Russia 090508 Basic Political Developments

Russia: Toughening Iran sanctions unwise

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3712719,00.html
Foreign Minister Lavrov visits Washington for first time since Obama administration took office, tells American counterpart that Moscow is interested in pressuring Tehran, but believes aggravating punitive action would not be a clever move

Yitzhak Benhorin

Published:

05.08.09, 07:27 / Israel News

WASHINGTON – Forty-eight hours after calling off his participation at a NATO conference, the Russian foreign minister arrived in Washington for the first time since the new American administration took office, and met with US President Barack Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

 

Sergey Lavrov expressed his government's opposition to toughening Security Council sanctions against Iran, and criticized the United States for imposing harsher sanctions outside the United Nations.

 

The US and its European allies are trying to advance another round of economic sanctions on Iran, in a bid to discourage the Islamic republic from moving forward with its nuclear program.

 

During his meeting with Clinton, the Russian minister addressed the sensitive issue, saying that "it's not so simple. There are joint decisions which were adopted at the Security Council and they bind all the countries in the world to act in a certain way and meet certain demands."

But he also expressed protest. "Alongside this there are also unilateral sanctions by the US and the European Union, which go beyond the Security Council's resolutions in terms of Iran. We don't believe this is helpful."

 

Lavrov clarified that the Kremlin was sticking to the agreement reached between the five Security Council powers and Germany during their meeting in London. "Iran hasn't objected to these proposals and has its own offers which we are willing to discuss."

 The Russian foreign minister stated during the Washington talks, "I never said we were against any pressure on Iran. In fact, I explained that we do not view tough sanctions as a wise move. However, in terms of pressure, we are in favor of pressuring Iran to return to the negotiating table."

 

The American secretary of state said in response that the US was laying the foundation for reasons for tougher sanctions. She added that proposals had been made to Tehran, but that her country was still very much on the alert.

US and Russia hold nuclear talks

http://english.aljazeera.net/news/americas/2009/05/200957181350192261.html

The US and Russia are keen to act on preventing nuclear proliferation and safeguarding nuclear facilties, the US secretary of state has said.

Hillary Clinton said following talks with Sergei Lavrov, her Russian counterpart, that both nations aimed to "set a standard and example" on nuclear issues and work at raising the country's relationship to "a new level".

Both Clinton and Lavrov also said on Thursday in Washington DC that the two countries' disgreements over Georgia would not affect work on nuclear disarmament.

"I believe Minister Lavrov and the Russian government recognise that stability and a peaceful resolution to the tensions in Georgia is in everyone's interest," Clinton said.

"But it's old thinking to say that if we disagree in one area that we shouldn't work on something else that is of overwhelming importance."

Clinton and Lavrov's meeting follows anger in Moscow over the Nato alliance's month-long military exercises in Georgia which began on Wednesday, a move Russia has called an "overt provocation".

Georgia has in turn accused Russia of backing a mutiny at one of its military bases.

Remaining tensions

US and Russian negotiators recently began negotiating to replace the 1991 Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (Start), which expires this year.

The talks were launched after the first meeting between Obama and Dmitry Medvedev, the Russian president, last month.

Disagreements between the US and Russia also remain over how to deal with Iran's nuclear programme and the US's missile system plans in Europe.

Later on Thursday Lavrov will also hold talks with Barack Obama, the US president

Might the US Recognize Abkhazia and Turn Moscow’s Victory into Defeat?

http://georgiandaily.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=11452&Itemid=65

May 06, 2009

Paul Goble

The United States and even more likely Turkey might change course, recognize the independence of Abkhazia, move to include both Abkhazia and Georgia into Western institutions like NATO and thus transform Moscow’s victory on the ground in August 2008 into a major geopolitical defeat, according to a Moscow analyst.

In what he acknowledges is a highly speculative article, Andrey Serenko, a political analyst at the Moscow Foundation for the Development of Information, argues that however improbable it may seem at present, the US and Turkey might recognize Abkhazia as part of a broader strategy of ousting Russia from the Caucasus.

And while the Moscow writer may be wrong both overall and in detail, his argument is worth exploring not only because it reflects a habit of mind quite frequently found in the Russian capital at the present time but also because it highlights the fluidity and openness of a situation in the Caucasus that most analysts are inclined to see as far more fixed than in fact is the case.

Despite the fact that much of the fighting between Russia and Georgia took place in South Ossetia rather than in Abkhazia – in fact, there was no fighting there during the recent war -- “the main goal” of both Moscow and Tbilisi was the latter because control of that breakaway republic was seen as controlling so much.

“If Tbilisi had been able to return Abkhazia to its control,” Serenko suggests, “the fate of the Russian Black Sea Fleet would have been fixed” and against Russia, whereas if, as happened, Abkhazia gained its independence as a result of Moscow’s actions, Russia’s ability to project power in the region would remain great.

Given the geopolitical importance of Abkhazia, the Moscow analyst says, it is implausible that the West will simply continue to repeat its declarations of support for the territorial integrity of the Republic Georgia and do nothing to counter the consequences of Russia’s victory there last summer.

One possible scenario, Serenko continues, would involve the following steps: “The United States could conduct shuttle talks between the Georgian and Abkhaz leaderships and on the basis of their outcome declare that Washington, following Moscow, will recognize the independence of Abkhazia.

Today, “no one expects this from the Americans but precisely such a move could change the situation in the Southern Caucasus in in favor of the US, because following such recognition, American investments, major Western companies and NGOs would flood into Sukhumi,” leading at least some Abkhaz to lobby “for friendship with the US.

Russia is certainly not prepared for such an American move, nor are the upper reaches of the Abkhazian leadership. President Sergey Bagapsh and his colleagues are “sincerely grateful” to Moscow for its assistance in their republic’s gaining independence and for its recognition of that status. And they believe that they can resist any blandishments from the West.

But Serenko says, “serious politicians inMoscow cannot be such optimists. Besides that, there are in Abkhazia, besides Bagapsh, politicians, bureaucrats, and petty businessmen who are striving to become major players and ‘win out’ some personal profit from independence achieved at long last. … Independence in order not to depend on or to take from all …

“In the event of a successful American entrance into Abkhazia, Sukhumi could be offered the variant which the US and NATO have already proposed to Serbia and Kosovo – why argue and fight over borders? Both Serbia and Kosovo will be admitted to the European Union in which there are no internal borders and then into NATO.

That formula will eventually work in the Balkans. Why not try it in the Caucasus? “Why should Georgia and Abkhazia fight and argue among themselves? They both an be admitted … [after a decent interval] … into the European Union and into NATO. And then the problem of borders and independence disappears on its own.

“Is this a fantastic scenario?” Serenko asks rhetorically. “Nomore fantastic than the disintegration of the USSR, the disintegration of Serbia or the recognition of the independence of Kosovo, Abkhazia and South Ossetia,” events many said would never happened before they did and were proclaimed inevitable.

One of the reasons that Moscow should be concerned about an American rapprochement with Abkhazia is that if it occurred, “the political successes of Russia [in Georgia in particular and in the Caucasus regionmore generally] would instantly be transformed into a political defeat.

First of all, the Moscow political commentator insists, “having recognized Abkhazia and South Ossetia [last summer], Moscow deprived itself of the right to talk about the principle of the inviolability of the territorial integrity of states and weakened its position in European political projects.

Second, Russia opened itself to more separatist challenges within, if not today “when in Moscow the powers that be are strong and the threats of separatism do not exist,” but in the future because “no one knows [what the situation will be either in Moscow or on Russia’s periphery] several years from now.

And third, “the independence of Abkhazia achieved by Russia can open the way for a new political project which Moscow would hardly like. The Abkhaz, the Cherkess, the Kabardins, the Adyge, and also their co-ethnics living in Turkey, Syria, and Jordan form one super-ethnos,” collectively and by themselves known as the Circassians, Serenko says.

Their existence could lead to greater activism by Turkey in this area even if the US doesn’t move. Many have noted that Ankara did not follow its Western partners in condemning Russia’s military and political moves in Georgia, and “it must not be excluded that Ankara could recognize Abkhazia” as part of its ongoing effort to project power in the Caucasus.

In that event, Serenko concludes ominously, if not entirely convincingly given the restrained language he used in presenting his scenario, “into the orbit of this game could be included three of the North Caucasus republics” – Adygeya, Kabardino-Balkaria, and Karachayevo-Cherkessia – which are included in Russia.”

Putin’s Tokyo visit to boost trade ties

http://www.mnweekly.ru/news/20090508/55376532.html

Ayano Hodouchi Prime Minister Vladimir Putin will visit Tokyo from May 11-13 on an official visit expected to focus on forging stronger economic and trade ties with Japan. Putin and his Japanese counterpart, Taro Aso, will discuss the two countries' longstanding dispute over the Kuril Islands, economical cooperation and energy development, and prepare for a summit between President Dmitry Medvedev and Aso in July, Japan's Chief Cabinet Secretary, Takeo Kawamura, announced late last month.

Territorial disputes have long soured relations between the countries, and a peace treaty has not been signed, more than six decades after World War II. Neither country wants to be seen as making concessions to the other, and in Japan, comments from the political elite about a compromise are quickly shot down. In 2006, Putin's administration offered the return of two small islands, based on the Soviet-Japanese Joint Declaration signed in 1956. Government representative Shoutarou Yachi came under fire recently for making a controversial comment: "These two islands are only 7 per cent of the total area of the four islands, but if the area is split fairly between the two countries, three and a half seems a good compromise."

Dmitry Streltsov, head of the Oriental Studies Department at the Moscow University of International Relations (MGIMO) said that Russia had made its position clear by offering Japan the two smallest of the four disputed islands. "I do not expect any progress unless the Japanese react to our position. As far as I know, we are still waiting for a response."

Highlighting a difference of perception, the consensus in Japan is that it is Russia's turn to take the initiative.

Trade between the countries is growing, and business leaders on both sides have said they are optimistic about future ties.

"Despite the worldwide economic crisis, in the long term the Russian economy is bound to grow greatly. We hope the two countries can strengthen their ties and that the business environment for both will improve," said Tomozo Matsumoto, CEO of Panasonic CIS.

Masao Fujita, chairman of the Japan Business Club, stressed the importance of cooperation between the two countries: "Russia is on the Eurasian continent, so it is important not only how they relate to the West, but what ties they have in the East as well."

Anti-crisis measures will be discussed at an economic forum between the Russian Union of Industrialists and Entrepreneurs (RSPP) and Japan's Keidanren business lobby group. Putin is expected to attend, and Alexandr Shokhin, President of the RSPP, will lead the Russian business delegation.

Vyacheslav Lunin, executive secretary of the National Committee for the Development of Economic Relationship with Japan, who will accompany Shokhin during Putin's visit, commented that when Putin last went to Japan in 2005, bilateral trade stood at a mere $4 billion, and now it is $30 billion. "So I can only say that we all have very, very good expectations - and we'd like to see Japanese investors even more active here, and Russian companies in Japan as well. The biggest companies like Gazprom are present in Japan, but there are still very few."  n

Several Russian regional governors are also going to Japan to meet their counterparts, and university rectors from both sides will meet to discuss student exchanges, said Strelsov, of MGIMO. "But economical cooperation is of the first importance," he said.

"The development of infrastructure and business in the Far East and Siberia, LNG delivery to Japan, Japanese cooperation for building a pipeline in Sakhalin, these are the matters we are most interested in."

Interview

Masao Fujita

Masao Fujita, chairman of the Japan Business Club, talked to The Moscow News about the climate for foreign businesses investing in Russia.

"The amazing growth of the Russian economy is reflected in the number of members of our association. From 65 companies in 2003, we have grown almost threefold," said Fujita.

Of course, most companies, especially manufacturing and trading companies, have been hit by the crisis. Trade was down 60 per cent in the first quarter of 2009, as companies found themselves overstocked amidst plummeting demand. But Fujita appears far from anxious.

"Figures were going up exponentially the past three years. Everyone knew it couldn't last. Despite the ups and downs, there's a general trend upwards, and an average growth of 10 per cent or more is good enough."

"As a market, there is great potential here, and chances are big," he says with conviction. "To do business here, it's essential to be surprised by little, be prepared for risks, and to have a long-term business plan."

The downsides? "Systems and rules can change suddenly here, and it's not always clear how rules are applied. That's a difficulty specific to Russia, I think."

Fujita also is the chief executive of Komatsu CIS, a subsidiary of the Japanese industrial equipment giant.

For the site of the company's plant, he chose Yaroslavl. The regional government seemed cooperative to his project, and he was also encouraged by the abundance of good engineers in the traditionally industrial city. Geography was also a deciding factor - too far away from Moscow was inconvenient for the mainly Japanese management, but too close to Moscow, and newly trained workers might be tempted away by the abundance of other work to be found in the capital.

He believes that it's not only cars and electrical appliances Russia needs; there is a great demand for improving the country's infrastructure. The plant will produce industrial vehicles such as forklifts and excavators for use in construction projects.

"You know what Gogol said - that one of Russia's greatest misfortunes is its bad roads," he smiled. - Ayano Hodouchi

Russia, Japan to Sign Nuclear Energy Accord on May 12 (Update1)
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601101&sid=a0T1sdnx5HR4&refer=japan
By Lyubov Pronina

May 7 (Bloomberg) -- Russia and Japan will sign an agreement on peaceful uses of nuclear energy on May 12 during Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin’s visit to Tokyo.

Putin and his Japanese counterpart Taro Aso will also discuss North Korea and their territorial dispute, though Russia isn’t prepared to cede four Kuril Islands claimed by Japan, Yury Ushakov, Putin’s deputy chief of staff, told reporters in Moscow today.

“We’re not ceding anything, but we may be ready to some degree to discuss hypothetical situations,” Ushakov said. “That’s all. We’re not ready to give the islands away.” Russia favors a “calm, constructive” dialogue on the Kurils without “inflated expectations and disappointments,” he said.

Putin travels to Tokyo on May 11 for a three-day visit aimed at boosting economic cooperation between the two countries, Ushakov said. Trade volume between Russia and Japan was nearly $29 billion last year, he said.

In addition to the nuclear power accord, five agreements will be signed during Putin’s visit, including two memorandums of understanding between OAO RusHydro, Russia’s state-owned hydropower utility, and Japanese partners on building hydro- and wind-power plants.

Putin’s delegation will include Moscow Mayor Yury Luzhkov, Energy Minister Sergei Shmatko and business leaders including OAO Gazprom Chief Executive Officer Alexei Miller, Sergei Kiriyenko, CEO of Rosatom Corp., the state-run Russian nuclear company, and billionaire Oleg Deripaska.

To contact the reporter on this story: Lyubov Pronina in Moscow at [e-mail]

Last Updated: May 7, 2009 12:06 EDT