Crossroads in History: The Struggle against Jihad and Supremacist Ideologies
By Jeffrey Imm

http://counterterrorismblog.org/

In fighting Islamic supremacism, instead of an approach only based on tactical measures and efforts at clever twists of terminology, what if America had a true strategy that was instead based on the defense of our values on human equality and liberty?

The true challenge of Islamic supremacism to America and the free world is not about Islam, Islamism, or terrorism, but about us. It is a historic challenge to determine whether we truly have the courage of our convictions on equality and liberty and we are willing to fight for these ideals, or if we will instead accept the continuing growth of anti-freedom ideologies here and around the world.

Islamic supremacists are counting on their belief that America is no longer willing to fight for such freedoms, that it has gotten too soft to do so, and that regardless of the success or failure of individual Jihadist tactics, eventually we will tolerate a continued growth of Islamic supremacism. The crossroads in history that we stand at remains whether or not we will prove Islamic supremacists correct, or if the idea defined in our very Declaration of Independence and chiseled in a marble memorial in America's capital - that "all men are created equal" - is an idea that America will once again sacrifice to defend.

America and the West are at a critical crossroads in history in their faltering struggle with Islamic supremacist ideologies and Jihadist terror tactics. Increasingly, groups seek to halt any meaningful debate and halt any challenge to the ideology behind Jihad, and they seek to redirect such debate and action to focus only on the terrorist symptoms of such a supremacist ideology. Such diversionary efforts are being made by non-violent Islamic supremacist groups and activists, government officials, academics, and media commentators. The solution to this can be found in recognizing how Islamic supremacism (as any supremacist ideology) is opposed to our values, and in understanding America's historical experience in defeating other supremacist ideologies.

A. The Islamic Supremacist Declaration of War on Equality and Freedom

From a counterterrorist perspective, the Al Qaeda declarations of war against the United States in 1996 and 1998 are widely examined as a basis for a "war on terror." However, the Islamic supremacist challenges to equality and liberty have been occurring long before declarations of war by Al Qaeda or any other Islamic supremacist terrorist groups.

Three years after the defeat of the Nazi supremacists, in 1948, the United Nations General Assembly advocated a Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) on human rights, freedom, and equality. In addition to abstention by Communist totalitarian nations, the Islamic supremacist Kingdom of Saudi Arabia refused to support such a resolution on equality.

In 1981, the Islamic supremacist Republic of Iran effectively issued a Sharia-based declaration of war on such ideas "when its representative affirmed that the UDHR represented a secular interpretation of the Judeo-Christian tradition which could not be implemented by Muslims; if a choice had to be made between its stipulations and 'the divine law of the country,' Iran would always choose Islamic law." The Islamic supremacists leading Iran were more forthright in their position than Saudi Arabia; they stated clearly and unequivocally that equality and Sharia were clearly incompatible. In the midst of the Cold War, few truly appreciated this as the Sharia declaration of war on equality and freedom that it was.

In 2000, a year before the 9/11 attacks, the 57 nation Islamist supremacist organization, the Organization of the Islamic Conference, officially resolved to support the Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam as an alternative document that says people have "freedom and right to a dignified life in accordance with the Islamic Shari'ah" -- an exclusionary ideology only for Muslims that denies freedom of religion and many other fundamental human rights of equality.

In 2001, nearly two months before the 9/11 attacks, the European Court of Human Rights determined that "the institution of Sharia law and a theocratic regime, were incompatible with the requirements of a democratic society."

Throughout the world on a daily basis, as analysts pore over the details of violent groups and their tactics, the details of terrorist finance, and the details of battlefield theaters, the anti-democratic stories of Sharia repression are widely ignored by many as the war of ideas with Islamic supremacism is not fully understood even today.

B. "All Men Are Created Equal" Versus Sharia

Tacticians believe the war is between Al-Qaeda and the West, the Taliban and the West, Hezbollah and the West, between Shiite and Sunni "extremists," or between terrorists and those who advocate non-violence. But this tactical view of world war only sees snapshots of individual theaters of violent activity and propaganda. The true aspects of the war remain a clash of ideological views, not merely individual political demands or battles.

Many in the United States and United Kingdom government leadership positions definitely do not want debate on this clash of ideological views, because they rightly fear that this will lead to more, not less confrontation. The historical mistake that they make is the assumption that such confrontation is something we don't need and something we can avoid. American leaders who fear such confrontation ignore the historical lessons of how other supremacist ideologies were fought and defeated.

The root of the real war is the ideas of equality and liberty versus Sharia and an Islamic supremacist form of societal control. Little is written about this war, which has numerous fronts around the world -- violent and non-violent, with propaganda fronts, economic fronts, demographic fronts, legal fronts, educational fronts. It is really what happens in this war of ideas, not in the individual battles in Iraq, Afghanistan, or elsewhere that will be the deciding factor in our victory or defeat. But to understand this war of ideas, and understand the application of history in fighting supremacism to dealing with Islamic supremacism, we must understand the dual aspects of freedom and how they remain the greatest weapon in America's arsenal.

While Islamic supremacists view their growing population as their greatest weapon, America has its twin towers of freedom -- liberty and equality - which combined provides the greatest weapon on Earth against supremacism. Liberty and equality are the twin towers of America that can not and will not fall as long as American retains its commitment to its national values. America has proven the value of these hard-won ideological weapons against supremacist ideologies repeatedly throughout our history.

Liberty alone is not enough to fight supremacism. Liberty is only half of the equation of freedom; equality is the other completing half of freedom that provides the values to truly challenge any supremacist ideology -- the values of America that all men and women are created equal. We learned that nearly 90 years after America's creation, and we fought to rectify this with a dual commitment for equality as well as liberty.

In the larger, strategic war against Islamic supremacism, it is America's unique historical experience in the war of ideas against other supremacist organizations that our leaders must examine in finding answers and strategies in fighting Islamic supremacism today.

Click here to continue reading this commentary.

Jewish World Review July 8, 2008 / 5 Tamuz 5768

Islamists have the West just where they want us

By Frank J. Gaffney, Jr.

Of course, Moscow strove to discredit those in America and elsewhere who opposed its totalitarian agenda — especially after Sen. Joseph McCarthy's excesses made it fashionable to vilify patriots by accusing them of believing communists were "under every bed."

But what if the USSR and its ideological soul-mates in places like China, North Korea, Cuba, Eastern Europe and parts of Africa had been able to criminalize efforts to oppose their quest for the triumph of world communism? What if it had been an internationally prosecutable offense even to talk about the dangers inherent in communist rule and the need to resist it?

The short answer is that history might very well have come out differently. Had courageous anti-communists been unable accurately and forcefully to describe the nature of that time's enemy — and to work against the danger posed by its repressive, seditious program, the Cold War might well have been lost.

Flash forward to today. At the moment, another totalitarian ideology characterized by techniques and global ambitions strikingly similar to those of yesteryear's communists is on the march. It goes by varying names: "Islamofascism," "Islamism," "jihadism" or "radical," "extremist" or "political Islam." Unlike the communists, however, adherents to this ideology are making extraordinary strides in Western societies toward criminalizing those who dare oppose the Islamist end-state — the imposition of brutal Shariah Law on Muslims and non-Muslims alike.

Consider but a few indicators of this ominous progress:

• In March, the 57 Muslim-state Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) prevailed upon the United Nations Human Rights Council to adopt a resolution requiring the effective evisceration of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Henceforth, the guaranteed right of free expression will not extend to any criticism of Islam, on the grounds that it amounts to an abusive act of religious discrimination. A UN Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Expression has been charged with documenting instances in which individuals and media organizations engage in what the Islamists call "Islamophobia." Not to be outdone, the OIC has its own "ten-year program of action" which will monitor closely all Islamophobic incidents and defamatory statements around the world.

• Monitoring is just the first step. Jordan's Prosecutor General has recently brought charges against Dutch Parliamentarian Geert Wilders. According to a lawsuit, "Fitna" — Wilders' short documentary film that ties certain Koranic passages to Islamist terrorism — is said to have slandered and insulted the Prophet Mohammed, demeaned Islam and offended the feelings of Muslims in violation of the Jordanian penal code. Mr. Wilders has been summoned to Amman to stand trial and, if he fails to appear voluntarily, international warrants for his arrest will be issued.

Zakaria Al-Sheikh, head of the "Messenger of Allah Unites Us Campaign" which is the plaintiff in the Jordanian suit, reportedly has "confirmed that the [prosecutor's action] is the first step towards setting in place an international law criminalizing anyone who insults Islam and the Prophet Mohammed." In the meantime, his campaign is trying to penalize the nations that have spawned "Islamophobes" like Wilders and the Danish cartoonists by boycotting their exports — unless the producers publicly denounce the perpetrators both in Jordan and in their home media.

• Unfortunately, it is not just some companies that are submitting to this sort of coercion — a status known in Islam as "dhimmitude." Western officials and governmental entities appear increasingly disposed to go along with such efforts to mutate warnings about Shariah law and its adherents from "politically incorrect" to "criminally punishable" activity.

For example, in Britain, Canada and even the United States, the authorities are declining to describe the true threat posed by Shariah Law and are using various techniques to discourage — and in some cases, prosecute — those who do. We are witnessing the spectacle of authors' books being burned, ministers prosecuted, documentary film-makers investigated and journalists hauled before so-called "Human Rights Councils" on charges of offending Muslims, slandering Islam or other "Islamophobic" conduct. Jurists on both sides of the Atlantic are acceding to the insinuation of Shariah law in their courts. And Wall Street is increasingly joining other Western capital markets in succumbing to the seductive Trojan Horse of "Shariah-Compliant Finance."

Let's be clear: The Islamists are trying to establish a kind of Catch-22: If you point out that they seek to impose a barbaric, repressive and seditious Shariah Law, you are insulting their faith and engaging in unwarranted, racist and bigoted fear-mongering.

On the other hand, pursuant to Shariah, you must submit to that theo-political-legal program. If you don't, you can legitimately be killed. It is not an irrational fear to find that prospect unappealing. And it is not racist or bigoted to decry and oppose Islamist efforts to bring it about — ask the anti-Islamist Muslims who are frequently accused of being Islamophobes!

If we go along with our enemies' demands to criminalize Islamophobia, we will mutate Western laws, traditions, values and societies beyond recognition. Ultimately, today's totalitarian ideologues will triumph where their predecessors were defeated.

To avoid such a fate, those who love freedom must oppose the seditious program the Islamists call Shariah — and all efforts to impose its 1st Amendment-violating blasphemy, slander and libel laws on us in the guise of preventing Western Islamophobia.

http://www.jewishworldreview.com/cols/gaffney070808.php3?printer_friendly

================================================================

President Dmitry Medvedev says Russia is extremely upset after the Czech Republic agreed to host part of a US missile shield.

"We will not be hysterical about this but we will think of retaliatory steps," Mr Medvedev said.

US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said she was "disappointed" by Russia's reaction to the shield plans.

Earlier, the Pentagon criticised "bellicose rhetoric" from Russia "designed to make Europeans nervous".

By Henry A. Kissinger
Tuesday, July 8, 2008; A15

President Bush's meeting with Dmitry Medvedev in Hokkaido yesterday provides an opportunity to review American relations with the new Russian leadership. Conventional wisdom treated Medvedev's inauguration as president of the Russian Federation as a continuation of President Vladimir Putin's two terms of Kremlin dominance and assertive foreign policy. But after recently visiting Moscow, where I met with leading political personalities as well as those in business and intellectual circles, I am convinced that this judgment is premature.

For one thing, the emerging power structure seems more complex than conventional wisdom holds. It was always doubtful why, if his primary objective was to retain power, Putin would choose the complicated and uncertain route of becoming prime minister; his popularity would have allowed him to amend the constitution and extend his presidency.

My impression is that a new phase of Russian politics is underway. The move of Putin's office from the Kremlin to the building housing the government could be symbolic. Medvedev has said that he means to chair the National Security Council and, as Russia's constitution provides, be the public face of foreign policy. The statement that the president designs foreign and security policy, and the prime minister implements it, has become the mantra of Russian officials. I encountered no Russian in or out of government who doubted that some kind of redistribution of power was taking place, although they were uncertain of its outcome.

Putin remains powerful. He is seen by most Russians as the leader who overcame the humiliation and chaos of the 1990s, when the Russian state, economy, ideology and empire collapsed. Conceivably he has assigned himself a review role over the performance of his successor; it is possible that he is keeping open the option of running in a future presidential election.

Whatever the ultimate outcome, the last Russian election marks a transition from a phase of consolidation to a period of modernization. The ceding of power by a ruler at the height of his influence is unprecedented in Russian history. The growing complexity of the economy has generated the need for predictable legal procedures, as already foreshadowed by Medvedev. The government's operation -- at least initially -- with two centers of power may, in retrospect, appear to be the beginning of an evolution toward a form of checks and balances.

A Russian democracy is not foreordained, of course. But neither was the democratic evolution in the West.

What are the implications for American foreign policy? During the next several months, Russia will be working out the practical means of the distinction between design and implementation of national security policy. The Bush administration and the presidential candidates would be wise to give Moscow space to do so and restrain public comment.

Ever since the demise of the Soviet Union in 1991, a succession of U.S. administrations has acted as if the creation of Russian democracy were a principal American task. Speeches denouncing Russian shortcomings and gestures drawn from the Cold War have occurred frequently. Proponents of such policies assert that the transformation of Russian society is the precondition of a more harmonious international order. They argue that if pressure is maintained on the current Russia, it, too, will eventually implode. Yet assertive intrusion into what Russians consider their own sense of self runs the risk of thwarting both geopolitical and moral goals.

Some groups and individuals in Russia undoubtedly look to America to accelerate a democratic evolution. But almost all observers agree that the majority of Russians perceive America as presumptuous and determined to stunt Russia's recovery. Such an environment is more likely to generate a nationalist and confrontational response than a democratic evolution.

In many ways, we are witnessing one of the most promising periods in Russian history. Exposure to modern open societies and engagement with them is more prolonged and intense than ever before -- even in the face of unfortunate repressive measures. The longer this continues, the more it will impact Russia's political evolution.

The pace of such an evolution will inevitably be Russian. We can affect it more by patience and historical understanding than by offended disengagement and public exhortations.

In fact, geopolitical realities provide an unusual opportunity for strategic cooperation. The United States and Russia control 90 percent of the world's nuclear weapons. Russia contains the largest land mass of any country. Progress toward stability, with respect to nuclear weapons, in the Middle East and in Iran depends on Russian-American cooperation.

The imperialist foreign policy of czarist and Soviet Russia was facilitated by the weakness of nearly all countries at Russia's borders. This enabled Russia, over a century and a half, to advance inexorably from the Volga to the Elbe, along the shores of the Black Sea, into the Caucasus and the approaches to India. In Asia, it penetrated to the Pacific and into Manchuria and Korea. Security became synonymous with continued expansion, and domestic legitimacy was achieved largely by demonstrated power abroad.

Those conditions have fundamentally changed. Russia's neighbors have overcome their weakness. The 2,500-mile frontier with China is a demographic challenge; east of Lake Baikal, 6.8 million Russians face 120 million Chinese in the provinces along the common border; across an equally long frontier, Moscow has to deal with militant Islamism extending its reach into southern Russia. Along its western frontier, Russia's strategic reach is limited by emerging realities, including the NATO membership of erstwhile Warsaw Pact states.

Though Russia's population is experiencing a surge in national pride, its leaders understand the risk of altering the new international order by their traditional methods. They know that among Russia's 25 million Muslims are a significant number whose loyalty to the state is doubtful. The health system is in need of overhaul; infrastructure has to be rebuilt. Russia has opted to concentrate on domestic reform for one of the few times in its history.

Confrontational rhetoric and bullying style notwithstanding, Russia's leaders are conscious of their strategic limitations. Indeed, I consider Russian policy under Putin as driven by a quest for a reliable strategic partner, with America being the preferred choice. Turbulent rhetoric in recent years reflects, in part, frustration by our seeming imperviousness to that quest. Presidents Bush and Putin have formed a constructive relationship but have not been able to overcome habits that their countries formed during the Cold War. On the Russian side, two elections for the Duma and the presidency have given leaders incentive to appeal to nationalist feelings rampant after a decade of perceived humiliation.

These detours do not affect the underlying reality. Three issues dominate the political agenda: security; Iran; and the relation of Russia to its former dependents, especially Ukraine.

Because of their nuclear preponderance, Russia and America have a special obligation to take the lead on global nuclear issues such as proliferation. There have been constructive initiatives, such as greater transparency and the linking of their anti-ballistic missile defense systems facing Iran, noted in the April communiqué issued by Presidents Bush and Putin in Sochi. But the general statements have yet to be followed by a detailed exploration.

Four questions need to be answered with respect to nuclear proliferation: Do Russia and the United States agree on the nature of the challenge posed by an Iranian acquisition of nuclear weapons? Do they agree on the status of Iran's nuclear program? Do they agree on the diplomacy to avert the danger? Do they agree on what measures to take if whatever diplomacy is finally adopted fails?

My impression is that a considerable consensus is emerging between the United States and Russia regarding the first two questions. With respect to the others, both sides must keep in mind that neither is able to easily overcome the challenge alone.

The issue of Ukraine goes to the heart of both sides' perceptions of the nature of international affairs. America sees the situation in terms of overcoming a potential military threat. For Russia, the question of relations with Ukraine is, above all, about coming to terms with a painful, historic upheaval.

Genuine independence for Ukraine is essential for a peaceful international system and must be unambiguously supported by the United States. Creating close political ties between the European Union and Ukraine, including E.U. membership, is important. But the movement of the Western security system to the approaches to Moscow brings home Russia's decline in a way that is bound to generate emotions that will inhibit the solving of all other issues. With NATO accepting the principle of Ukrainian membership, there is no urgency to accelerate the implementation.

The two presidents' Sochi declaration outlined a road map for an emerging strategic dialogue between the two sides. The new administrations in Russia and America should give it operational context.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/07/07/AR2008070702218_pf.html

==============================================================

Russia: Medvedev's Whistle Stop Tour

Stratfor Today » July 3, 2008 | 1946 GMT

DMITRY ASTAKHOV/AFP/Getty Images

Russian President Dmitri Medvedev

Summary

New Russian President Dmitri Medvedev on July 3 began a short tour of Azerbaijan, Turkmenistan and Kazakhstan on his way to the July 7 G8 summit in Japan. The tour illustrates Moscow’s desire to consolidate its influence over countries that are strategically important to Russia.

Analysis

New Russian President Dmitri Medvedev set out July 3 for a tour of several former Soviet states on his way to the G8 meeting in Japan on July 7. Medvedev will stop off in Azerbaijan, Turkmenistan and Kazakhstan, three countries that have already met with the new president — some more than once — in the two short months since he took office. The tour clearly demonstrates Moscow’s move to consolidate its relationships with countries of strategic importance to Russia.

Just two weeks after taking the helm in Moscow on May 7, Medvedev made his first official foreign trip, heading east to Kazakhstan and China rather than the traditional Russian presidential voyage westward to Europe. Medvedev’s choice was a sign that Russia’s focus was not mostly on the West anymore and that Moscow was in the process of not only consolidating its relationship with Kazakhstan but also showing China that Moscow still considers Central Asia to be Russian turf.

Central Asia and Azerbaijan are strategically important to Russia for several reasons. First, they are part of Russia’s periphery that has many other large and looming powers on the other side — such as China on the other side of Central Asia and Iran on the other side of Azerbaijan. The West has also infiltrated the former Soviet regions interested in their large energy wealth. Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan each have considerable oil and natural gas supplies which are just now being significantly tapped:

• Kazakhstan is estimated (on the high end) to have 40 billion barrels of oil reserves and 3 trillion cubic meters of natural gas.
• Turkmenistan is estimated to have 3 trillion cubic meters of natural gas and some of the world’s largest natural gas fields, as well as 2-6 billion barrels of oil.
• Azerbaijan has an estimated 13 billion barrels of oil reserves and 2 trillion cubic meters of natural gas.

Russia already has Soviet-era connections in place with Turkmenistan and Kazakhstan, though these lines are aged and do not tap the greater energy wealth from these countries. Russia also has infrastructure in place with Azerbaijan, though its purpose was to supply Azerbaijan with Russian energy until 2005, since Azerbaijan’s energy reserves were unexploited until recently. But Russia is faced with large competition from the West, Middle East and China for Central Asian and Caucasus energy.

Russia currently relies on supplies from Turkmenistan and Kazakhstan to help fill its export orders in Europe. If those supplies get diverted from Russian pipelines, then Russia could not fill its orders. Moreover, Russia is seeing declining oil and natural gas production, so it is looking to Turkmenistan, Kazakhstan and Azerbaijan to make up the difference in the future. If the supplies from those three countries are diverted to either the West or China, then not only is Russia in an energy crunch, but it will lose some of its ability to use energy policy as a political tool.

This is where Medvedev is stepping in. He is looking to consolidate Moscow’s ties with Baku, Ashgabat and Astana, though each in a different way.

Medvedev has already met with Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev twice since becoming president, with energy and Azerbaijan’s security on the table. Azerbaijan has been locked into a tense disagreement with its neighbor Armenia over the secessionist region of Nagorno-Karabakh since the two countries went to war 20 years ago. With Baku’s newfound energy wealth, it has been ramping up its military and defenses — with much help from Russia. Azerbaijan also knows that Armenia is heavily reliant on Russia for political, economic and defense support — something that Baku resents. The Nagorno-Karabakh issue is one that Medvedev could exploit in the future to keep Azerbaijan open to Moscow’s wishes.

Turkmenistan has traditionally held an isolated and independent foreign policy in an attempt to keep from being under Beijing, Washington, Brussels or Moscow’s thumb. But since Ashgabat has started feeling the desire to reap the monetary benefits of its enormous energy wealth, it has been talking to each side about where to send Turkmen oil and natural gas. The problem is that Turkmenistan is signing deals with just about everyone and has not had its reserves developed enough to fill those deals. Two pipelines are already under construction — one going to Kazakhstan and then to China, and the other going to Russia. Both pipelines are expected to be completed in late 2009 without the supplies to fill both of them. Whereas Beijing is ready to front the cash to have its pipeline supplied, Russia is trying a different tactic. Russia has the cash to spend, but is forming a military relationship with its former Soviet state to help consolidate their ties.

Moscow has not yet revealed its plans for getting Kazakhstan’s energy supplies flowing into Russia. Money tends to get Kazakh President Nursultan Nazarbayev’s attention, but Russia has not yet opened its wallet. Kazakhstan and Russia have other economic ties, such as the large Kazakh population living across the border, but Astana is looking for more from Moscow now.

Medvedev’s whistle stop tour to these three countries is imperative to Russia, as Moscow wants to prove its power globally once again. Though Moscow has energy and influence, it depends on these countries to create a buffer between Russia and other world powers. Furthermore, Moscow wants to make sure these countries’ energy supplies flow only where the Kremlin wants them to go.

www.stratfor.com

=============================================

 

Celebrations in a maternity ward in Ulyanovsk last September 12. Russia introduced "Family Contact Day" that encourages

Russians to stay home and engage in some marital closeness in the hopes of producing children on Russia Day,

exactly nine months later. (Sergei Karpukhin/Reuters)

From Russia with love: A new holiday to fight population decline

By Sara Rhodin

Tuesday, July 8, 2008

MOSCOW: In a southern Moscow park, the newest romantic seating spot - courtesy of Russian officials - is a wooden bench with a back shaped like outstretched angel wings and a curved seat that encourages couples to slide closer together.

Alyona Safina, 21, who works for the youth branch of Prime Minster Vladimir Putin's United Russia party, scuttled around the park Tuesday setting up an inauguration ceremony for the "bench of reconciliation." Couples were urged to sit on the bench and work out their differences, as Safina hung tiny ribbons with the colors of the Russian flag around the rim of a nearby fountain.

It was one of a host of events throughout Russia to mark the first annual Day of Family, Love and Fidelity, a new holiday that is the government's latest attempt to stem population decline.

Last year, Putin, then the president, declared 2008 the "Year of the family." Last Sept. 12, a nationwide holiday called "Family Contact Day" encouraged Russians to stay home and engage in some marital closeness in the hopes of producing children on Russia Day, exactly nine months later on June 12.

But the new holiday takes Russia's promotion of procreation a step farther, encouraging couples not only to have children but to also to provide the children with two-parent, stable family lives. It is a sign that the new president, Dmitri Medvedev, will continue the state's move under Putin to take a more active role in promoting morality and optimism about Russia's future.

According to the Kremlin, the day is the brainchild of Svetlana Medvedev, the first lady, who has taken a much more public role than Putin's wife, Lyudmila.

The new holiday is held on the day of the Russian Orthodox saints Fevronia and Pytor. Fevronia saved Pytor from disease in exchange for the promise of marriage and the couple stayed together until the end, when they both died on the same day. In Orthodoxy, they are viewed as the prime example of happy marriage.

But unlike the joyful marriage of the saints, Russian families today are plagued with high divorce rates. Combining this with high male mortality rates, Russia has a lot of single mothers.

In Vlakhernskoye-Kuzminki park in southern Moscow, Safina, the organizer, said that growing up without fathers at home was harmful to Russian children. A girl may choose a husband like her irresponsible or absent father, she said, and a boy without a father has no role model.

"He will not know what it means to be a man," Safina said.

In honor of the new holiday, long-married couples with children have received medals. Floral displays in honor of the holiday bore titles like "I'm with Mom." Hanging from the angel wings of the new bench is a padlock, echoing a Russian tradition in which newly married couples snap locks onto bridges.

As part of the Year of the Family, the country has launched in an all-out campaign to encourage marriage and child bearing.

Signs line the escalators of Moscow's cavernous Metro system, tying families to patriotism. One billboard shows a woman holding three identical babies - looking as if three photos of the same baby have been pasted together - under the slogan "The State Needs Your Records." The state has offered financial incentives to women who have more than one child.

While some officials claim that such efforts have slowed the declining birthrate, statistics still paint a grim forecast. The population is expected to shrink nearly half a percent in 2008, a loss of about 667,000 people.

Safina, a tall, thin brunette who smoked cigarettes while she talked, added that the holiday was also meant to encourage people to have children sooner. Waiting till after age 30 to give birth can be detrimental to the physical and mental health of the child, she argued. She is not officially engaged, she said, but she and her long-term boyfriend plan to marry next summer.

http://www.iht.com/bin/printfriendly.php?id=14336445

=================================================================

Belarus considers restrictive media law

full story: http://www.cpj.org/protests/08ltrs/europe/belarus08jul08pl.html

======================================================

Lithuania sending additional troops to bolster small Afghan peacekeeping force

VILNIUS, Lithuania (AP) - Lithuania's defense ministry said Thursday it was increasing its peacekeeping force for Afghanistan sooner than planned because of the death of one soldier and the withdrawal of three others last month.
The ministry said 16 additional troops would mainly be used for improved security for 100 other Lithuanians based in the western Afghanistan province of Gohr. The extra troops were originally planned for the autumn.
«Recent events made us move faster. The total number of Lithuanian soldiers will reach 150 within several months,» said Lt. Gen. Valdas Tutkus, the commander of Lithuania's armed forces.

Sgt. Arunas Jarmalavicius, 35, was shot and killed last month during a clash with protesters, who were angered because an American sniper in Iraq used a Quran for target practice. Jarmalavicius was the first Lithuanian soldier killed in Afghanistan.
Three other soldiers withdrew from service in Afghanistan shortly after the death, and were released from war duty by Defense Minister Juozas Olekas this week.

http://www.pr-inside.com/lithuania-sending-additional-troops-to-r696348.htm

========================================================

Exports Via Baltics To End by ‘15

 

Bloomberg

MOSCOW — Russia must stop exports of oil products and coal via its Baltic Sea neighbors by 2015, Interfax reported, citing Deputy Prime Minister Sergei Ivanov, who spoke at a maritime meeting in St. Petersburg on Saturday.

Russia currently exports about 80 percent of its oil products through ports in the Baltic states, the news service quoted Transportation Minister Igor Levitin as saying at the event.

The country will have enough capacity by 2015 to send all exports from its own terminals, Levitin said.

Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, all members of the European Union, are connected to Russia by a network of communist-era pipelines. Russia is seeking to eliminate its reliance on former Soviet republics as transit countries for its oil and gas.

http://www.sptimes.ru/index.php?action_id=2&story_id=26489

======================================================

UPDATE 1-PKN eyes remaining 10 pct of Lithuanian refiner

Thu Jul 10, 2008 12:09pm EDT

(Changes dateline, adds government reaction, details)

VILNIUS, July 10 (Reuters) - Polish oil refiner PKN Orlen PKNA.WA wants to buy the 9.98 percent of Mazeikiu Nafta it does not already own from Lithuania, but the government does not plan to sell at the moment, the prime minister's advisor said on Thursday.

PKN Orlen, which controls slightly more than 90 percent of the Lithuanian refiner, is also interested in a stake in oil terminal operator Klaipedos Nafta (KNF1L.VL: Quote, Profile, Research, Stock Buzz), the government said in a statement, quoting Chief Executive Wojciech Heydel as saying at a meeting with Lithuania's Prime Minister Gediminas Kirkilas.

"PKN Orlen's CEO asked about possibility to buy the remaining shares, as they did in the past, but there are no plans to sell the shares at the moment," Mantas Nocius, the prime minister's advisor, who was present at the meeting, told Reuters. "We may consider that in the future, of course," he added.

The statement did not give a possible price for the stake.

The government also remains reluctant to sell a stake in Klaipedos.

The Polish oil group said it needed control over Klaipedos, so it can have a say over setting loading tariffs, before it starts building more than 100 million dollars worth of pipelines.

Mazeikiu said it may send its oil products via ports in neighbouring Latvia, if it does not get the control of the Klaipedos oil terminal, its main export hub to western European and the U.S. markets.

The government said a sale of Klaipedos needs parliament's approval and with only a few months left until general elections in October it was not good time to debate the issue.

However, PKN is to start consultations with Lithuanian political parties to prepare for a decision, which could be made after the elections, Reuters sources said.

Mazeikiu was hit when crude supplies via the Druzhba pipeline were cut in mid-2006, leaving the refiner to ship crude via its off-shore terminal in the Baltic Sea.

(Reporting by Nerijus Adomaitis; Editing by Erica Billingham)

http://www.reuters.com/article/rbssEnergyNews/idUSL1035978920080710

=====================================================

Business News
Lithuania threatens to torpedo Russian port plans
By DPA
Jul 9, 2008, 14:22 GMT

Vilnius - Lithuania threatened Wednesday to delay Russia's entry to the World Trade Organization and Russia's future agreements with the European Union, if Moscow gives a preferential treatment to its ports on the Baltic Sea.

'The possible segregation of the Baltic States' ports from the other ports on the Baltic Sea coastline would contradict to the WTO practices of free and fair competition,' the Lithuanian foreign ministry told Deutsche Presse-Agentur dpa on Wednesday.

'Failure to comply with the WTO practices would also affect Russia's efforts to conclude a post-PCA agreement with the EU as quickly as possible,' a statement sent to dpa said.

Last week, Russia said it wanted to start using its own Baltic Sea port of Ust-Luga to move oil and coal products by 2015. Russia has been developing the port since 1997, so that it won't have to use oil ports in the Baltic countries of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania.

'By 2015 we will have enough capacity to ship oil products through our own ports,' said Russia's Transport Minister Igor Levitin. At the moment, the Baltic ports handle around 80 per cent of Russian oil products.

Russia closed the oil pipeline to Ventspils port in 2003 and stopped shipping oil to Mazeikiu oil refinery in 2006. Last year Russia drastically cut the volume of oil shipped through Port of Tallinn's Muuga port.

'We have.. a task to completely discontinue oil and coal exports through the Baltic States and increase the capacity of doing it through our ports,' Russian Deputy Prime Minister Ivanov was quoted as saying during the naval issues board session of Russian government in St Petersburg.

http://www.monstersandcritics.com/news/business/news/article_1415967.php/Lithuania_threatens_to_torpedo_Russian_port_plans

===========================================================

Russian-German Baltic gas link delayed to late 2011

Wed Jul 9, 2008 10:49am EDT

MOSCOW, July 9 (Reuters) - The Russian-German gas consortium building the Nord Stream gas pipeline will delay first fuel deliveries by a few months to late 2011 due to new ecological studies requested by the states involved.

"We are not giving an exact month but it will start in the second half of 2011. The slight adjustment is due to the fact that countries involved are raising new requests," said Nord Stream's spokeswoman Irina Vasiliyeva.

European Union lawmakers demanded on Tuesday a full assessment of potential environmental damage from a planned pipeline to pump Russian gas under the Baltic Sea to Germany.

The pipeline, which will eventually pump 55 billion cubic metres of gas to Europe annually, had been initially due to start in 2010 but last year adjusted the deadline to early 2011.

(Reporting by Dmitry Zhdannikov; editing by Amie Ferris-Rotman)

http://www.reuters.com/article/rbssEnergyNews/idUSL0946492320080709

==========================================================

 

Lithuanian soldiers discharged

Jul 09, 2008
Staff and wire reports

VILNIUS – Out of the three Lithuanian soldiers serving in Afghanistan, two have chosen to cut there mission short and have been discharged from the service. This decision is in concurrence with a decree by Defense Minister Juozas Olekas, with the decision regarding the third soldier's fate still pending.

Chief of Defense of the Lithuanian Armed Forces Lieutenant General Valdas Tutkus noted that a proposal was made to the defense minister to discontinue military service contracts with the soldiers in question. Two of the officers, Tutkus said, are already fired, with the third currently on the sick-list, and his case will be decided upon his return to service.

"I recommended removing them from service. Those, who are incapable of adequate reactions to challenges arising during service, are not meant for the military. There are plenty of other professions", Tutkus said.

Olekas signed a degree Tuesday on the discontinuation of professional military service contracts with sergeant Nerijus Gylius and corporal Svajunas Zaparackas. The case of Sergeant First Class Nerijus Klimavicius will be decided when he returns to service after recovering from his illness, the Defense Ministry said in a release.

According to the release, the soldiers were dismissed in accordance with organization of the National Defense System of the Republic of Lithuania and the Military Service Law as well as conclusions of the official investigation launched over disobeying a legitimate decree.

The soldiers announced their decision to discontinue their mission in Afghanistan following an open fire attack on the Lithuanian-led Provincial Reconstruction Team (PRT) camp, in the Ghor province, leaving army sergeant Arunas Jarmalavicius fatally injured.

There are approximately 130 Lithuanian soldiers currently serving in Ghor, with the PRT joining another 50 soldiers from Denmark, Croatia, Georgia, the US and Ukraine.

Lithuania has been heading a PRT since 2005. The main goal of the PRT is to help Afghan authorities expand influence in the province, warrant security and form suitable conditions for reconstructing the province.

http://www.baltictimes.com/news/articles/20787/

======================================================

Cemetery survey complete

Jul 04, 2008
By Mike Collier

VILNIUS - Geophysicists have completed an exhaustive survey of the controversial Šnipiškės Jewish cemetery site, according to a release from the Lithuanian Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

On 3 July, Vice-Minister Jaroslavas Neverovičius received head of Israeli geophysics Arieh Klein, who informed him about the successful course of the geophysical research in the former cemetery in Šnipiškės.

The geophysical research was carried out by an Israeli company, Geotec, working with the Lithuanian Geological Survey. The research started on 25 June and was finished on 4 July. The research was financed by Lithuanian taxpayers at a cost of more than 100,000 euros.

Results of the research will be made public by Geotec after analysis in Israel.

Seeking to identify the boundaries of the cemetery in Šnipiškės as precisely as possible, the geophysical research will be complemented by archaeological digging, which will be carried out by archaeologists, invited by the Department of Cultural Heritage Protection under the Ministry of Culture. Rabbis, delegated by the Committee for the Preservation of Jewish Cemeteries in Europe, will supervise the digging.

It is intended that in the middle of August, Geotec will consider results of the geophysical and archaeological research and will submit their conclusions regarding the boundaries of the cemetery in Šnipiškės to Lithuanian Geological Survey, which signed an agreement with Geotec back in May on the works, as commissioned by the Government of Lithuania.

http://www.baltictimes.com/news/articles/20774/

================================================================

 

Estonian drug traffickers caught

Jul 08, 2008
In cooperation with BNS

TALLINN - Three Estonian drug traffickers of an international drug ring were detained in Spain.

The Foreign Ministry spokeswoman told the Baltic News Service that the drug traffickers were detained in Cadiz in the southwest of the country.

The news agency linked the three Estonians with a gang of international drug criminals suspected of the smuggling of a large amount of cocaine from Latin America.

According to the Foreign Ministry 104 persons of Estonian ethnicity have been caught trafficking drugs from 2006 up to the present.

The biggest number of Estonian drug traffickers have been detained in Finland: 42 and a total of 28 drug Estonian traffickers have been caught in Latin America since 2006.

The Estonian Central Criminal Police also have a certain role in detaining many Estonian traffickers in foreign countries. According to Veiko Germann, head of the drug squad, Estonian drug traffickers are mainly irresponsible, uneducated young people.

http://www.baltictimes.com/news/articles/20780/

=============================================================

Latvian inmates- most with medical disorders

Jul 09, 2008
In cooperation with BNS

RIGA - In 2007, most inmates in Latvian jails were diagnosed with mental or behavioral disorders, corresponding to the increase in the number of prisoners serving lengthy jail terms.

A report by the Latvian Prison Administration shows that last year's medical checks revealed mental and behavioral disorders in 4,113 inmates, up from 3,582 inmates diagnosed in 2006.

The most widespread disorder was an inadequate response to reprimands and warnings.

Medics diagnosed 1,056 inmates with drug addiction and found tuberculosis in 47 inmates.

The prison authority notes that the number of drug users has not been decreasing in jails and that inmates constantly try to access forbidden substances.

The number of suicides in Latvian jails dropped from seven in 2007 to six in 2006, the report says.

Last year, 976 inmates were characterized as especially dangerous, including 206 people with a tendency to escape, 116 people with a tendency to assault staff, 101 suicidal people and 24 the so called "prison bosses".

The number of inmates serving long jail terms increased in 2007, as 1,854 people were jailed for five to ten years, and 573 for 10-20 years.

Last year, 6,548 people were serving their terms in Latvian jails, and their number has remained roughly the same this year.

Prison Administration head Visvaldis Pukite told The Baltic News Servicethat most inmates with mental or behavioral disorders acquired them outside of jail. Despite material difficulties, the Prison Administration wants to provide at least two psychologists for each jail. They will also try to ensure the social reintegration of former inmates when they are released.

http://www.baltictimes.com/news/articles/20786/

============================================

By David S. Broder
Thursday, July 3, 2008; A17

Washington Post

Just in time for Independence Day, a conservative think tank has delivered a controversial report asking whether America's national identity is eroding under the pressure of population diversity and educational slackness.

The threat outlined by the Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation in its report, "E Pluribus Unum," strikes me as a bit exaggerated. But with Barack Obama and John McCain debating the "patriotism issue," having a coherent discussion of this matter -- and this short pamphlet is admirably written and well-researched -- is a useful contribution.

The takeoff point for the argument is an observation about the uniqueness of America that was made by Thomas Jefferson -- and by myriad other worthies in the centuries since. They all have drawn attention to the fact that the national identity of America, unlike that of other countries, rests "not on a common ethnicity, but on a set of ideas."

And so, the Bradley scholars say, "knowing what America stands for is not a genetic inheritance. It must be learned, both by the next generation and by those who come to this country. In this way, a nation founded on an idea is inherently fragile."

The ideas that define this country are found in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, as amplified by Supreme Court decisions and statutes in subsequent years. Those ideas have been tested in crisis and in war, and the leaders who steered the nation through those testing times are the heroes whose legacy we celebrate -- Washington, Lincoln, the two Roosevelts.

What disturbs the Bradley scholars is evidence that our generation is failing to educate the next one on the essentials of the American experiment. "On the 2006 National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) Civics Test," the report notes, "the majority of eighth graders could not explain the purpose of the Declaration of Independence. Only 5 percent of seniors could accurately describe the way presidential power can be checked by Congress and the Supreme Court." The authors also decry the fact that most colleges and universities allow students to graduate without ever taking a comprehensive course in American history and government.

On this point, I think they have plenty of company -- all across the political spectrum. But they have many other criticisms and a variety of suggestions. Some are trivial, such as scrapping Presidents' Day and bringing back Washington's and Lincoln's birthday holidays. Others are far-reaching and controversial, such as telling all colleges and universities to open their campuses to the ROTC.

When it comes to the treatment of immigrants, the Bradley team sees a real threat in such things as multilingual ballots and bilingual classes. Such accommodations to the growing diversity of the population could lead to "many Americas, or even no America at all," they maintain. "Historical ignorance, civic neglect and social fragmentation might achieve what a foreign invader could not."

That degree of pessimism seems unwarranted. The authorities quoted in this report, most of them drawn from conservative academia, manage to overlook the evidence that there is still plenty of vitality in the American system.

Young people may not know the Constitution as well as we would like, but they found their way to polling places in record numbers this year and joined enthusiastically in many campaigns. And they volunteer for all kinds of good works in their communities.

I have not worried about the fundamental commitment of the American people since 1974. In that year, they were confronted with the stunning evidence that their president had conducted a criminal conspiracy out of the Oval Office. In response, the American people reminded Richard Nixon, the man they had just recently reelected overwhelmingly, that in this country, no one, not even the president, is above the law. They required him to yield his office.

That is not the sign of a nation that has lost its sense of values or forgotten the principles on which this system rests. And that is something worth celebrating on more than the Fourth of July.

davidbroder@washpost.com

The Enemy Detainee Mess
July 3, 2008; Page A10

Wall Street Journal

Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy has departed for summer vacation, but what a mess he's left behind, especially for the U.S. military. His 5-4 decision requiring habeas corpus review for foreign terrorists is already creating confusion and problems about how to handle these dangerous enemies.

The Bush Administration is currently debating how to respond to Mr. Kennedy's war-fighting ukase in Boumediene v. Bush, with President Bush set to make a decision soon. Some in the Administration want Mr. Bush to abolish not merely Guantanamo but even military commissions, the special tribunals set up to try Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and others for their war crimes. This would compound the mistake of Boumediene, and do away with what has long been a useful tool of military justice.

It is already clear to nearly everyone in the Administration that it will be impossible for the U.S. to hold most detainees from now on. That's true not merely at Gitmo, but even in Afghanistan, Iraq and other foreign battlefields. Earlier this month, lawyers filed a lawsuit on behalf of a detainee held at the U.S. military prison at Bagram air base near Kabul. It's only a matter of time before suits are filed demanding habeas writs for anyone captured and held by GIs for any length of time anywhere in the world.

Regrettably, the Administration will now have to let most enemy fighters go. The burden of gathering enough evidence to meet the habeas standards of U.S. federal courts is simply too great under battlefield conditions – and in any case is far too dangerous. This week a panel of the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals rejected the enemy combatant status of a Gitmo detainee captured after training in al Qaeda camps in Afghanistan. The press has reported this as if the Bush Administration had invented a case against an innocent shepherd. But the truth is that in the fog of battle it is impossible to gather evidence the way a Manhattan cop can. There's no "CSI: Kandahar."

While GIs gathered shell casings or interviewed witnesses to meet a U.S. judge's habeas standard, they would leave themselves open to counterattack or sniper fire. No commander – and no Commander in Chief – can ask his troops to put themselves in danger to satisfy Justice Kennedy's legal afflatus. This is what Justice Antonin Scalia meant when he wrote that Americans will die as a result of Boumediene.

Justice Kennedy won't want to hear this, but this means that some enemy combatants will be shot on the battlefield rather than captured. Most who are captured will be interrogated for a brief time and released. Some will be set free entirely, while others will be handed over to the tender mercies of our allies on the ground in Iraq or Afghanistan.

The U.S. will still require some kind of detention for the worst combatants – such as KSM, and others we will want to put on trial. But if Gitmo is no longer a prison, some U.S. domestic prison will have to house these men while they await a habeas hearing and trial. If a habeas court finds the evidence against them unpersuasive, they can then be held only for six months under immigration law before they are deported. If no country will accept them, the possibility exists that they will be released here. It will be fascinating to watch the Congressfolk who cheered Boumediene now saying "not in my backyard." What does Pat Leahy think about a Vermont destination?

That still leaves the issue of trials for those who are found to be enemy combatants. The State Department is arguing that Mr. Bush should now cashier the entire post-9/11 system, including Gitmo and military commissions. The argument is that the U.S. will get no diplomatic benefit from refusing to hold future detainees as long as the commissions continue. In any case, State's legal sages say, the Supreme Court will eventually declare military commissions unconstitutional too.

But we doubt even Justice Kennedy would disallow commissions, which have existed throughout American history. After the Civil War, they were even used against the KKK's attempts to defeat Reconstruction of the South. After six long years, about 20 enemy combatants (including KSM) are now set for the tribunals, and multiple trials are under way. If Mr. Bush shuts down the commissions at this late date, the military justice process would have to start over.

It would insult the 9/11 families if justice for KSM and the others who planned those attacks is delayed once again. Assuming they are convicted, they will have the right of appeal. But would five Supreme Court Justices really set free the men who plotted the murders of 3,000 Americans? As for diplomacy, those who dislike America won't bother to distinguish between military commissions and courts martial. They'll find any military trials unfair.

The killers of 9/11 need to be put on trial, and soon. Americans need to hear them revel in their jihad, boasting that they would kill again if they get the chance. Justice Kennedy needs to hear it too.

U.S., Poland strike missile deal while Russia objects

• Story Highlights
• Tentative deal made to place part of a ballistic missile defense system in Poland
  
• Poland's political establishment still has to sign off on the agreement
  
• Anti-missile system may blunt Russia's nuclear deterrent
  
• U.S. says system's intent is to protect Europe from possible Mideast attack
  

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The United States and Poland have reached a tentative deal to place part of a ballistic missile defense system on its territory, a plan that has drawn sharp objections from Russia, a senior administration official said Wednesday.

Poland's political establishment still has to sign off on the deal and determine the next steps, the official said.

The agreement came after several days of negotiations and less than a week before a planned visit by U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Defense Secretary Robert Gates.

The Bush administration has long pushed to base missile interceptors in Poland. The interceptor rockets would be linked to an air-defense radar system in the Czech Republic, where officials agreed in April to take part in the system.

The interceptors in the Czech Republic could identify and shoot down missiles fired by Iran at Europe or the United States. Russia fervently opposes basing the interceptors right across its border and says the system's real target would be Russian missiles, according to Time magazine.

The Czech Republic and Poland are former Soviet satellites, now members of the U.S.-led NATO alliance.

The United States has said the system is intended to defend Europe from a possible missile attack from the Middle East.

There was no immediate response from Moscow about the deal. But Assistant Secretary of State Dan Fried said the United States has taken to heart Polish concerns over more U.S. cooperation with Russia and NATO on the missile defense shield.

The United States has also agreed to help Poland modernize its military, which it requested as a condition of its support for housing the missile defense system.

Fried told reporters earlier that Polish negotiators were tough and came to the table with "serious suggestions and positions," but that the U.S. was "quite satisfied" with the status of the negotiations.

Fried called Poland a "magnificent ally" who has sent troops to Iraq and Afghanistan. He said the talks have been "strenuous" but that the United States understood that this was important to Poland.

http://edition.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/europe/07/02/missile.defense.poland/

=============================================================

Secret Russian weapons stash found near border

The depot contained two "Osa" type missiles and a 76mm bomb at the site near Liinakhamary, just three kilometers (less than two miles) from the Russian-Norwegian border. Electronic detonators were also said to have been found at the site.

The weapons, according to BarentsObserver.com’s version of a Russian report on Russian web site Newsru.com,were found on Tuesday and were destroyed by the Federal Security service of the Russian Federation (FSB). The FSB is responsible for internal security within Russia, including border security.

FSB officials in Murmansk told Newsru.com that they did not know why the missiles were on the site or who put them there. An investigation was underway.

The Osa guided missiles have been produced since the early 1960s. A Norwegian military spokesman said the missiles probably came from a naval base in the area that was shut down a few years ago.

"This is really a maritime weapon, probably used on several of their vessels at the naval base," said Kjetil Eide of the military.

Others at the military research institute FFI criticized the apparent lack of control over weapons, especially near the border. "Missiles shouldn't just be left lying around" said Jan Erik Torp told Aftenposten.no, but he added that the discovery wasn't all that dramatic.

"This is probably old equipment, and unusable," Torp said. He said the OSA missile found had a range of only 15 kilometers and was "very ordinary."

BarentsObserver.com describes itself as "an open Internet news service," offering daily updated news from and about the Barents Region. The project is run by the Norwegian Barents Secretariat in Kirkenes, which long has been affiliated with the Norwegian Foreign Ministry and has invested nearly NOK 350 million in the region since 1993, through more than 3,000 grants and cooperating programs.

The Barents Secretariat is now run by the Norwegian counties of Finnmark, Troms and Nordland.

Aftenposten English Web Desk
Nina Berglund

http://www.aftenposten.no/english/local/article2520028.ece?service=print

==========================================================

Medvedev: Russia is not leaving the G-8

By JIM HEINTZ – 8 hours ago

MOSCOW (AP) — Russian President Dmitry Medvedev says suggestions that the country be thrown out of the Group of Eight can't be taken seriously.

Sen. John McCain, the Republican Party's presidential candidate, has called for Russia to be booted from the group of the world's eight leading industrialized democracies.

But Medvedev said: "It's completely obvious that any kind of thesis about the exclusion of Russia appears simply unserious. The world 'eight' exists not because someone likes it or dislikes it, but because it is objectively the largest economies and the most serious in terms of foreign politics."

Medvedev spoke to G-8 media representatives ahead of next week's summit in Japan. The interview transcript was released by the Kremlin on Thursday.

The trip comes two months after Medvedev was inaugurated, replacing Vladimir Putin who is now prime minister. Yet with Putin remaining in a powerful position, there is wide uncertainty about who is running the country.

In the interview, Medvedev also reiterated his determination to fight Russia's endemic corruption, which he has made the focus of his first months in office. On Wednesday, he outlined an ambitious plan to combat corruption, which he said has become a "way of life" in Russia.

Medvedev said the plan includes tougher criminal punishment for corrupt officials, more rigid requirements for civil servants and judges and stronger controls by civil society. He said the new legislation must be in place by next year.

Combating graft should be a "matter of honor" for the government, he said.

The Russian president also said he will continue the policies established by Putin over the past eight years, but indicated he will aim for a different style than his often caustic and confrontational predecessor.

"The accents in domestic and foreign politics certainly will change. ... Every politician, every president, has his own style. Otherwise, people wouldn't be able to tell them apart and it would be boring," he told the journalists.

One of the strongest international criticisms of Russia under Putin — and the core of McCain's belief that Russia should be out of the G-8 — is that the Kremlin has stifled opposition and democracy.

Medvedev said he supports competitive politics, "but it must be rational. This is competition built on the basis of law."

"The system that was built on one party having the right to truth showed its weakness 20 years ago," he said, referring to deterioration of the Soviet Union.

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hoRKoGZKUyZZz5XiKjqWI41LqJDgD91M9J4O0

=======================================================