand before FSB headquarters?"
As many have forgotten, Nikita Khrushchev first raised the idea of a monument to Stalin's victims in the party and government at the 20th Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union in 1956, and at the 22nd CPSU Congress in 1961, he called for the construction of a memorial to them in Moscow itself.
Twenty-seven years later, at the 19th All-Union Party Conference, the issue was raised again and broadened to include all victims of Stalin. And at that time, efforts to rehabilitate the dictator's victims were resumed after a hiatus of more than a generation. A Memorial was created – but it was and remains an informal organization rather than something else.
Had a monument to Stalin's victims been erected in 1988-89, a time when there was unusual popular attention to the past, that act alone would "not only have united society but had a powerful influence on the future course of the development of the country. But that did not happen, she notes, and it could not happen for reasons that are "now clear."
The emerging political elite wanted to draw on the past rather than condemn it, and in March 1996, on the 40th anniversary of Khrushchev's secret speech unmasking Stalin, no more than ten members of the Duma were prepared to support the late Sergey Yushenkov's proposal to honor the victims by standing up for a moment of silence.
Beyond any doubt, Russia needs a monument to those who were repressed by Stalin and by others, Pavlova concludes. But it must be one created by the Russian people who fully recognize and understand the crimes of the past, not one "put up with the permission of the current powers that be – the heirs of the very organs which carried out the repressions."
===========================================================
Three Baltic states mourn 1941 Soviet deportees
Posted on : 2008-06-14 Author : DPA News Category : Europe
Riga - The three small Baltic nations of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania paid moving tribute on Saturday to the tens of thousands of men, women, and children who were rounded up and deported to Siberia by the Soviet authorities. In the early hours of June 14, 1941, some 10,000 Estonians, more than 15,000 Latvians and between 16,000 and 18,000 Lithuanians were herded onto cattle trains and transported to the far eastern reaches of the Soviet Union, where many of them died.
The expulsions were carried out "to persecute and silence" opponents of Josef Stalin's regime, which occupied the three Baltic states first in 1940, and again at the close of World War II following a few years of the Nazi occupation.
"Words cannot express the despair felt by the people sent off towards an unknown destination, with nothing but ephemeral hope of surviving and returning to homeland," Estonian President Toomas Hendrik Ilves along with Prime Minister Andrus Ansip and Parliament's speaker Ene Ergma said in a joint statement in the Estonian capital, Tallinn.
"What must the mothers and fathers have felt, seeing their children crammed in cattle wagons alongside themselves? These mothers and fathers, women and men had little chance of seeing their loved ones again," said Ilves, who himself was born in Stockholm to a family of Estonian refugees.
They were the first of a series of mass deportations that lasted until the early 1950s and saw hundreds of thousands of Estonians, Latvians and Lithuanians sent to prison or exile in Siberia as Moscow put in motion a plan to occupy the Baltics.
In the Latvian capital, Riga, a group of former political prisoners and leaders laid flowers at the city's Freedom Monument in the drizzling rain.
Maroon and white Latvian flags with black ribbons of mourning tied to them fluttered about as Latvian President Valdis Zatlers told a crowd of several hundred people not to forget those who were deported to their death in Siberian gulags.
"It is a painful day in our history ... we can never forget those who remained in Siberia, those who were killed there. We have to tell the world that our nation suffered from many occupations." Zatlers said.
The Soviet occupying force sent Balts to camps and prisons in the most disadvantaged regions of the USSR in on June 14, 1941. The deportations recommenced after the Soviets reoccupied the countries from Nazi Germany and then again after World War II during the partisan resistance movement that lasted until the mid-1950s.
In Lithuania, leaders marked the Day of Mourning and Hope by laying flowers at a special memorial.
"More than 60 years ago, occupiers took our country, launched their plan to rid Lithuania of Lithuanians. For thousands of our citizens it meant death, deportations, broken health, and broken lives," said Lithuanian President Valdas Adamkus at the monument to victims of Soviet oppression in the Lithuanian capital, Vilnius.
Some 50,000-60,000 Lithuanians - every third prisoner or deportee - died in exile. Only half of the deportees returned home decades later.
In all, Soviet authorities deported about 150,000 people from Lithuania, most of whom died.
=====================================================================
European Parliament commemoration of anniversary of first mass deportations from Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia June 14th, 1941.
The ceremony will take place on Wednesday, June 18th, at 2.30 pm in the visitors area of the Louise Weiss building in Strasbourg before a memorial plaque that was presented to the President of the European Parliament in June 2006 by three Baltic delegations of the EPP-ED group together with the British MEP Christopher Beazley.
We will lay flowers in front of the plaque and show our respect for the tens of thousands of victims who were taken from their homes by the Soviet totalitarian regime, a significant number never to return.
June 14 is marked every year in all three Baltic states as a national day of mourning. We thank you for sharing in this event with us by your presence or through your good thoughts.
Background information
In May 1941, the Central Committee of the Communist Party and the Soviet Government adopted a joint directive “On the measures to cleanse Lithuanian, Latvian and Estonian SSR of anti-Soviet, criminal and socially dangerous element”. Security forces were directed to repress five categories of inhabitants of these countries, which had been occupied by the Soviet Union in June 1940 on the basis of the August 23, 1940 Stalin-Hitler Pact:
Activists of the counter-revolutionary parties as well as members of anti-Soviet, nationalistic and “White Guard” organizations;
former policemen and prison officials;
former big land-owners, factory-owners and civil servants;
former Army officers;
the criminal element.
These “measures” meant arresting all people belonging to those arbitrary and ambiguous categories, sentencing them to 5-8 years in forced labour camps and then to 20 years of exile in the remotest parts of the Soviet Union; all their property was to be confiscated. The term “Counter-revolutionary parties” included all non- Communist political parties; the term “anti-Soviet and nationalistic organizations” included all NGO-s and patriotic formations.
All family members of persons belonging to the first four categories were destined to 20 years of exile along with the confiscation of their property. The same measures applied to families whose head of household had gone into hiding.
Approximately 50,000 Lithuanian, Latvian and Estonian nationals fell victim to the June 14, 1941 deportations. Considerable numbers of deportees perished, some of them – most often the elderly and infants and small children – died in the cattle cars before ever reaching their destinations in remote regions of Siberia. Their confiscated property was never restored by the Soviet authorities. Most of those who managed to return were subjected for decades to social and economic discrimination.
Tunne Kelam
======================================================
SCHUMER JOINS PUTIN TO OPEN NEW RUSSIAN GAS STATION CHAIN IN NEW YORK
Schumer: more competition and new sources are the best way to loosen OPEC's stranglehold on New York and America
OPEC's newly-announced cuts of nearly 1 million barrels of oil a day will raise prices further – Schumer says alternative to OPEC supplies is desperately needed
1,200 Lukoil gas stations will sell Russian gasoline in regionUS Senator Chuck Schumer and President Vladimir Putin of the Russian Federation celebrated the grand opening of Lukoil Oil Company’s new service stations in New York City today, with Schumer saying that because Lukoil's gas is not governed by OPEC, these new gas stations will help New Yorkers fight price hikes caused by OPEC and Saudi Arabia manipulating oil supplies.
"These new gas stations will – in the long run – help bring down gas prices by introducing the OPEC monopoly to good old-fashioned American competition. OPEC and Saudi Arabia have held New Yorkers in the palms of their hands for too long, jacking up our gas prices at will. When President Bush says we have to cut our reliance on oil form the Middle East, I couldn't agree more – but for most of us, we've had no choice until now. Lukoil's huge investment in New York gives us a choice – an opportunity to cut our reliance on Middle East oil without having to drive our cars any less."
Lukoil's presence in the US cuts American dependence on Middle Eastern oil and responds to President Bush's strategic decision to diversify oil imports. Lukoil is Russia's largest oil producer, and they have made a major commitment to the US market. The 1,200 Metro New York stations – former Getty stations – will bring in $400 million in annual revenues, and will pay $50 million in gross receipt taxes and over $4 million in real estate taxes to New York City. Lukoil will employ more than 1,000 people at its services stations in New York City.
This week, OPEC announced that it is cutting oil production by nearly 1 million barrels a day. Schumer said that energy experts have told him that because most OPEC members are not currently meeting their production quotas, the majority of the reduction in oil production will come at the hands of Saudi Arabia – meaning the Saudis are once again reducing oil to the US to flex their muscles. Energy experts warned yesterday that gas prices are likely to go up more because of the OPEC cuts, with at least one expert saying that OPEC decided on the production cut precisely because US gas prices were coming down slightly.
While gas prices are down 10 cents over the last month nationwide, Schumer yesterday released data showing that the average for price of a gallon of regular gasoline in New York City and Long Island remains stubbornly high. The average price for a gallon of regular unleaded in both New York City and Long Island is 17 cents higher than a month ago, and Schumer asked the US Federal Trade Commission to investigate.
"These new gas stations in New York are an easy win-win. It obviously benefits the Russian economy to be able to tap further into the American gasoline market, and a stronger Russian economy is a net plus for the United States and the West. If there's one thing New York drivers need, it's lower gas prices, and that comes from good-old American competition. This Russian gas should increase oil alternatives in our market and will, we hope, help drive gas prices down."
Schumer and President Putin were joined today at a new Lukoil gas station on Manhattan's west side by Lukoil President Vagit Alekperov.###
==========================================================
Lithuanian interactive KGB show replays brutal past 2008-05-08
As Lithuania's post-Soviet generation comes of age, a local theatre troupe is making sure the evils of the communist past are not forgotten, offering a three-hour refresher course -- as KGB prisoners.
"These few hours should provide a quintessential Soviet-era experience," said Ruta Vanagaite, producer of the interactive show that runs in a former bunker in Naujasode, 25 kilometres (15 miles) from the capital Vilnius.
"By the end visitors should feel how, under a totalitarian regime, they are nothing," she said. "They should realise how much progress there's been over the past 17 years."
Before heading four metres (13 feet) underground, participants begin a journey back in time by swigging a cup of ersatz coffee and donning a "fufaika", the quilted cotton jacket worn by prisoners in the Soviet gulag.
From then on, the curious tourist is treated as a simple "comrade-prisoner" -- obliged to respond to barked questions and commands from a half-dozen actors with a simple yes or no.
After saluting the Soviet flag, participants are made to perform physical exercises, such as squatting, running and rolling in a blanket while wearing a gas mask.
The ryhthm is dictated by an actor in KGB uniform, who screeches orders in Russian as his German shepherd dog strains on its leash.
The Orwellian show is set in 1984, and takes place in a bunker that until 1991 housed emergency radio and television transmitters which were meant to be used if a NATO attack knocked out other Soviet facilities.
Lithuania, which was occupied by the Soviet Union during World War II, declared independence in 1990 and won international recognition a year later as the Soviet bloc crumbled.
In the early years, Soviet rule was notoriously brutal.
Some 360,000 Lithuanians were jailed, killed or deported to the gulags of Siberia and central Asia in the 1940s and 1950s.
In later decades, lower-level repression became the norm, although in a last gasp the Soviet regime cracked down on the Lithuanian independence movement in January 1991, killing 14 civilians.
Today's Lithuania is a democratic, free-market nation with previously unimaginable opportunities for a new generation in its population of 3.4 million -- notably since European Union membership in 2004 opened road for tens of thousands to work abroad.
For Lithuania's teenagers, twenty- and thirty-somethings, the Soviet era is a non-existent or distant memory, while a swathe of older people who missed out on the benefits of change are nostalgic for the relative economic security.
"Half the population of this country misses the Soviet period and around half a million young Lithuanians never lived through it," Vanagaite said.
In the bunker, visitors are forced to sit through Soviet-style May Day speeches, littered with praise for global communism and homages to steelworkers and the people of Cuba.
They are also treated to a medical check-up, where a doctor threatens to use a vintage dental drill on them.
The most unpleasant part of the show, however, remains to come.
The entire group of around 30 visitors is made to face the fall with their hands up, then a male participant is picked out.
In a booming voice, an actor playing a KGB interrogator browbeats the hapless individual into confessing that he has stolen from the factory where he works -- an act of "anti-Soviet sabotage".
Trying not to crack under pressure, or even attempting outright resistance, is a bad idea: the bunker has its own solitary confinement cell.
The tension only falls towards the end, as the "released" visitors are allowed to visit a Soviet-style store and leave with a toilet roll that is a soft as sandpaper.
School pupils make up a large slice of the bunker's visitors, although they are given a toned-down version of the show.
Adults have to sign a disclaimer which informs them that they risk verbal abuse and will have to perform physical exercise.
During AFP's visit, an elderly man was asked to leave after refusing to kneel and coming to blows with one of the actors. Once outside, he called the police to report having been mistreated.
After the show, visitors are treated to an ultra-Soviet supper of tinned beef and a glass of vodka.
"I was curious to get taken back to this period, but for me it was really just a show, because I've drawn a line under the past," said Lina, an accountant who was in her early teens when Lithuania won its independence.
Jolanta, a teacher in her forties, added: "Young people must come here to feel even a little bit what we went through."
In the depths of the bunker, the herd instinct is strong.
"That's exactly what I want to show young people: that in the Soviet era, they too would have followed the crowd and wouldn't have behaved any different from their parents," Vanagaite explained.
=================================================
Cavaliers won't allow Lithuania's Ilgauskas to play in Olympics
THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
CLEVELAND - LeBron James will be the only Cleveland Cavaliers player going to China this summer.
The Cavaliers have declined permission for centre Zydrunas Ilgauskas to play for Lithuania in the Olympics.
Cavaliers general manager Danny Ferry says Ilgauskas is a higher-risk player because of his injury history. The seven-foot-three Ilgauskas was plagued by foot injuries early in his career and the Cavs are concerned about his lower back.
Ilgauskas needed permission to play because his contract is not fully insured.
Ilgauskas viewed the Beijing Olympics as his last chance to play for his country.
© The Canadian Press, 2008
from June 19 - 13, 2008
go to "blog" link to www.TonyMazeika.blog.com or
http://mazeikabloginternationalnews.blogspot.com/
Pass this link on to other readers!
Breaking stories.....your comments are welcome....
Place this "blog link" into your computer favorites for easy access.
=======================================================
Visit our interactive website and new featured listings....at www.tonymazeika.com
Ocean to Mountains Real Estate for all Orange County
Tony & Danute Mazeika...... 949 721-3445 949 929-9051 cell
Celebrating 21 years and more than 500 successful real estate transactions...
Don't miss incredible market opportunities....... Prices are at Year 2002 level...
May home sales up significantly ...Positive signs of market recovery is here.
Inventory is decreasing. Conforming & FHA Loan Limits Raised...Best home buys since 2002!
Demand for home inventory is up significantly. For those delaying a purchase, now is the time to consider selecting the home of your choice from the best available inventory in years- at historic rates and terms.
.You may qualify for a credit on closing costs and savings on escrow fees...Ask us how......
Don't delay..call us today! 949 721-3445
================================================================
Please support this unique blog.....Buy your ....Books, Dvds, and CDs
on our special link access to Amazon.Com
Tony & Danute
=====================================================================
Breaking news & commentary......................
Islamic school draws fire
Protest follows arrest of top official on obstruction charge
Gary Emerling (Contact)Wednesday, June 18, 2008
The arrest of a top official at a Saudi-financed school in Northern Virginia has fueled further criticism of the institution following findings released last week that say its textbooks contained violent and intolerant language.
Photo by Astrid Riecken
Christine Brim of Fairfax County, an official with the District-based Center for Security Policy, joins a protest at the Islamic Saudi Academy in Alexandria on Tuesday. "They don't have a First Amendment right in this country to incite violence against other groups," she said.
"They're free to come here and worship, but they are not free to come here and teach hate," said Andrea Lafferty, executive director of the Traditional Values Coalition and one of about 15 protesters that gathered Tuesday morning outside the Islamic Saudi Academy's main campus in Alexandria.
The academy - a 900-student private school with campuses in Alexandria and Fairfax - has been the subject of renewed scrutiny after an investigation by the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom found that textbooks used in the school contained passages that blame Jews for "discord" and say it is sometimes permissible to kill non-Muslims.
The school's director general, Abdalla Al-Shabnan, was arrested June 9 and charged with obstruction of justice - a misdemeanor count that follows accusations that he failed to report an allegation of child abuse made by a student at the school.
A 5-year-old girl at the academy's campus in Fairfax said she had been sexually assaulted by a family member, according to court documents. Mr. Al-Shabnan, 52, met with the child's parents, documents show, but did not notify authorities of the complaint within a 72-hour period required by Virginia law.
"At no time did [Mr. Al-Shabnan] report the allegations to any child protective agency or law enforcement agency," an affidavit for a search warrant filed in Fairfax County Circuit Court says. "He further stated that he was not aware that he was required to make such a report."
Court documents also say Mr. Al-Shabnan "stated he did not believe [the girl's] complaint and felt she may be attempting to gain attention." He ordered a written report of the incident deleted from a secretary's computer at the Fairfax campus, documents say.
As part of the investigation, Fairfax County Police searched school offices last month and seized computers, notebooks, student files and disks.
Mr. Al-Shabnan, who is scheduled to appear in court Aug. 1, could not be reached for comment. An academy administrator also declined to comment on the arrest.
Protesters on Tuesday said the director's arrest was another sign of trouble at the academy. The textbook review conducted by the federal panel focused on 17 books used during the last school year and obtained from independent sources.
Astrid Riecken/The Washington Times An armed guard guides visitors to the school Tuesday while monitoring the Islamic Saudi Academy grounds.
The passages found in the review include a 12th-grade Koranic interpretation textbook that states it is permissible for a Muslim to kill those who have left the faith and one that says "the Jews conspired against Islam and its people."
"They don't have a First Amendment right in this country to incite violence against other groups," said Christine Brim, an official with the District-based Center for Security Policy.
At one point, staff and children affiliated with the academy brought bottles of water to the protesters, who gathered near a sidewalk in front of the school holding signs with slogans like "Murder is not a religious freedom" and "Stop Teaching Kids Jihad." But the groups soon began arguing.
"That's absolutely not true," said Rahima Abdullah, the school's education department director. "What we teach here is love and tolerance."
The school has since released a statement calling the panel's report "erroneous" and saying it "contains mistranslated and misinterpreted texts."
"We have new books now, and the ones the commission is talking about have been out of use for some time, and were misinterpreted then," Ms. Abdullah said.
=================================================================
The Marines Vs. Haditha Smear Merchants
By Michelle MalkinWednesday, June 18, 2008
Yet another U.S. Marine, Lt. Col. Jeffrey Chessani, had charges dropped Tuesday in the so-called Haditha massacre -- bringing the total number of Marines who've been cleared or won case dismissals in the Iraq war incident to seven. "Undue command influence" on the prosecution led to the outcome in Chessani's case. Bottom line: That's zero for seven for military prosecutors, with one trial left to go.
I repeat: Haditha prosecution goes 0-7. But you won't see that headline in the same Armageddon-sized font The New York Times used repeatedly when the story first broke.
The Times, Rep. John Murtha, D-Pa, and the rest of the anti-war drum-pounders who fueled the smear campaign against the troops two years ago should hang their hands in shame. They won't, of course. Perpetuating the "cold-blooded Marines" narrative means never having to say you're sorry.
It means never having to look Lt. Col. Chessani (charges dismissed), Lt. Andrew Grayson (acquitted), Lance Cpl. Stephen Tatum (charges dismissed), Capt. Lucas McConnell (charges dismissed), Lance Cpl. Justin Sharratt (charges dismissed), Sgt. Sanick Dela Cruz (charges dismissed), Sgt. Frank Wuterich (awaiting trial) and their families in the eyes and apologize for the preemptive character assassination they all faced at the hands of the hyperventilating, noose-hanging press.
Murtha and company applied Queen of Hearts ("Off with their heads!") treatment to our own men and women in uniform while giving more benefit of the doubt to foreign terror suspects at Gitmo. It is worth recalling, because the press won't do it for you, what they concluded about the now-crumbling Haditha case in the summer of 2006 before a single formal charge had been filed.
-- MSNBC hangman Keith Olbermann, who couldn't wait to define the entire war in Iraq by a single moment about which he knew nothing, inveighed that the incident was "willful targeted brutality." Due process? For convicted cop-killer Mumia Abu-Jamal, of course. For our military? Never mind.
-- Far-left The Nation magazine railed, "Enough details have emerged … to conclude that … members of the 3rd Battalion, 1st Marine Regiment perpetrated a massacre." The publication also judged the event "a willful, targeted brutality designed to send a message to Iraqis." Not content with hanging the troops, the Nation pinned blame on the president and a so-called "culture of impunity" that supposedly permeates the most accountable military in the world.
-- Singing the same tune as The Nation, The New York Times spilled a flood of front-page ink on the case and took things a step further in a lead editorial blaming not just President Bush, but also top Pentagon brass for the "nightmare" killings in Haditha. Times reporter Paul von Zielbauer filed over 30 stories on the case, which the paper wishfully called the "defining atrocity" of the Iraq war.
-- Hoping to facilitate a self-fulfilling prophecy, media tools around the world likened Haditha to the Vietnam War's most infamous atrocity -- from The Guardian ("My Lai on the Euphrates?") to the Daily Telegraph ("Massacre in Iraq just like My Lai") to the Los Angeles Times ("What happened at the Iraqi My Lai?") to The New York Times' Maureen Dowd ("My Lai acid flashback") and the Associated Press, which reached into its photo archives to run a 1970 file photo of My Lai to illustrate a Haditha article.
-- And, of course, there's the permanent stain left by the slanderous propaganda of Rep. Murtha -- the stab in the Marines' backs heard 'round the world: "Our troops overreacted because of the pressure on them, and they killed innocent civilians in cold blood."
Relatives of the Haditha Marines have called for Congress to censure Murtha, who cuts and runs to the nearest elevator when questioned about the Haditha dismissals. He and the Haditha smear merchants have skated while the men and their families suffered global whippings on the airwaves and eternal demonization in print. Whose "culture of impunity"?
Michelle Malkin makes news and waves with a unique combination of investigative journalism and incisive commentary. She is the author of Unhinged: Exposing Liberals Gone Wild .
===================================================
Geopolitical Diary: Ireland's Vote and the Fate of the EU
Ireland on Thursday became thus far the only country of the European Union’s 27-member bloc to hold a referendum over the Treaty of Lisbon. The outcome of Ireland’s vote will not be made public until the close of the day on June 13, leaving many EU bureaucrats anxiously waiting to know the fate of their union. The treaty has a slight majority of support inside of Ireland, though the low voter turnout has left it a coin toss of an outcome.
When the European Union was established in 1993 from the European Community, it was made up of only 15 western European countries that were all at around the same level of development. The purpose of the European Union was to be a unified governing and economic body — a hybrid of intergovernmentalism and supranationalism, transcending the different nations’ differences.
Speed forward to today: Now the European Union’s 27 members range from densely populated and wealthy states such as France and Germany to the poor new members such as Romania and Bulgaria. The union now is a mixture of members that have agricultural, industrial or service-based economies and new members that spent half of the last century under the Iron Curtain.
In short, the EU member states have different views of politics, security and economic models; not to mention, many EU members do not exactly fully trust the others — especially those they have been to war with on the continent in the past century.
But, at least symbolically, the EU nations are attempting to come together in creating a framework of how exactly this union should govern. Thus far, no treaty or constitution has been finalized because there has had to be a unanimous decision by every member state. The newest attempt, called the Treaty of Lisbon, is the EU replacement for the union’s constitution, which was rejected by France and the Netherlands in 2005. The new treaty combines bits and pieces from not only its predecessor but also the treaties of Rome in 1957 and Maastricht in 1992. Because so much of the Treaty of Lisbon comes from existing treaties negotiated before the 2004 round of accessions of the Eastern European states, it has had to be seriously watered down in order for there to be any semblance of an agreement.
To sum it up, the Treaty of Lisbon is the European Union’s weak effort to prove it is indeed a union and not just a fractured and ineffective club of independent states. If Ireland votes against the treaty, it is a public demonstration of the latter. But even if the treaty is approved by the Irish, it won’t save the European Union from its troubles.
Ironically, on Thursday — the same day of Ireland’s referendum — the European Union demonstrated the fact that it is not a governing body, but merely a coordinating one, in its discussions on how to react to high energy prices that are leading to strikes and protests in many European countries.
The union has attempted to formulate a response to Europe’s energy dilemmas in the past, but it has always been hit by a roadblock from one of its member states, meaning that decision-making has reverted back to a state-by-state basis. The concept of the European Union seems as if it should allow for some states to share in other states’ pain over any major challenges –- such as high energy prices — but the EU Council announced Thursday that it will hold discussions June 19-20 on loosening the restrictions on each state’s ability to make its own choice on a specifically short-term response.
Each state is most likely going to follow its own path anyway, but the European Union is trying to show it still has some hold on its members, even if it doesn’t. When facing a crisis, especially over fuel, that hits all other areas such as manufacturing, food and transportation, a state will always look out for its own first and not another nation that is on the other side of the continent — unless the ties binding that nation to another are so strong as to be necessary for the survival of both. Right now, none of the EU members know exactly what they can expect to get from the links they have to other members, and thus will likely pursue their own goals.
In the end, the European Union is undermining its own credibility and viability, just as a vote is taking place to show it is still a functioning governing body.
www.stratfor.com
Geopolitical Diary: Implications of Overt U.S. Operations in Pakistan
Speaking at a joint press conference with British Prime Minister Gordon Brown on Monday, U.S. President George W. Bush expressed support for Afghan President Hamid Karzai’s June 15 remarks that Kabul would send forces into Pakistan to prevent the Taliban from using the South Asian country as a launchpad for attacks in Afghanistan. Karzai, who spoke after a major jailbreak in Kandahar in which hundreds of Taliban fighters escaped, specifically mentioned the Waziristan-based Pakistani Taliban chief Baitullah Mehsud and Maulana Fazlullah, the jihadist leader in the district of Swat in the North-West Frontier Province (NWFP). Pakistani authorities have been negotiating peace agreements with these two jihadist leaders.
It is no coincidence that Bush’s and Karzai’s statements come just days after a U.S. airstrike against a paramilitary outpost in Pakistan that killed 11 Pakistani soldiers. Afghan forces alone clearly lack the ability to conduct cross-border operations in Pakistan, regardless of Karzai’s wishes; Afghanistan can barely secure its own capital. U.S. forces — most likely operating outside the aegis of NATO’s International Security Assistance Force — probably would carry out any such move.
Afghanistan and Pakistan are undergoing a shift Stratfor mentioned in May in which the United States is no longer relying on Pakistan to rein in Islamist militants on its side of the border, but is imposing a situation in which it will become the norm for U.S.-led coalition forces to conduct operations openly inside Pakistan. While U.S. special operations forces and CIA teams have been operating covertly in Pakistan essentially since the beginning of the U.S.-jihadist war, this operational tempo appears to have increased to the point that it is poised to become overt. From the U.S. point of view, Pakistan’s new civil-military leadership is failing to respond to the jihadist threat aggressively, and there is growing U.S. mistrust of the South Asian country’s military and intelligence apparatus.
This perception could help explain the U.S. position that the airstrike on (what Pakistan maintains is) a well-established Pakistani outpost was justified. While U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates called for a joint inquiry into the incident, U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Adm. Mike Mullen maintained that U.S. forces took action against hostile forces and that the operation was carried out in keeping with operational protocol. It is no secret that Pakistan’s Frontier Corps, whose outpost was hit, is viewed as sympathetic to the Taliban and its allies. This apparently led the United States to take matters into its own hands.
Though it is very difficult to describe the nature of U.S. operations on Pakistani soil, Karzai’s comments offer some insight. By threatening not just Mehsud but also Fazlullah, Karzai was hinting that such operations might not be limited to the Federally Administered Tribal Areas but could extend to the NWFP. This leaves the Pakistanis in a very difficult position.
Islamabad could pre-empt the U.S. move by giving Washington exactly what it wants and engaging in a massive action against the militants and their sympathizers within the Pakistani security establishment. Given Pakistan’s performance thus far, this is probably not likely, however. But the inability to make such a move is contributing to the growing international perception of Pakistan as a dysfunctional state, and only pushes the United States further toward taking unilateral action.
Routine U.S. raids on Pakistani soil could lead to clashes not only with militants but also with local tribesmen and others who might not support the Taliban. This very well could create a major uprising in Pakistan, with a strong nationalist reaction from a population that already harbors highly anti-American sentiments. Worse, such raids could create fissures and possibly even fractures with the Pakistani army. This would be especially true if Pakistani troops end up clashing with U.S. forces — something certainly not impossible, considering the deteriorating situation in Pakistan.
Rifts within its army would greatly destabilize the Pakistani state. The military is the only robust institution in Pakistan, and is the cornerstone of whatever stability remains in the South Asian country. But the recent turn of events means Islamabad must choose between confrontation with the United States and confrontation with the jihadists.
==============================================================
Lithuanian ban on Soviet symbols
Lithuania's parliament has passed the toughest restrictions anywhere in the former Soviet Union on the public display of Soviet and Nazi symbols.
It will now be an offence in the Baltic state to display the images of Soviet and Nazi leaders.
This includes flags, emblems and badges carrying insignia, such as the hammer and sickle or swastika.
Correspondents say equating Soviet and Nazi symbols in this way is certain to infuriate Russia.
The new law also prohibits the Nazi and Soviet national anthems but does not specify if this extends to the modern-day Russian national anthem, which uses the Soviet music with different lyrics.
BBC Russian affairs analyst Steven Eke says these are the toughest bans on symbols from the Soviet past adopted in any of the 15 countries that emerged from the USSR.
'Blasphemous'
The measures go further than neighbouring Estonia's ban on Soviet symbols, he says.
Estonia's decision to put the swastika and hammer and sickle on an equally prohibited footing was described by Russia as "blasphemous", and an attempt to rewrite history.
Moscow's official interpretation of history is that Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia were liberated from Nazi Germany by, then voluntarily joined, the Soviet Union.
This account is rejected by those three Baltic States and most other European nations, says our correspondent.
They believe the Soviet Union illegally occupied the Baltic republics as a result of a secret agreement - the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact - between the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany.
The occupation continued until the collapse of the Soviet state itself at the end of 1991.
Story from BBC NEWS:http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/europe/7459976.stm
================================================================
President Valdas Adamkus at a news conference in Trakai, Lithuania, June 16, 2008.
Lithuania Will Take the Missiles
The United States is in negotiations with Lithuania on the placement of elements of its missile defense system in that country, according to Polish Deputy Foreign Minister Witold Waszczykowski. Washington views Lithuania as a possible alternative in the event negotiations with Poland are unsuccessful, Waszczykowski said. Vilnius initiated the negotiations last month. Spokesmen for the American embassy in Warsaw have denied that information, and Lithuanian Foreign Minister Petras Vaitiekunas declined to comment on the claims.
At the end of last month, the Lithuanian National Defense Ministry denied reports that National Defense Minister Juozas Olekas has urged the U.S. to place part of its missile defense system on Lithuanian territory. Lithuania, which is a member of NATO, issued a statement at that time saying that the system in the Czech Republic and Poland will strengthen the security of Lithuania, Europe and Russia. The U.S. plans to place ten interceptor missiles in Poland to defend Europe and the U.S. against attack by such states as Iran and North Korea. Washington signed an agreement with the Czech Republic on May 21 on the placement of radar facilities for the system in that country. Negotiations with Poland have taken a turn for the worse since Donald Tusk became the country’s prime minister. Tusk is determined to maintain good relations with Russia as well as the U.S. Poland is also asking for $20 billion to modernize its army in compensation for the risks associated with the missiles. The U.S. has offered the symbolic sum of $200 million.
No, Lithuania Won’t Take the Missiles
The Lithuanian Foreign Ministry has denied reports that Vilnius is in negotiations with Washington over the placement of elements of the U.S. missile defense system on Lithuanian territory. “Lithuania is not conducting negotiations on the placement of the missile defense system on its territory,” Violetta Gaizauskaite, head of the information and public relations department of the Lithuanian Foreign Ministry told local LTV television. She added that Lithuania “assesses the possibility of the placement of the missile defense system in Poland positively.”
On Tuesday, Polish Deputy Foreign Minister and chief missile negotiator Witold Waszczykowski stated that the U.S. had entered into negotiations with Lithuania on Lithuanian initiative on the placement of elements of the defense system in that country should negotiations with Poland fail. Official U.S. State Department representative Tom Casey told journalists that negotiations with Poland should soon be concluded and no alternatives are needed for the placement of U.S. interceptor missiles. The U.S. plans to place ten interceptor missiles in Poland and the radar equipment for the system in the Czech Republic as defense against the threat posed by Iran. Russia is concerned that the system could be a threat to its security, however. Warsaw is expecting U.S. aid for modernizing its army in return. Warsaw has expressed particular interest in obtaining Patriot PAC-3, THAAD or AMRAAM short- or medium-range missile complexes.
www.kommersant.com
=====================================================================
Lithuania open to U.S. shield talks if Poland refuses
Wed Jun 18, 2008 11:14am EDT
VILNIUS (Reuters) - Lithuania has held no talks on hosting a U.S. missile shield, but would consider the idea if Washington's negotiations with Poland failed and the Americans suggested it, officials said on Wednesday.
Polish chief negotiator Witold Waszczykowski told Reuters on Tuesday the United States was already in talks with Lithuania. Diplomats say Washington has become exasperated by Warsaw's tough negotiating stance.
"Only if no bilateral agreement was reached between Poland and the U.S. and an official proposal was sent to Lithuania would our country look at it with due attention and responsibility," Lithuania's Defense Ministry said.
It added in a statement that it supported the idea of a missile shield in Europe and was following the negotiations closely. It said it had been informed by U.S. representatives at a meeting in Vilnius in May about the course of the talks.
But it added: "Lithuania does not hold any talks with the U.S. on installation of elements of anti-missile defense systems."
The United States said on Tuesday that only "general conversations" with the Lithuanians had taken place.
President George W. Bush's administration wants to install interceptor rockets in Poland and a tracking radar in the Czech Republic to shield the United States and allies from attack by what it calls "rogue states", particularly Iran.
Russia is strongly opposed to the idea, seeing it as a threat to its own security.
Poland has set tough conditions for agreeing to base 10 U.S. interceptor rockets on its soil. It wants Washington to spend billions of dollars to upgrade Polish air defenses after Russia said it would point missiles at Poland in case of deployment.
The United States has said it would seek another site for its European missile defense project if talks with Poland fail. Poland, the Czech Republic and Lithuania are members of NATO.
(Reporting by Patrick Lannin; Editing by Charles Dick)
Reuters
================================================
Czech official "not surprised" by Baltic shield talks claims (Extra)
By DPAJun 18, 2008, 14:12 GMT
Prague - Czech Deputy Prime Minister Alexandr Vondra said Wednesday that he was not surprised by claims that the United States is in talks with Lithuania on installing a part of a planned US missile shield in the Baltic state.
'We don't want to comment (on) what belongs to Lithuania or Poland, but I was not very surprised by that statement,' Vondra said.
Vondra reacted to a statement by Polish top missile shield negotiator Witold Waszczykowski, who said Tuesday that the United States were negotiating with Lithuania about a possibility to place 10 interceptor missiles, intended as the Polish arm of the system, in the Baltic state.
Both Washington and Vilnius have since denied holding such talks.
The Pentagon said that the US hopes to strike a deal with Poland but would look elsewhere, including at Lithuania, if the talks in Warsaw fail, while Lithuanian officials confirmed they are open to negotiations on hosting the base.
Washington is close to completing talks with the Czech Republic on placing a tracking radar in a military zone south-west of Prague. The talks in Poland have lagged behind after Warsaw's demands for military aid.
The plan to put the missile shield bases, allegedly designed against the so-called rogues states such as Iran, in the former Soviet satellites has irked Russia, which has threatened to aim its missiles at central Europe if the shield is installed there.
=====================================================
Medvedev Employs Communists
Russia’s President Dmitry Medvedev proceeded with meetings with heads of State Duma’s factions. The yesterday’s guest in the Kremlin was Gennady Zyuganov, leader of the Communist Party of the RF (CPRF).
Gennady Zyuganov was the third party leader that met with the new president. State Duma Vice Speaker from Fair Russia Party Alexander Babakov and Civil Force leader Mikhail Barshchevsky had had their rendezvous with the president already. Civil Force has no faction of its own in the lower house of Russia’s parliament but it had been amid the parties that nominated Medvedev the presidential candidate.The sources say Medvedev will meet with LDPR leader Dmitry Zhirinovsky and Yabloko leader Grigory Yavlinsky in the nearest future. As to the meetings with spokesmen of United Russia’s faction, the leader of the latter and today’s PM of the country Vladimir Putin promised to see about it.In the Kremlin yesterday, Medvedev proposed to communists to take part in the matter of national significance. “We have nowhere to step back, it’s time to pass all those documents,” the president said referring to the national program for corruption fighting. “In essence, it’s clear what should be there… But there are nuances, both legal and economic, which could be debated.” The CPRF faction is the second in the State Duma “in terms of significance and authority” and it has its own ideas, so it should be also involved in the process, according to the president.So, the communists were urged to come up with their own counter-corrupt amendments and to join the elaboration of judicial reform. Zyuganov accepted the offer, specifying that the faction has not only the experts and ideas but also the ready bills.
www.kommersant.com
===========================================================
MAN IN CHARGE Prime Minister Putin in May.
AFP
Putin's Giant Chess Game: 'Petrostate'
Books Review of: Petrostate: Putin, Power, and the New Russia
By MARTHA MERCERJune 18, 2008
Over the weekend, at a meeting in Osaka, finance ministers from the Group of Eight industrialized nations warned that high commodities prices are a threat to the world economy. With the price of oil passing $130 a barrel, the American Treasury secretary, Henry Paulson, singled out oil-rich countries for not investing enough in production.
As news outlets pointed out, most of the G-8 countries have little control over production. One, however, does, and it has leveraged that control, and its enormous reserves, to regain status as a world power.
Russia's re-emergence as a "Petrostate" is the subject of Marshall Goldman's new book of the same name (Oxford University Press, 244 pages, $27.95). An emeritus professor of economics at Wellesley College and senior scholar at the Davis Center for Russian and Eurasian Studies at Harvard University, Mr. Goldman has spent decades delving into Russian and Soviet economics, and his latest in a dozen books offers critical insight into the country's energy sector.
After the tsarist reconquest of what is now Azerbaijan and the Caucuses in the mid-19th century, Russia began a cycle that has repeated itself in various forms to the present day. Foreign concerns, beginning with the Swedish Nobel family and Rockefeller's Standard Oil, were allowed in to exploit the petroleum reserves and lend their advanced technology, but after the Bolsheviks took over, the foreigners were forced out.
In "Petrostate," Mr. Goldman takes a detailed look at oil production in the Soviet era, and especially the political leverage that ownership of some of the world's largest petroleum and gas reserves offered: the use of oil to gain influence in countries such as Cuba and Pakistan, and the opportunity presented by the 1973 oil embargo, when Western Europe sought to reduce its dependence on uncertain imports from the Middle East. The West throughout the Cold War had held back its advanced drilling technology from the Soviet Union, which oversaw colossal waste through its emphasis on quantity over quality, but by the early 1980s, a natural gas pipeline linking the U.S.S.R. with Western Europe was in the offing, over the objections of President Reagan. It was completed in 1985.
The breakup of the Soviet Union and the division of its spoils provides Mr. Goldman with his meatiest material. While the Ministry of the Gas Industry was preserved whole as a hybrid state corporate entity — in 1989, it became Gazprom, with the gas minister, Viktor Chernomyrdin, installed as its CEO — the Ministry of Petroleum privatized its oil fields.
The chaos that ensued, Mr. Goldman writes, was foreseeable. As many Russians traded away the vouchers they received from President Yeltsin's government for a bottle of vodka instead of using them to purchase stock in the country's new companies, a small group of men was preparing the ground for takeovers on a huge scale.
Through the tainted Loans for Shares program, for example, Mikhail Khodorkovsky and his Bank Menatep were able, by way of a rigged auction, to gain control of the huge oil fields of Yukos for a mere $309 million, Mr. Goldman writes. The company, one of many controlled by the country's new "oligarch" class, soon had a market share of $15 billion.
With production and the price of oil dropping as the 1990s progressed, Russia again turned to foreign partners, allowing British Petroleum to buy part of the Russian oil concern TNK, and permitting the signing of production sharing agreements with Royal Dutch Shell and Total, among others, to drill in the inhospitable fields off the island of Sakhalin.
But after Russia hit rock bottom with the August 1998 default and crash, commodities prices began to rise again, as did demand for oil and gas in India and China. A year later, and five months after the economy began its turnaround, Mr. Goldman writes, an unknown from St. Petersburg named Vladimir Putin was appointed prime minister.
As president, and now again as prime minister, Mr. Putin has presided over economic growth approaching 8% a year. He laid out his economic strategy in a dissertation in 1997: Instead of allowing Russia's oligarch-controlled corporations to focus exclusively on making a profit, they should be used to advance the country's national interests. Russia should welcome direct foreign investment, but Russia alone should retain operating control.
Sibneft and Yukos, which was flirting with the idea of selling itself to ExxonMobil and Chevron, were reined in, and the oligarchs who controlled them were jailed or fled abroad. Production sharing agreements in Sakhalin, which Mr. Putin had referred to as "a colonial agreement," were adjusted in Russia's favor. Companies known as "national champions," such as Gazprom and Rosneft, now check in advance with Mr. Putin before selling assets to a foreign company.
In a welcome contrast to aggrieved Western press reports about Mr. Putin's economic strategy and the subsequent fall of oligarchs such as Mr. Khodorkovsky, Mr. Goldman takes an agnostic view on these developments. "In all fairness," he writes, "the way the Russian government reacts when foreign investors attempt to buy their energy resources is not that atypical of how other countries react in a similar situation. If anything, most members of OPEC, for example, are even more protective."
He does have a stern warning for Western Europe, however. The region has become dangerously dependent on Russia for natural gas, he writes. With its spreading network of pipelines, Gazprom now has the power to let Europe freeze if it so chooses.
Although the deputy chairman of the state-controlled gas giant, Alexander Medvedev, proclaims that "what is good for Gazprom is good for the world," Mr. Goldman points out that over the years, the Soviet Union and now Russia have not hesitated to reduce or halt the flow of gas. Squabbles with Ukraine, Belarus, and Georgia over the last few years have made hollow Gazprom's pledges that it is a reliable energy partner. While the Europeans and Americans have sought to break Gazprom's pipeline monopoly by promoting the construction of a bypass gas pipeline under the Caspian through Azerbaijan and Georgia to Turkey, they are getting a late start to what Mr. Goldman calls Mr. Putin's "giant chess game." Russia's power today, he writes, now exceeds the military might it had during the Cold War. With no mutually assured destruction, there is no mutually assured restraint, giving Russia more economic clout than Europe or even the kingdom with the world's largest proven oil reserves, Saudi Arabia.
The chess game continues.
mmercer@nysun.com
=====================================================
Divided village reflects a deeper divide in Europe
By YURAS KARMANAU
The Associated Press
PYATSKUNY, Belarus — When Stanislava Subach wants to lay flowers on her husband's grave, she puts them in a plastic shopping bag and adds some stones for weight.
The package is then tossed over a metal fence and into what is now another country, to be picked up by former neighbors and placed on the grave.
The border between Belarus and Lithuania, two countries that were part of the Soviet Union, was once little more than a line on a map.
Now a fence runs along the border, representing a new version of the Iron Curtain that separated Eastern and Western Europe until communism collapsed. The autocratic regime of Belarus portrays this heavily policed border as the last line of defense against an encroaching West, represented by Lithuania, now a member of the European Union and NATO.
Here the fence cuts right through the village, separating Pyatskuny on the Belarus side from its Lithuanian half, Norviliskes. Villagers are cut off from the neighbors, the parish church and the cemetery, just a few steps but a whole world away.
People living across the fence can travel visa-free throughout Europe and work there. Those who stay in Norviliskes are paid by the EU to farm their land, and have money to fix up their homes and buy new clothes.
Those on the Belarusian side have little choice but to work on the local collective farm, and they depend on their gardens for food.
Belarus' President Alexander Lukashenko, who permits no real economic or political reform, uses the fortified border much as the Soviet bloc once did: as a way to keep people in as much as keep them out.
The Lithuanian border police operate as any in Europe: guarding the frontier with patrol cars and video cameras, chiefly to catch smugglers and illegal immigrants. But on the Belarus side, armed guards patrol with dogs and are authorized to shoot.
Villagers cannot even walk to the fence to talk to neighbors or pass parcels. Just leaving a footprint in the 10-foot-wide raked dirt track along the fence can mean a fine or 10 days in jail.
"Our hearts were left on the other side of the fence," said Subach, 67, as she sat on the border watching a service through the open door of the Catholic church and joining in the prayers. She has not visited her husband's grave for more than two years, nor can she attend Mass in her church.
To travel there, she would have to journey 90 miles to the nearest Lithuanian consulate, wait in line for several days, pay about $90 for a visa (almost her entire monthly pension), travel 60 miles north to a border checkpoint and another 60 miles south before finally arriving in Norviliskes.
Fear rules on Belarus side
This is the only border village that is cut in two. As under Soviet rule, border guards and secret-service agents keep tabs on everyone in the border region, and those traveling here from elsewhere in Belarus need permission.
Three men in leather jackets who introduced themselves as border guards accompanied two journalists throughout a recent visit. Some villagers said they were afraid to speak in the men's presence.
Elderly villagers joke that they have lived in three countries without ever leaving home. Once part of Poland, the village was taken over by the Soviet Union in 1939, which gave one half to Belarus and the other to Lithuania.
After the Soviet collapse in 1991, the border with Lithuania became an international one, but travel rules remained relatively lax and Belarusian villagers were able to cross over to the Lithuanian side on religious holidays.
Then, in 2004, Lithuania joined the EU and NATO, and required visiting Belarusians to have visas, since it had become part of the EU's border-free zone.
Many Belarusians would like to travel west, but the European Union says it will ease travel restrictions only after Lukashenko frees political prisoners and holds free elections.
Yanina Yanovich, 61, says she shouts across the border to communicate with her nephew, Stanislav, who lives in the first house on the Lithuanian side.
"This is one thing the government can't stop us from doing," said Yanovich, wearing old rubber boots and a darned sweater with the lettering U.S.A.
In Norviliskes, many of the 35 inhabitants have cellphones. Pyatskuny's 50 people have only the phone in the grocery.
The store's clerk, Tereza Turkevich, says she often sells food to villagers on credit. "Some survive on bread and water so they can save enough money to travel to Lithuania," she said.
Norviliskes has a recently restored a 16th-century castle that draws tourists year-round, and a summer music festival that attracts thousands.
Marja Dudowicz, 68, who lives next to the castle, sells milk to tourists to supplement her monthly pension of about $275. She also receives more than double that sum from the EU for sowing wheat, rapeseed and oats on her 37 acres of land, some of which she rents out.
"We have problems, but I can't complain after looking across the fence at our Belarusian neighbors," said Dudowicz. She has renovated her house and has groceries delivered to her door. She plies her guests with Brazilian coffee, Belgian amaretto, ham, homemade sausage and fresh brown bread.
For 50-year-old Leokadija Gordiewicz, living in the EU means being able to talk politics without fear. She named her dog Landsbergis, after Lithuanian independence leader Vytautas Landsbergis. Her cat's name is Lukashenko.
"I could be jailed for this in Belarus," she said.
Youth move out
Despite Norviliskes' relative prosperity, most of the young Lithuanian villagers have left, either for Vilnius, the capital, about 50 miles away, or farther afield.
Yan Mikul, 24, grew up in the village but for the past two years has been working in Dublin, Ireland as a plumber, where, he says, he earns up to $4,500 a month.
"Only a fool would not take advantage of the opportunities of a Europe without borders," said Mikul, who was wearing a new green sweater and red jacket. He had driven back to Norviliskes in his used BMW to tend his grandparents' graves, and was also helping to collect the flowers thrown across the fence and placing them on the graves.
Giedrius Klimkevicius, the Lithuanian businessman who restored the village's castle with EU help, would have liked to place the stage for the music festival right on the border as a gesture of unity, but says the Belarusian authorities forbade it.
"The iron fence on the border has become a symbol of the division of two civilizations, to our deep regret," he said.
Copyright © 2008 The Seattle Times Company
===================================================================
Belarus: Study Brands Minsk Worst City In Europe
Minsk ranked last in living standards
(Bymedia.net)
Belarus seems to have a knack for breaking dubious records.U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice once famously called Belarus "the last dictatorship in Europe," an epithet that has stuck to the authoritarian regime of President Alyaksandr Lukashenka.Now, the country's capital has been branded the European city with the worst living standards.A study released last week by Mercer, a global human-resources consultancy, says expatriates in Minsk are worse-off than anywhere else in Europe. The city ranked last in Mercer's annual living-standards tally, trailing 182 other European cities. Slagin Parakatil, a senior researcher at Mercer, says Minsk fared poorly in most of the 39 criteria examined for the report."One of the criteria in which it didn't get very good scores is consumer goods -- the availability of fruit, meat, and fish; there's also the infrastructure -- we're looking at reasonable, expatriate-standard housing facilities," Parakatil says. "If an expatriate needs to have emergency surgery, the score is relatively low for services provided by both private and public hospitals."The city also got bad marks for its recreational facilities, economic and political environment, airport facilities, and transport connections.Unlike most other Eastern European cities, which have moved up the list since Mercer's previous study, Minsk remains last with consistently low scores.'Nowhere To Go'Do Minsk residents share this unflattering view of their city?Some, such as Valmen Aladau, an architect and professor at the Belarusian National Technical University, have denounced the Mercer study as slander."Minsk is one of the most interesting cities in Europe, everyone who's been here has said so publicly," Aladau says. "This is pure political vileness that is probably targeted against our government and ends up hurting the whole population. We don't have enough hotels. But in terms of being interesting, there should be more such cities in Europe."But a poll carried out by RFE/RL's Belarus Service in the streets of Minsk shows that many residents do agree with Mercer, particularly with regard to their city's recreational facilities."In all European cities, if you're not in a hurry to go home in the evening, there are clubs and cafes where you can spend some time," says one woman. "Here, the only places open at night are the casinos and train station.""Nothing open at night" (Bymedia.net)"There aren't enough places to drink coffee from a nice cup, not a plastic one," says another woman."For children, for instance, there's the Ice Palace, but it would be nice to have something other than just the Ice Palace," a third woman says. "There's almost nowhere to take kids during the summer holidays."Syarhey Khareuski, a Belarusian cultural analyst, agrees that city authorities have done little to preserve and embellish Minsk's historical city center."Take a walk in the center of Minsk, what is there to see? Two churches, and that's all. Museums that were once planned were never built. Instead of museums and exhibition halls, you have ordinary pubs. The efforts of the current authorities have concentrated on selling every square meter of space in the city center, lining their pockets, and allowing as many vehicles as possible to pass through the city center."RFE/RL's Belarus Service contributed to this report
=================================================================
Window on Eurasia: Russian Politicians Seen Hijacking Construction of Monument to Victims of Communism
Paul Goble
Vienna, June 17 – Just as Vasily Grossman foresaw in his classic work, "Forever Flowing," Russian politicians who openly admire Stalin are now the very people calling for a minute of silence or a monument to his millions of victims, an act of hypocrisy that does no honor to the former and insults the memory of the latter.
Last week, "Novaya gazeta" featured an article suggesting that the Russian government may at long last be prepared to build a monument to the victims of communism in that country, thus ending what the article's author, Vladimir Ryzhkov, suggested is an anomalous and even dangerous situation (www.novayagazeta.ru/data/2008/41/28.html).
Russia today, he noted, "remains almost the only country in the former socialist camp" where there is not a national memorial to the victims of communism. That shortcoming " puts Russia in a hypocritical position: making it appear that we are shamefully justifying the crimes of Stalinism and even in part acting as successors of [his] criminal regime."
But now, Ryzhkov continued, this situation is changing. Former Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev has raised the issue twice. Various fractions of the Duma have called for a memorial. And now Boris Gryzlov, the speaker of the Duma and the number two official in the ruling United Russia Party, is backing the idea.
Such "growing support for the initiative of establishing a memorial center," Ryzhkov concluded, "offers hope that in the near future it will be possible to achieve all the necessary political and organization decisions and include the forces of both society and state in the creation of a monument, memorial and museum worthy of the victims and of the new Russia."
In an essay posted online today, however, Moscow historian Irina Pavlova argues that Ryzhkov's upbeat stance is misplaced for at least three reasons. First, she notes, the politicians pushing the idea of a memorial to the victims of Stalin are admirers of the dictator, a combination that insults the dead and the living (grani.ru/Politics/Russia/m.137810.html).
Second, she points out, these same politicians are interested in using such a monument to legitimate the regime of which they are a part rather than deal honestly with the crimes of their predecessors, again a travesty against the memory of the millions upon millions of people who suffered under Soviet rule.
Indeed, she writes, "the establishment of a memorial to the victims of Stalinist repression today would serve only one thing – the legitimation of the current powers that be that in essence have reproduced the Stalinist mechanism of administration under the cover of 'sovereign democracy.'"
And third, Pavlova suggests, the Russian government is trying to hijack the construction of such a memorial, to reduce to a minimum the role of society and thus to gut the meaning of such a monument for the population as a whole even while the regime seeks to use it to present itself as having "overcome" the past.
It is this last point that clearly concerns her most. Involved with the collection of memoirs of the victims of Stalin's rule for more than 20 years, Pavlova a decade ago published an article arguing that the time was not yet ripe for such a monument because it would be "an indulgence" for the regime and elicit only feelings of "anger, regret, and protest" among the population.
Today, the Moscow historian says, "the atmosphere in the country is worse than it was ten years ago," with the current regime "having cultivated the image of Stalin as an outstanding statesman," a view that public opinion polls show has had a serious impact on the views of the Russian people.
Ryzhkov is of course correct, Pavlova says, when he suggests that Russia is "just about the only country in the former socialist camp" without such a memorial. But he is profoundly wrong when he suggests that such a situation risks creating the impression that Russia is today "a successor of [Stalin's] criminal regime."
That is not an impression, she says; it is a reality. To give but one example: the FSB has not declassified many of the documents about that period in violation of Boris Yeltsin's order of August 24, 1991, and historians working for the organs continue to churn out books and articles celebrating Stalin and his contributions to the country and the world.
Moreover, she asks, "why should we be talking about a memorial to the victims only of Stalin and not of all political repressions? Even in the time of perestroika, the question was framed more broadly. And why should this memorial complex be hidden in the Butyrka prison [as some have proposed] and not stand before FSB headquarters?"
As many have forgotten, Nikita Khrushchev first raised the idea of a monument to Stalin's victims in the party and government at the 20th Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union in 1956, and at the 22nd CPSU Congress in 1961, he called for the construction of a memorial to them in Moscow itself.
Twenty-seven years later, at the 19th All-Union Party Conference, the issue was raised again and broadened to include all victims of Stalin. And at that time, efforts to rehabilitate the dictator's victims were resumed after a hiatus of more than a generation. A Memorial was created – but it was and remains an informal organization rather than something else.
Had a monument to Stalin's victims been erected in 1988-89, a time when there was unusual popular attention to the past, that act alone would "not only have united society but had a powerful influence on the future course of the development of the country. But that did not happen, she notes, and it could not happen for reasons that are "now clear."
The emerging political elite wanted to draw on the past rather than condemn it, and in March 1996, on the 40th anniversary of Khrushchev's secret speech unmasking Stalin, no more than ten members of the Duma were prepared to support the late Sergey Yushenkov's proposal to honor the victims by standing up for a moment of silence.
Beyond any doubt, Russia needs a monument to those who were repressed by Stalin and by others, Pavlova concludes. But it must be one created by the Russian people who fully recognize and understand the crimes of the past, not one "put up with the permission of the current powers that be – the heirs of the very organs which carried out the repressions."
===========================================================
Three Baltic states mourn 1941 Soviet deportees
Posted on : 2008-06-14 Author : DPA News Category : Europe
Riga - The three small Baltic nations of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania paid moving tribute on Saturday to the tens of thousands of men, women, and children who were rounded up and deported to Siberia by the Soviet authorities. In the early hours of June 14, 1941, some 10,000 Estonians, more than 15,000 Latvians and between 16,000 and 18,000 Lithuanians were herded onto cattle trains and transported to the far eastern reaches of the Soviet Union, where many of them died.
The expulsions were carried out "to persecute and silence" opponents of Josef Stalin's regime, which occupied the three Baltic states first in 1940, and again at the close of World War II following a few years of the Nazi occupation.
"Words cannot express the despair felt by the people sent off towards an unknown destination, with nothing but ephemeral hope of surviving and returning to homeland," Estonian President Toomas Hendrik Ilves along with Prime Minister Andrus Ansip and Parliament's speaker Ene Ergma said in a joint statement in the Estonian capital, Tallinn.
"What must the mothers and fathers have felt, seeing their children crammed in cattle wagons alongside themselves? These mothers and fathers, women and men had little chance of seeing their loved ones again," said Ilves, who himself was born in Stockholm to a family of Estonian refugees.
They were the first of a series of mass deportations that lasted until the early 1950s and saw hundreds of thousands of Estonians, Latvians and Lithuanians sent to prison or exile in Siberia as Moscow put in motion a plan to occupy the Baltics.
In the Latvian capital, Riga, a group of former political prisoners and leaders laid flowers at the city's Freedom Monument in the drizzling rain.
Maroon and white Latvian flags with black ribbons of mourning tied to them fluttered about as Latvian President Valdis Zatlers told a crowd of several hundred people not to forget those who were deported to their death in Siberian gulags.
"It is a painful day in our history ... we can never forget those who remained in Siberia, those who were killed there. We have to tell the world that our nation suffered from many occupations." Zatlers said.
The Soviet occupying force sent Balts to camps and prisons in the most disadvantaged regions of the USSR in on June 14, 1941. The deportations recommenced after the Soviets reoccupied the countries from Nazi Germany and then again after World War II during the partisan resistance movement that lasted until the mid-1950s.
In Lithuania, leaders marked the Day of Mourning and Hope by laying flowers at a special memorial.
"More than 60 years ago, occupiers took our country, launched their plan to rid Lithuania of Lithuanians. For thousands of our citizens it meant death, deportations, broken health, and broken lives," said Lithuanian President Valdas Adamkus at the monument to victims of Soviet oppression in the Lithuanian capital, Vilnius.
Some 50,000-60,000 Lithuanians - every third prisoner or deportee - died in exile. Only half of the deportees returned home decades later.
In all, Soviet authorities deported about 150,000 people from Lithuania, most of whom died.
=====================================================================
European Parliament commemoration of anniversary of first mass deportations from Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia June 14th, 1941.
The ceremony will take place on Wednesday, June 18th, at 2.30 pm in the visitors area of the Louise Weiss building in Strasbourg before a memorial plaque that was presented to the President of the European Parliament in June 2006 by three Baltic delegations of the EPP-ED group together with the British MEP Christopher Beazley.
We will lay flowers in front of the plaque and show our respect for the tens of thousands of victims who were taken from their homes by the Soviet totalitarian regime, a significant number never to return.
June 14 is marked every year in all three Baltic states as a national day of mourning. We thank you for sharing in this event with us by your presence or through your good thoughts.
Background information
In May 1941, the Central Committee of the Communist Party and the Soviet Government adopted a joint directive “On the measures to cleanse Lithuanian, Latvian and Estonian SSR of anti-Soviet, criminal and socially dangerous element”. Security forces were directed to repress five categories of inhabitants of these countries, which had been occupied by the Soviet Union in June 1940 on the basis of the August 23, 1940 Stalin-Hitler Pact:
Activists of the counter-revolutionary parties as well as members of anti-Soviet, nationalistic and “White Guard” organizations;
former policemen and prison officials;
former big land-owners, factory-owners and civil servants;
former Army officers;
the criminal element.
These “measures” meant arresting all people belonging to those arbitrary and ambiguous categories, sentencing them to 5-8 years in forced labour camps and then to 20 years of exile in the remotest parts of the Soviet Union; all their property was to be confiscated. The term “Counter-revolutionary parties” included all non- Communist political parties; the term “anti-Soviet and nationalistic organizations” included all NGO-s and patriotic formations.
All family members of persons belonging to the first four categories were destined to 20 years of exile along with the confiscation of their property. The same measures applied to families whose head of household had gone into hiding.
Approximately 50,000 Lithuanian, Latvian and Estonian nationals fell victim to the June 14, 1941 deportations. Considerable numbers of deportees perished, some of them – most often the elderly and infants and small children – died in the cattle cars before ever reaching their destinations in remote regions of Siberia. Their confiscated property was never restored by the Soviet authorities. Most of those who managed to return were subjected for decades to social and economic discrimination.
Tunne Kelam
======================================================
SCHUMER JOINS PUTIN TO OPEN NEW RUSSIAN GAS STATION CHAIN IN NEW YORK
Schumer: more competition and new sources are the best way to loosen OPEC's stranglehold on New York and America
OPEC's newly-announced cuts of nearly 1 million barrels of oil a day will raise prices further – Schumer says alternative to OPEC supplies is desperately needed
1,200 Lukoil gas stations will sell Russian gasoline in regionUS Senator Chuck Schumer and President Vladimir Putin of the Russian Federation celebrated the grand opening of Lukoil Oil Company’s new service stations in New York City today, with Schumer saying that because Lukoil's gas is not governed by OPEC, these new gas stations will help New Yorkers fight price hikes caused by OPEC and Saudi Arabia manipulating oil supplies.
"These new gas stations will – in the long run – help bring down gas prices by introducing the OPEC monopoly to good old-fashioned American competition. OPEC and Saudi Arabia have held New Yorkers in the palms of their hands for too long, jacking up our gas prices at will. When President Bush says we have to cut our reliance on oil form the Middle East, I couldn't agree more – but for most of us, we've had no choice until now. Lukoil's huge investment in New York gives us a choice – an opportunity to cut our reliance on Middle East oil without having to drive our cars any less."
Lukoil's presence in the US cuts American dependence on Middle Eastern oil and responds to President Bush's strategic decision to diversify oil imports. Lukoil is Russia's largest oil producer, and they have made a major commitment to the US market. The 1,200 Metro New York stations – former Getty stations – will bring in $400 million in annual revenues, and will pay $50 million in gross receipt taxes and over $4 million in real estate taxes to New York City. Lukoil will employ more than 1,000 people at its services stations in New York City.
This week, OPEC announced that it is cutting oil production by nearly 1 million barrels a day. Schumer said that energy experts have told him that because most OPEC members are not currently meeting their production quotas, the majority of the reduction in oil production will come at the hands of Saudi Arabia – meaning the Saudis are once again reducing oil to the US to flex their muscles. Energy experts warned yesterday that gas prices are likely to go up more because of the OPEC cuts, with at least one expert saying that OPEC decided on the production cut precisely because US gas prices were coming down slightly.
While gas prices are down 10 cents over the last month nationwide, Schumer yesterday released data showing that the average for price of a gallon of regular gasoline in New York City and Long Island remains stubbornly high. The average price for a gallon of regular unleaded in both New York City and Long Island is 17 cents higher than a month ago, and Schumer asked the US Federal Trade Commission to investigate.
"These new gas stations in New York are an easy win-win. It obviously benefits the Russian economy to be able to tap further into the American gasoline market, and a stronger Russian economy is a net plus for the United States and the West. If there's one thing New York drivers need, it's lower gas prices, and that comes from good-old American competition. This Russian gas should increase oil alternatives in our market and will, we hope, help drive gas prices down."
Schumer and President Putin were joined today at a new Lukoil gas station on Manhattan's west side by Lukoil President Vagit Alekperov.###
==========================================================
Lithuanian interactive KGB show replays brutal past 2008-05-08
As Lithuania's post-Soviet generation comes of age, a local theatre troupe is making sure the evils of the communist past are not forgotten, offering a three-hour refresher course -- as KGB prisoners.
"These few hours should provide a quintessential Soviet-era experience," said Ruta Vanagaite, producer of the interactive show that runs in a former bunker in Naujasode, 25 kilometres (15 miles) from the capital Vilnius.
"By the end visitors should feel how, under a totalitarian regime, they are nothing," she said. "They should realise how much progress there's been over the past 17 years."
Before heading four metres (13 feet) underground, participants begin a journey back in time by swigging a cup of ersatz coffee and donning a "fufaika", the quilted cotton jacket worn by prisoners in the Soviet gulag.
From then on, the curious tourist is treated as a simple "comrade-prisoner" -- obliged to respond to barked questions and commands from a half-dozen actors with a simple yes or no.
After saluting the Soviet flag, participants are made to perform physical exercises, such as squatting, running and rolling in a blanket while wearing a gas mask.
The ryhthm is dictated by an actor in KGB uniform, who screeches orders in Russian as his German shepherd dog strains on its leash.
The Orwellian show is set in 1984, and takes place in a bunker that until 1991 housed emergency radio and television transmitters which were meant to be used if a NATO attack knocked out other Soviet facilities.
Lithuania, which was occupied by the Soviet Union during World War II, declared independence in 1990 and won international recognition a year later as the Soviet bloc crumbled.
In the early years, Soviet rule was notoriously brutal.
Some 360,000 Lithuanians were jailed, killed or deported to the gulags of Siberia and central Asia in the 1940s and 1950s.
In later decades, lower-level repression became the norm, although in a last gasp the Soviet regime cracked down on the Lithuanian independence movement in January 1991, killing 14 civilians.
Today's Lithuania is a democratic, free-market nation with previously unimaginable opportunities for a new generation in its population of 3.4 million -- notably since European Union membership in 2004 opened road for tens of thousands to work abroad.
For Lithuania's teenagers, twenty- and thirty-somethings, the Soviet era is a non-existent or distant memory, while a swathe of older people who missed out on the benefits of change are nostalgic for the relative economic security.
"Half the population of this country misses the Soviet period and around half a million young Lithuanians never lived through it," Vanagaite said.
In the bunker, visitors are forced to sit through Soviet-style May Day speeches, littered with praise for global communism and homages to steelworkers and the people of Cuba.
They are also treated to a medical check-up, where a doctor threatens to use a vintage dental drill on them.
The most unpleasant part of the show, however, remains to come.
The entire group of around 30 visitors is made to face the fall with their hands up, then a male participant is picked out.
In a booming voice, an actor playing a KGB interrogator browbeats the hapless individual into confessing that he has stolen from the factory where he works -- an act of "anti-Soviet sabotage".
Trying not to crack under pressure, or even attempting outright resistance, is a bad idea: the bunker has its own solitary confinement cell.
The tension only falls towards the end, as the "released" visitors are allowed to visit a Soviet-style store and leave with a toilet roll that is a soft as sandpaper.
School pupils make up a large slice of the bunker's visitors, although they are given a toned-down version of the show.
Adults have to sign a disclaimer which informs them that they risk verbal abuse and will have to perform physical exercise.
During AFP's visit, an elderly man was asked to leave after refusing to kneel and coming to blows with one of the actors. Once outside, he called the police to report having been mistreated.
After the show, visitors are treated to an ultra-Soviet supper of tinned beef and a glass of vodka.
"I was curious to get taken back to this period, but for me it was really just a show, because I've drawn a line under the past," said Lina, an accountant who was in her early teens when Lithuania won its independence.
Jolanta, a teacher in her forties, added: "Young people must come here to feel even a little bit what we went through."
In the depths of the bunker, the herd instinct is strong.
"That's exactly what I want to show young people: that in the Soviet era, they too would have followed the crowd and wouldn't have behaved any different from their parents," Vanagaite explained.
=================================================
Cavaliers won't allow Lithuania's Ilgauskas to play in Olympics
THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
CLEVELAND - LeBron James will be the only Cleveland Cavaliers player going to China this summer.
The Cavaliers have declined permission for centre Zydrunas Ilgauskas to play for Lithuania in the Olympics.
Cavaliers general manager Danny Ferry says Ilgauskas is a higher-risk player because of his injury history. The seven-foot-three Ilgauskas was plagued by foot injuries early in his career and the Cavs are concerned about his lower back.
Ilgauskas needed permission to play because his contract is not fully insured.
Ilgauskas viewed the Beijing Olympics as his last chance to play for his country.
© The Canadian Press, 2008
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)