CIS countries presenting Caucasus, Europe and Middle Asia in the former USSR have been searching for closeness to NATO very actively after Yugoslavian war. As if it got clear who is the master in Europe and in the world now and with whom to deal with in terms of military blocks formation etc. From visits and talks new democratic leaders moved to watcher status and to partners. And what will happen after Prague summit in November 2002 ãîäà, nobody knows. So CIS countries are in focus.
23 June 1999, the President of Armenia, Mr. Robert Kocharian, came to NATO HQ to meet with the Secretary General, Dr Javier Solana. They discussed matters of interest to both NATO and Armenia, including regional cooperation and Armenia's participation in Partnership for Peace and the Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council
3-7 April 2000, a course on civil emergency planning and civil-military cooperation is being run in Baku, Azerbaijan from 3-7 April. It is open to participants from Azerbaijan and from neighbouring countries which are also members of NATO's Partnership for Peace programme. The course aims to familiarise participants with the functions of civil emergency planning and with procedures and principles used during civil-military cooperation within the framework of NATO's strategic concept.
10 May 2000. Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia have recently signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) as follow-up to a NATO Workshop on Networking Development in the Caucasus Region. The MOU provides for the three countries to work together to realise common networking goals. Co-ordination of the region's networks will encourage standardization, compatibility and exchange of information. The stated aims are to foster increased political stability and free exchange of views, and to rebuild the links between the scientific and educational communities of these states once part of the former Soviet Union. To achieve the goals set out in the MOU, it is the intention to create a single management organisation comprising one representative from each country
24 May 2000, the same type seminar takes place in Portoroz, Slovenia “Advanced Technologies of network protection”. In the US and in Western Europe protective infrastructure is turning to element of regular network service. Qualified lecturers from NATO countries will transfer their knowledge on computer security service provision to partner-countries specialists and to users of such different sectors as trade, industry, management and science.
20-21 May 2000. In Azerbaijan they held a seminar on energy security. About 70 representatives from 8 member countries and 9 partners met in Azerbaijan near Baku to discuss issues of energy security in Caucasus region. Participants discussed international terrorism threat and the ways to cope with threats. They raised the issue of pipeline guarding stretching by hundreds kilometers. They also reviewed potential oil and gas markets to be extracted in Caspian Sea basin and economic effect of such export for the region.
Seminar was held by the request of Azerbaijan within the framework of CEAP work group on regional cooperation prospects in Caucasus and it was prepared in close cooperation with NATO.
3-4 July 2000. Lord Robertson, during his visit to three Central Asian countries: Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan and the Kyrghyz Republic. Two main issues of the visit were tuning of relations with NATO and regional stability The tour started on 3-4 July in Astana, Kazakhstan, and is continuing in the capital of Uzbekistan, Tashkent, 5-6 July, and the capital of the Kyrghyz Republic, Bishkek, 6-7 July. Lord Roberston is meeting with political leaders from the three countries to discuss the possibility of increased cooperation within the Partnership for Peace programme and ways of combating regional threats such as terrorism, drug trafficking and arms smuggling
25-26 September 2000. On the 25-26 September, Lord Robertson travelled to the Georgian capital, Tbilisi, where he met with President Eduard Shevardnadze (see photo) and several government ministers. He also addressed a conference on the "Caucasus Today: Perspectives of Regional Cooperation and Partnership with NATO". In his speech, Lord Robertson underlined the importance of partnership and practical cooperation between NATO and NATO partners, stating that a new security culture had now developed throughout Eurasia.
Georgia was one of the first countries joined ‘Partnership for Peace’ programme in 1994. Within the last several years it became the most active partner of the programme like Albania which is close to Serbia for example.
15-18 January 2001, NATO Secretary General Lord Robertson visited Armenia, Azerbaijan and Turkmenistan between 15 and 18 January where he met heads of state, foreign and defence ministers. All three countries participate in the Partnership for Peace, a programme for co-operation between NATO and non-NATO countries in the Euro-Atlantic area. They should also determine on whose side they are in pre-war universe.
22 January 2001, Mongolian Prime Minister, Nambaryn Enkhbayar, comes to NATO HQ on 22 January 2001 to meet Lord Robertson. Mongolia is not a member of CIS but always gravitated to Russia. Now you see how far Europe and “Atlanitcs” are stretching.
27 February 2001, a project is currently underway to safely destroy stockpiles of anti-personnel landmines and munitions in Moldova. NATO's Maintenance and Supply Agency (NAMSA) is responsible for developing detailed plans for this project, namely to ensure the material assistance and the training of Moldovan military engineers to carry out the work.
26 April 2001, International conference – Highway or barrier?: The Republic of Moldova's integration into Euro-Atlantic structures" was the theme of an international conference held in the Moldovan capital, Chisinau, from 26-27 April. There is not a long distance between partnership and membership.
15 May 2001. The newly elected Prime Minister of the Republic of Moldova, Vasile Tarlev, came on his first visit to NATO HQ to meet with Lord Robertson. At a joint press conference, Prime Minister Tarlev stated that Moldova was determined to broaden and extend cooperation with NATO within the framework of the Partnership for Peace (PfP), namely in the field of peacekeeping operations. PfP activity includes NATO support in the field of civil emergency planning and the project of annihilation of anti-personnel mines and shells started in January 2001 on behalf of NATO. Prime-minister and Secretary discussed current events in Moldova and strategic issues including military reform, policy of newly elected government and status of the area close to Dnestr river – the area of Russian speaking population settlement in Moldova where the Russian troops are still deployed since civil war waged in 1991.
28 May - 1 June. A regional course on Civil Emergency Planning (CEP) and Civil-Military Cooperation (CIMIC) is being held in the capital of Kazakhstan, Almaty. Participants from Kazakhstan and neighbouring countries are being introduced to the organisation, functions and procedures of these two areas of activity and will exchange information on the region.
6 June 2001. The President of Armenia, Robert Kocharian, came to NATO HQ, Brussels on to meet with Lord Robertson. At a joint point de presse, the Secretary General explained that they had discussed the tension between Armenia and Azerbaijan over the Nagorno-Karabakh region, as well as Armenia's continued participation in NATO's Partnership for Peace (PfP) programme and the Euro-Atlantic Partnership.
25-27 June 2001. Media representatives from Southern Caucasia gathered in the Georgian capital, Tbilisi, to participate in a NATO-sponsored seminar on the "PfP programme and basic information issues”.
28 June 2001. Moldova, one of the twenty-six members of NATO's Partnership for Peace programme, signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with NATO, concerning the safe destruction of liquid propellant oxidizer (known as melange) and the destruction of anti-personnel land mines and surplus munitions. This will allow NATO to provide material assistance and training to ensure the implementation of the project.
12-13 July 2001. Disaster relief professionals from NATO and Partner countries and international organisations gathered in Baku, Azerbaijan on 2001 for a seminar held in the framework of the Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council (EAPC) and Partnership for Peace.
5 September 2001. On the occasion of the Republic of Uzbekistan's 10th anniversary of independence, 1 September, Lord Robertson sent a letter of congratulations to President Islam Karimov. The Secretary General also met with the newly appointed Ambassador to NATO, H.E. Alisher Shaykhov. Let’s mention that there are six days before the attack on New Yourk and Alliance actively engaged with middle Asian region.
29 October 2001, at its meeting in Tbilisi, Georgia, on 29th October, the NATO Science Committee gave the go-ahead for funding new computer networking infrastructure for the academic communities of the Southern Caucasus and Central Asia. Computer network infrastructure has a name “Virtual Silk Way”.
20 February 2002. Tajikistan signed today the Partnership for Peace (PfP) Framework Document, becoming the 27th country of the Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council to join the Partnership for Peace Programme. The Framework Document was signed by the Ambassador of Tajikistan, Mr. Sharif Rahimov, during a meeting at NATO's Headquarters with the North Atlantic Council.
18 March 2002. During his three-day visit to Brussels, the President of Georgia, Mr Eduard Shevardnadze, met with Lord Robertson. Their discussions mainly focused on the role of the Caucasus in the campaign against terrorism, Georgia's partnership with NATO and, in particular, NATO's assistance in helping Georgia modernise and reshape its armed forces. Georgian fight with terrorism in July-August 2002 was expressed by the fact that via its territory armed extremists freely move to Chechnya. If Russian state terrorism toward Chechnya is meant the position of Georgian authorities is explainable. Otherwise we face with double game: Georgia is between USA-NATO and Russia. And it can be ended by the same way as in Kosovo. New military base can appear at the Russian border. Either Russian will intensify air strikes in ravine.
26 May 2002. Among the engagements of President Eduard Shevardnadze of Georgia on Georgia's National Day was a visit to inspect a NATO Science for Peace project which is supporting the development of a high-technology process for the production of integrated circuits used in all areas of the electronics industry. The Minister of Science and Education and the Mayor of Tbilisi also participated in the visit.
With a help of this programme “Science for Peace” realizing in cooperation with Greek scientific institute NATO assists Georgia to modernize scientific-industrial complex of Tbilisi University. The fact that NATO approved this Project means that it gained further support from the other international organizations such as International Centre of Information and Technology in Moscow and Fraunhoffer society (Germany), and private company “Infion Technologies” provided high quality equipment to the laboratory by the amount of 250 mln. Euro. President of Georgia expressed gratitude and admiration of the work done and thanked NATO for support of the Project.
20-22 June 2002. A meeting of the NATO Science Committee's Advisory Panel on Computer Networking took place in Almaty, Kazakhstan from 20 to 22. The Vice-Minister of Education and Science, Professor G. Mutanov, welcomed participants to the Kazakh National Technical University on behalf of the Kazakh government. Advisory Panel realizes supervision over development and installation of “Virtual Silk Way” – a satellite network which maintain switching to Internet laborers of science and culture in eight countries of southern Caucasus and Central Asia. NATO this way expedites “virtual brain-drain” from CIS countries. Specialists from NATO and USA review manpower and purchase perspective “heads” and researches from poor countries. NATO scientific programme eases this task for itself by provision access to Internet for higher educational schools and research institutes. But everything is being done for the sake of Weapon.
Network hardware for the “Silk Way” project including given equipment at the moment is being delivered to Hamburg (Germany) – the place for the principal European network junction. Then it will be assembled and checked before delivery to receiving countries. As it is anticipated deliveries will commence at the beginning of August. Data standards, protocols and procedures are provided from Brussels.
A week ago in Tashkent by the invitation of uzbek authorities Science NATO Committee was held there, and the project “Silk Way” was one of the issues discussed at the regional seminar. “Virtual Silk Way” is impatiently awaited in countries concerned and part of the seminar was devoted to discussion of opportunities which can be provided by the project and difficulties arising from the project implementation.
NATO is getting deeper and deeper in CIS lands, touching the most sensible issues for Alliance, these are defense, military production, civil protection and ecology inasmuch as they are connected with easy occupation of required territories, required for Euro-American corporations. War is taking place but there is no smoke seen.
NATO AND UKRAINE
Ukraine takes a special place in intra-European relations. A country with 50 million population neighboring with Russia and having long-time cultural-ethnic intercourses with Canada and USA draws attention of military and politicians from NATO for a long time. Ukraine once was a battlefield of cruel fight with Hitler’s fascism and to some extent goes through the same emotions. Nationalism on the west of Republic is searching for cause and means to reveal pro-Russian orientation of the centre and the East of the Republic, to condemn communist past of the nation. A numerous nationalistic extremist volunteers are being recruited from this territory as well as from Estonia for the war with Russian troops in Chechnya. It is easy to utilize this ‘ethnic’ eruption of population according to practice already applied by NATO at Balkans. How far did these mutual flirtations of NATO and Ukraine go within four last years.
10-12 February 1999. NATO's Political Committee undertook its second visit to Ukraine since the signature of the NATO-Ukraine Charter in 9 July 1997. Meetings in Kyiv with Foreign Minister Tarasyuk, with the State Interagency Committee of Ukraine for relations with NATO, and with members of the Foreign Relations and Security and Defence Committees of the Ukrainian Parliament (Verkhovna Rada) allowed the NATO representatives to gain a first-hand impression of current security concerns and views on NATO-Ukraine cooperation.
22 March 1999. During the NATO-Ukraine Commission (NUC) meeting on 22 March, NATO members welcomed the official designation of the Yavoriv training area as a Partnership for Peace Training Centre. This centre as well as the one in Ankara, have been designated to help develop military cooperation and interoperability between the armed forces of NATO and Partner countries.
23 April 1999. It was the opening of the NATO Liaison Office in Kyiv.
24 June 1999. A seminar on perspectives of cooperation between NATO and Ukraine took place in Kharkiv, Ukraine, on 24 June. A total of around 70 journalists, academics, students and local government representatives gathered to discuss further cooperation between NATO and Ukraine, NATO's role in Kosovo and the outlook for security in the Balkans. The seminar was organised by the non-governmental organisation: "Democratic Transformations of Ukraine" and was co-sponsored by NATO.
9 September 1999. Within the framework of the «Distinctive Partnership» established between NATO and Ukraine in 1997, the NATO-Ukraine Commission met at Ambassadorial level. Kosovo and Ukraine's full participation in the international security presence in the province were discussed, as were other forms of cooperation outlined in the Washington Summit Declaration.
11 October 1999. NATO and Ukraine sign an agreement to provide civilian training for retired Ukrainian army officers. (The similar training was provided by NATO for Croatia and Russia later on).
25-29 October 1999. NATO CCMS (Committee on the Challenges of Modern Society) is sponsoring (that is paying) a workshop on ecological problems caused by defence activities in the Black Sea and the adjacent Azov Sea. Organised in Sevastopol, Ukraine, the workshop aims to assess the ecological safety of naval bases and coastal infrastructure, consolidate present efforts being made in this area and agree on a way of assisting Ukraine in putting into place projects on recovery of the environment. This workshop follows one which took place on 14-17 October in Georgia on "Environmental Security of Oil Pipelines". There is no doubt that in course of such works funded by NATO means normal information-intelligence activity takes place mostly in the sphere of defence and adjacent fields. They have been collecting information by similar way on behalf of European Community by specialists working in numerous TACIS projects. There is no rush while CIS is getting into deep indebtedness.
1 March 2000. The Ukrainian Parliament - the Verkhovna Rada - has ratified the agreement with NATO concerning the presence of foreign troops on Ukrainian territory during Partnership for Peace exercises. It has also ratified the Open Skies Treaty which allows signatories to carry out flights over each other's territory.
NATO is engaging in a series of initiatives within the Joint Working Group on Defence Reform. Recently, an international conference was held in Kyiv on "Ukrainian Defence Reform: the Challenge of Change". It was jointly organised by NATO and the Centre for Defence and International Security Studies, Lancaster University, United Kingdom
7-9 May 2000. Minister of Foreign Affairs, Boris Tarasyuk, opened a conference on the role of Europe, and more particularly the role of Ukraine, in security and international relations. High-level officials and academics from many countries including Ukraine, Belgium, Russia and the United States gathered at Yalta to assess Europe's role from 1945 to the present and its future direction. Central to the discussions was recreating national and international identities for nations and international organisations in Europe today (as it is understood by bigger capital of North America and Europe). Therefore term “recreating” sounds ambiguously.
17-19 May 2000. The visit of Admiral Venturoni, Chairman of the NATO Military Committee takes place to Ukraine. The Admiral's visit included a tour of the Yavoriv Training Centre, designated as a Partnership for Peace training Centre in March 1999. These centres offer courses and training facilities for NATO's member and Partner countries, enabling them to conduct military exercises together. Admiral Venturoni also discussed NATO-Ukraine cooperation with National Security Adviser Marchuk and Minister of Foreign Affairs Tarasyuk. Following the visit on 22 May there was a prime-minister visit of Ukrainian Prime Minister Viktor Yuschenko to NATO HQ which strengthened relations with Alliance.
Since 19 June to 1 July 2000 Ten NATO and six Partner countries (Russia also attended as an observer) are participating in a military exercise hosted in Ukraine, with forces from NATO's Standing Naval Force Mediterranean (STANAVFORMED) and NATO's Standing Mine Counter-Measures Force Mediterranean (MCMFORMED). Exercise Cooperative Partner 2000 is taking place from 19 June to 1 July in the Black Sea and in the area of Odessa. It aims to contribute in training multinational forces to work together for peace support operations.
22-23 June 2000. A seminar on "Ukrainian Defense Reform: Priorities, Prerequisites and Prospects" was held in Kyiv on 22-23 June. Discussions focused on the Armed Forces, Society and the State, a first seminar having been held on the "Challenge of change in Ukraine" in March. First of such seminars was held in 7 March 2000. Some professors and high officials of NATO took part in seminar together with those busy with defense issues of political and military circles of Ukraine.
The seminar was co-sponsored by NATO and the British Ministry of Defense and was organised by the Centre for Defense and International Security Studies, Lancaster University, Lancaster
20-29 September 2000. A Disaster Relief Exercise - “Transcarpathia 2000” - simulating major flooding, is conducted in Western Ukraine in the framework of Partnership for Peace and the NATO-Ukraine Work Plan. Three hundred and fifty personnel from disaster response elements of 11 EAPC countries participate in exercises.
4-6 October 2000. During its third visit (4-6 October) to Ukraine since the signing of the NATO-Ukraine Charter in 1997, NATO's Political Committee met with senior representatives from the Foreign Ministry, the State Interagency Commission of Ukraine for relations with NATO and members of the Verkhovna Rada - the Ukrainian Parliament. In addition, it had the opportunity to discuss NATO-Ukraine relations with think-tanks, the media and academics based in the capital before travelling to Kharkiv to meet the city's representatives and officials.
18 October 2000. The first meeting of the NATO-Ukraine Working Group on Scientific and Environmental Cooperation took place on 18 October 2000, at NATO Headquarters. At this first meeting a review was made of the current collaboration with Ukraine under the NATO Science Programme, and the Environmental and Society Programme of the Committee on the Challenges of Modern Society (CCMS), with over 120 grants or fellowships awarded to Ukrainian scientists in the past year.
14-15 November 2000. A practical air loading test programme was conducted, 14-15 November, at the Italian airbase in Villafranca, involving Italian and Ukrainian forces. At this airbase, near the historic city of Verona, a Ukrainian Illuyshin-76 flew in to conduct an air loading test with an Italian surface-to-air missile system, SPADA.
As early as 1993, a shortfall in Alliance strategic mobility capabilities was identified, particularly as far as some bulky air defence equipment is concerned. As air defence equipment can be expected to be employed very early in a conflict situation, e.g. to protect points of embarkation/debarkation, the flexibility of the airlift capability is particularly important. This airlift shortfall, which is also highlighted as a prominent Defence Capability Initiative issue, can be alleviated by Partner contributions in case of peace support and crisis response operations. Within this context, the Ukrainian/Italian load test successfully demonstrated that airlift operations between the Alliance and certain Partner nations can be envisaged for any future coalition operation.
During the test, Ukrainian Cargo Airways (UCA) carefully assessed the loading of a complete SPADA system and conducted a pre-test loading of the entire operational SPADA system on 14 November. The test was organised by the NATO Air Defence Committee (NADC), within the framework of the Guidelines for Cooperation with Partners on Air Defence.
14 March 2001 ã. The NATO Information and Documentation Center in Kyiv and the Lutsk Bio-Technical Institute organised a seminar, entitled Ukraine-NATO: Strategic Partnership, in Lutsk. Participants, including local and national officials, academics and journalists, as well as representatives from NATO HQ and NATO Ambassadors in Ukraine, discussed NATO-Ukraine cooperation in military reform, economic security and non-military cooperation.
26-28 July 2001. Ukrainian defence reform and the problems of implementation are being discussed at a three-day workshop, 26-28 July, in Lancaster, United Kingdom. Participants will aim to develop practical recommendations on: 1) defence policy missions and roles and the alternative force structures and strategic options for Ukraine; 2) professionalisation of the armed forces, military education and training; 3) civil-military relations, including the democratic control of the armed forces, recruitment and ways of promoting public support for the military.
Top level state and military officials as well as representatives of academic circles take place in the seminar and some other scientists from other countries and NATO officials are also presented here.
1 August 2001. NATO is currently developing a pilot project on regional flood preparedness and response in Ukraine, together with the neighbouring countries of the entire Tisza catchment area. Calls for the development of a pilot project in the field of Civil Emergency Planning were made at the meeting of the NATO-Ukraine Commission at the level of Foreign Ministers on 15 December 1999 when the NATO-Ukraine Work Plan for the implementation of the NATO-Ukraine Charter in 2000 was approved
Financial resources for analytical phase of the project which is about US$ 200 000 were provided from NATO budget and for donator-countries NEAP members. Nobody cares why NATO is so concerned about floods in Ukraine and gets deeper and deeper in its infrastructure, policy and economy of this ‘special partner’.
Summer floods in Europe in July-August 2002 did not worried senior management of NATO much because in August they take a rest.
14 August. Czech Republic appealed via Coordination centre for disaster relief in NEAP asking for help. They needed: mobile drier devices to dry up houses flooded, electric and floating pumps. Since that moment Coordination centre issues daily bulletins on circumstances and needs of Czech Republic.
Only on 16 August chief of the Alliance moved that NATO is ready to help Czech Republic (by refundable assistance) in liquidation of flood consequences or in fighting with flow of water elements. 2002 NATO year budget is already determined in its most baleful manner. The keyword is ‘Iraq’ and not ‘water’. There are no extra funds. Meanwhile the Secretary General of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, Lord Robertson expressed his sympathy for the citizens and governments of the countries hit by the catastrophic floods in recent days
24 September 2001. NATO sponsored seminar “NATO-Ukraine cooperation as an important aspect of intensification European security” in Lugansk. 9-10 November another conference takes place in Kyiv this is “European choice of Ukraine: internal transformations and search for new role in foreign policy”, which was attended by representatives of international organizations and scientific institutes as well as by former government bureaucrats from Italy and Poland.
21 January 2002. The former military airbase of Uzyn, south of Kyiv, is to be converted for civilian use, according to the Ukrainian authorities. A NATO group of experts, led by the NATO Economics Directorate, is working with the Ukrainian authorities to examine ways of developing the feasibility of a pilot project for Uzyn. This project is part of the NATO-Ukraine Work programme for 2002 and would use the expertise of NATO countries in this field. It is interesting that those servicemen employed at this base are being sacked off gradually as a result of military reform and process of bases closure in Ukraine. NATO organized training program in foreign languages which is to help the former officers and retired to find civil job in a very strained labour market. Thus, Ukraine does not require own and big air forces. ‘Open Skies’ programme and military reform by NATO schemes lead to full dependence of political and military structures of Ukraine on NATO directives. The place at Ukrainian air bases should be provided only for NATO troops even if they would consist of Ukrainian ‘professional military’. English language will be required for them to understand new administration. Whose administration is better?
16-19 June 2002. Several representatives from the Atlantic Treaty Association (ATA) travelled to Ukraine on 16-19 June following an invitation from the Atlantic Council of Ukraine. The aim of the trip was to discuss ways to enhance the activities of the Atlantic Council of Ukraine and to assess Ukrainian public opinion towards NATO. Association was founded in 18 June 1954 as a mechanism allowing to unite efforts of national volunteer and non-governmental organizations of each 19 NATO member countries to support Treaty activity and to make a positive image of North Atlantic Treaty in other lands.
ATA representatives and Ukrainian officials took part in a special Youth Conference that gathered young people from all regions of Ukraine. It is easier to work with youth that was used by Hitler in the beginning of 1930s. It seems that not all Ukrainians peremptory greet symbiosis with NATO preferring dependence on rich empire rather than poor one.
NATO AND RUSSIA
Russia feels that space of her freedom is getting narrower as regards to relations with close circle of the former USSR republics part of which come into CIS and with other inter-state alliances. Russia experienced breakdown of the USSR in 1991 and avoided big civil war. Sad experience of the former Yugoslavia that survived civil war in 1990s pushed Russia involuntary to cooperate with UN troops (for instance in Abkhazia). Meanwhile UN troops were partly or fully substituted by NATO troops in several world regions. It was left nothing for Russia 1n 1997 except signing document about cooperation with NATO. Historical analogue of this event was signing of “Non-aggression Pact” between USST and Germany. It did not protect from aggression but gave an illusion of peace and breathing space for rise of military industry, for army to be prepared to war.
Obviously, reader will find some similarity of history and contemporaneity looking at development of relations NATO-Russia during the last three-four years. Let us for instance take chronology of this partnership since the moment of canceling air strikes in Yugoslavia. As usual the most interesting thing is topics of relations with NATO, their geography and financing.
13-16 June1999. A workshop sponsored by the NATO Science Programme was held in Obninsk, Kaluga Region, Russia, on 13-16 June. It studied state support for the development of Cities of Science and High Technologies in Russia, analysed measures proposed for Russia and compared the experience of Western countries.
The workshop was jointly organised by the Obninsk Center of Science and Technology, Russia, and the Free University of Berlin, Germany. 12 Russian naukograds (Cities of Science) were represented, whereas Western participants, including experts from the US Department of Energy, the Oak Ridge National Laboratory, USA, the EU TACIS programme, and the French CEA were presented by the Deputy Minister for Nuclear Affairs (Minatom). Scientific discussions and disputes do not exclude reconnaissance of Russian fundamental science successes, searching for promising scientists and prospective fields of science which can be included in NATO projects “Science for Peace”. Military utilization of R&D results obtained in course of “partnership” is not excluded either.
23 July 1999. NATO's 19 member countries and Russia met at the Alliance's headquarters in Brussels. This was the first NATO-Russia Permanent Joint Council meeting since the beginning of NATO's air campaign against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. Security Council Resolution 1244.
15 September 1999. The NATO-Russia Permanent Joint Council (PJC) met at NATO HQ. The Alliance's 19 Ambassadors and Russia discussed the situation in and around Kosovo, NATO-Russia cooperation in the NATO-led peacekeeping force, KFOR, and ways of further improving the security situation in the province. This is the second NATO-Russia PJC meeting since the end of the Kosovo crisis. The same day there was a workshop in Novosibirsk under the title “Subsidized biological research for new millennium in Russia”. Workshop was sponsored by NATO scientific program on a basis of state research Centre of virology and biotechnology in Kolzovo. Co-managers of the group professor S.Sandakhchiev, director general of the Centre and doctor F.Wolfram from US Department of Energy and also scientists from the USA, European countries and Japan gathered together to work with Russian colleagues in south-Siberian region. (US Department of Energy is a big Pentagon contractor).
Workshop was held to exchange scientific information on progress of research in biotechnology and to discuss the opportunity of international cooperation and development of selected directions of research for their commercial usage. Among the topics discussed were the following: “The origin and repeated appearance of infectious disease”, “Bio-diversification/Stability of natural resources” and possibility of international cooperation and commercial spin-off as well.
27 October 1999. In its third meeting since the end of the Kosovo crisis, the NATO-Russia Permanent Joint Council (PJC) met on 27 October at NATO HQ to discuss the evolution of the situation in and around Kosovo since the last PJC meeting held on 15 September.
7-10 December 1999. A workshop was held in Petrozavodsk, Karelia, Russia to study the setting up of a common data communications infrastructure for non-commercial, academic and research networks in the Barents Region of Russiañ. Workshop considered academic network of Scandinavia as a model for the network of this region, which will get benefit to professional community in science, education, ecology, telemedicine and health care. It is nice, isn’t it?
However, The workshop was organised with support from the NATO Science Programme, and co-directed by scientists from Petrozavodsk State University and NORUT Information Technology, Tromso, Norway (where HF generator of 2 MW capacity was constructed, see details hereafter).
15-16 February 2000. A new boost has been given to NATO-Russia relations with the visit of NATO's Secretary General to Moscow on 15-16 February. Lord Robertson met with Acting President, Vladimir Putin, Foreign minister Igor Ivanov and Defence minister, Igor Once Russia had frozen their relations with NATO because of disagreement on Kosovo crisis. It was in June 1999 when NATO air strike campaign against Yugoslavia stopped and some kinds of cooperation and contacts in the network of NATO-Russia Permanent Joint Council were renewed. This visit opened a new page in NATO and Russia relations.
9-10 May 2000. Meetings of the Military Committee -NATO's highest military authority- took place on 9 and 10 May, with the participation, this year, of Russia. These meetings take place each year at NATO HQ prior to the Spring and Autumn Ministerial meetings - the third involves NATO members only and is hosted by a NATO country on a rotational basis.
15-16 June 2000. Military force in international relations in the 21st century was debated during an international conference held in St. Petersburg. Approximately one hundred delegates from academic and political circles, together with journalists and Russian and NATO officials, focused on the following themes: the traditional and non-traditional use of force, international law and the use of military force, civil-military relations, policy and strategy for the military and civilians in local conflicts, defense reform in Russia and defining Russia's needs for its Army. Conference was organized by International Relations School of Saint-Petersburg University and sponsored by General Consulate of the USA in Saint-Petersburg and with financial assistance of NATO.
20 September 2000. During the first NATO-Russia Permanent Joint Council meeting after the summer break, the Russian representatives gave a briefing on issues related to military infrastructure in their country. Other questions raised at the meeting were the setting up of a NATO Information Centre in Moscow, terrorism and anti-ballistic missiles. In the context of the recent elections in the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, the political situation in the country was also discussed.
29 September – 1 October 2000. Problems and prospects of developing and reforming the Russian Armed Forces in Russia were under the spotlight at a seminar held in Moscow. This was the third in a series of meetings organised by the International Center for Strategic and Political Studies, Moscow, with co-sponsorship from the NATO Office of Information and Press. The aim of these seminars is to exchange experience of defense reform and defense planning in democratic conditions. The most recent seminar also discussed prospects for NATO-Russia cooperation, and the role of the media in establishing democratic control of the armed forces.
27 November 2000. The second meeting of the Committee on NATO-Russia Joint Scientific and Technological Cooperation (JSTC) was held at NATO HQ on 27 November. The Committee received reports from its scientific Advisory Panels, presenting scope statements in Plasma Physics, Plant Biotechnology, and Forecast and Prevention of Catastrophes, which are the scientific areas selected as the focus for cooperative activities. The Committee also agreed on all the cooperative procedures and mechanisms for both the short-term and long-term, and thereby gave its approval for the NATO-Russia Joint Scientific and Technological Cooperation Programme to be launched. It is better to call all these activities “Science for NATO”.
22 November 2000. A NATO Advanced Research Workshop has taken place in Moscow, to examine the topic - From Restructuring to Upgrading: Challenges for Industrial and Innovation Policy in Transitional Economies. Participants of the workshop discussed the task how to stimulate exchange of ideas on technological innovations and to give recommendation on how to provide industrial modernization and growth of competitiveness in transition economy by the best way.
The co-directors of the workshop were from the Centre for Science Research and Statistics, Moscow and the Social Science Research Council, New York. Over 30 experts from 12 countries debated the issue. Their findings will be published in a volume of the NATO Science Series in the coming weeks
10 January 2001. The Vladivostok State University of Economics and Services has won a NATO Science grant to develop a computer network in Primorye Territory. This project will create a regional network infrastructure linking the educational and scientific centres of Vladivostok, Nakhodka, Ussuriisk and Artyom. It also plans to maintain links with the University of California, with which it set up the project, by purchasing a satellite communications ground station. I suppose it is not required to explain that high velocity “free flow” of information is needed for military purposes. Draw your attention on the fact whose grant was gained by university from Russia.
20 February 2001. The inauguration ceremony of the new NATO Information Office was held in Moscow. Office is located in the centre of Moscow and opens the whole week. Previously hostile military bloc settled now in capital of Russia.
28 February -2 March 2001. Two seminars co-sponsored by NATO have recently been held in Moscow on the general theme of military reform. "European Trends in Military Restructuring", was the title of the first seminar, conducted jointly by the International Institute for Strategic Studies, London, and the Russian Public Foundation.
16-22 April 2001. Environmental change and its impact on international security was the theme of a conference held at the University of St. Petersburg, Russia, 16-22 April. Rising global temperatures, flooding, air pollution, poisoning of water, but also more security-related topics such as land mines and the contamination by nuclear and chemical waste, were considered in light of their long-term social and political consequences and their impact on international security. In addition, some of the latest NATO-related security issues and the NATO-Russia relationship were discussed.
13 September 2001. NATO member countries and Russia strongly reiterated their anger and indignation at the brutal acts committed against New York and Washington D.C. during a meeting of the NATO-Russia Permanent Joint Council (PJC). Islamic extremists already assigned as guilty for these attacks.
3 October 2001. On his first trip to Brussels, President Putin of Russia met with NATO Secretary General Lord Robertson at the Palais d'Egmont. This is a historical visit since the moment of the similar Eltsin’s visit to NATO HQ in 1997. NATO general secretary went to Russia and visited Moscow and Volgograd where he attended schools, academic institutes and met local bureaucrats. This was a new stage of Russia-NATO relations.
6-7 December 2001. Meeting of Foreign Ministers: the launch of a "new relationship" with Russia. One of the main conclusions of the meeting sounded as: "Today we commit ourselves to forge a new relationship between NATO Allies and Russia…We have decided to give impetus and substance to our partnership, with the goal of creating a new council bringing together NATO member states and Russia to identify and pursue opportunities for joint action at 20". Certainly for Russia at her difficult position better to be in 20 of members rather than to remain among 26 “partners for peace”. But don’t be blandish, Russia-NATO Council is just new name of the former Permanent Russia-NATO Council and Russia is not accessed to group of member countries. It means that Russia is not allowed to participate in decision-making on war, peace and “NATO extension”. There is a big pyramid where the highest top is for commandership from USA, all the rest are lower in accordance to hierarchy of capitals and loyalty to the concept of “Atlantism”, to ideas of military-financial enslaving of the world.
28 January 2002. Participants of the meeting of PJC Russia-NATO reviewed joint NATO-Russian initiative on combatting terrorism adopted so far, including exchange of information, regular consultations and cooperation in the sphere of civil emergency planning. The meeting allowed studying another ways of cooperation in these fields.
4 February 2002. A NATO-Russia conference on the role of the military in combating terrorism took place in Rome, Italy, at the NATO Defense College on 4 February. This joint initiative brought together decision-makers and academics from NATO member states and Russia to explore avenues for cooperation against terrorism in the wake of the 11 September attacks on the United States. The common enemy named “terrorist” is a very serious thing.
NATO Secretary General Lord Robertson and Russian Defence Minister Sergey Ivanov were keynote speakers at the one-day conference. "We can very clearly see a common threat, a common enemy for perhaps the first time in 60 years," Lord Robertson told reporters at a press conference. "Intensified NATO-Russia cooperation is a central pillar of the global struggle against terrorism." Thus, NATO and the US seriously rely upon military power of Putin’s Russia in terms of saving world bourgeois civilization, even if it would require victimizing Russia for world capital to survive. Local bourgeoisie that being sunk in Dollar River is seemed to support this pathos of European and American capitals. It looks like repetition of the situation when Russia used to save European lands from Mongol-Tartarian yoke. Will local capitalists have enough time to buster from this territory if “NATO extension” reaches hot phase in the East?
18 February – 1 March 2002. The fourth "Winter Academy" is taking place from 18 February to 1 March and is focusing this year on the inter-relationship between Russia, NATO and the European Union (EU). Winter Academy is a combination of lectures, seminars where participants can make use of direct contact with leading experts in security issues and to understand different approaches to international security that being developed at present. There is an opportunity for young aspirants from all Russia and East and Central Europe countries to exchange ideas and opinions with reporters of higher rank. This year reporters arrived from Russian research institutes, NATO and EC.
22 February 2002. An international conference on "Russia-NATO Strategic Partnership: not whether but when?" was held in St Petersburg on 22 February 2002. High-level participants from NATO and Partner countries, including the US Ambassador to Russia, Alexander Vershbow, and Dr. Irina Hakamada, Vice-Speaker of the Duma and member of the Union of the Rightist Forces addressed the conference, which focused on the state of NATO-Russia relations in the political and military spheres and prospects for further development.
Ðîññèéñêèå «äîëëàðîâûå ïîëèòèêè» âîçìîæíî è ñîãëàñèëèñü áû íà ïîòåðþ Ðîññèåé ýêîíîìè÷åñêîãî è ïîëèòè÷åñêîãî ñóâåðåíèòåòà, íà âêëþ÷åíèå åå âî âñå ñòðóêòóðû Åâðîïû è ÑØÀ â êà÷åñòâå «ìëàäøåãî áðàòà», íî ñîãëàñÿòñÿ ëè ñ ýòèì ïðîñòûå ãðàæäàíå ôåäåðàöèè, íå îáðåìåíåííûå åâðî-äîëëàðàìè?
20 March 2002. A contract between NATO and the Moscow State University for Economics, Statistics and Informatics (MESI) was signed in Moscow for the opening of a NATO-Russia "Information, Consultation and Training Centre". This centre will soon be opened by the Ministry of Defence in Moscow and will deal with the resettlement of military personnel due for discharge or already discharged from the armed forces of the Russian Federation, distributing information inside all Russia on all problems of adaptation to civil life including legal, financial and housing problems. Information will be accessible via Internet and via special network of consultants on social adaptation. NATO sponsors project.
22-24 April 2002. A workshop dealing with "Unresolved Issues Remaining in the Decommissioning of Nuclear Powered Vessels" took place in Moscow and was attended by high-level officials, including Mr. V. Lebedev, Secretary of State and Deputy Minister, Ministry of Atomic Energy of Russia.
27 May 2002. NATO’s Admiral Venturoni (chairman of Military Committee of NATO, the highest organ of Alliance) opened Military liaison mission. Head of general staff of Russian military forces general A.Kvashnin and deputy chief of Belgian Consulate mission, advisor F.Kumps took part in ceremony. Mission established will provide implementation of military cooperation and serve as a main link between NATO HQ and Defense Ministry of Russia.
28 May 2002. From the Pratica di Mare Air Force Base near Rome Heads of State and Government from NATO member countries and the Russian Federation "launched a new era in NATO-Russia cooperation". They signed the Rome Declaration, "NATO-Russia Relations: A New Quality", that has formally established the NATO-Russia Council. This new forum "will serve as the principal structure and venue for advancing the relationship between NATO and Russia".
When accepting congratulations in Brussels with getting ‘half-membership’ in NATO Russian foreign minister I.Ivanov said by the way mechanically that the main institute of international security should remain the UNO. All those presented here depressed their eyes like if dead man was mentioned…
Here we may agree with American politicians which used to assert long ago and aloud that UNO is a crowd of multicolored people that doesn’t able to make adequate decisions, to reply any challenge.
There two opinions about NATO in the USA: one considers Alliance as a substitute of the UNO but without a right of veto from Russia side, absolutely without China and other little mankind. So-called “pigeons” behold this position led by State Secretary C.Powell. The other powerful party led by defense ministry D.Ramsfeld and vice-president D.Chainy believe that NATO can not remain a “machine for working-out consensus” and respectively will loose ability to make decisions, given that European conscious is growing up as well as formation of European own direct-action forces and Russian presence here either. Thus they make a conclusion: USA is the only force, which must take care about the world order otherwise it, goes to the end of the world. If we remind the fact that military budget of the US is higher than summarized budgets of Russia, China, Japan and all countries of the Western Europe, we understand this task as feasible.
Russia-NATO Council will make decisions on a basis of consensus; all parties will work like “equal partners”. It is said in Roman Declaration that Russia-NATO Council “will work on a basis of permanent political dialogue on issues of securities between their members in order to identify problem appearing properly at the early stages, to define optimal approaches and to realize joint actions”. NATO’s smart stupidities “on a regular basis” will just put to sleep major potential object of NATO “extension” – Russia. The only reason for establishment of new NATO organ is abstract international terrorism otherwise it doesn’t make sense. Russia won’t be allowed to cook something in a secret military kitchen.
