Obama's Consensus Diplomacy Put to the Test

By Fyodor Lukyanov

 

Following U.S. President Barack Obama's visit to Russia, most political commentators focused on two themes: the fact that nuclear arms reductions have returned to the agenda and the problem of democracy in Russia. In both areas, Obama performed a political balancing act that was nothing short of miraculous.

 

Disarmament experts are having a heyday because their skills are once again in demand, and the summit negotiations recall the time when disarmament issues were the focal point of U.S.-Russian relations. But this era has passed, never to return.

 

The huge nuclear arsenals held by both countries still remain a symbol of their superpower status. It is therefore not surprising that conservatives on both sides of the ocean claimed that even the modest reductions proposed were a threat to national security. But the nuclear parity between the United States and Russia serves more of a political than a military function. Reductions in the number of weapons have more impact on national prestige than they do on national security. And because even the most diehard hawks in both countries do not consider nuclear war to be a serious possibility, negotiations over nuclear weapons have become an auxiliary tool for resolving more pressing issues.

 

An agreement on nuclear arms reductions could kick-start stalled U.S.-Russian cooperation on a number of other nonrelated issues. At least, that is what Moscow hopes. Obama is hoping that reductions in nuclear arsenals will give a big boost to his larger goal of global nuclear disarmament.

 

But chances are slim that either side's hopes will be realized. An agreement would, of course, improve the overall climate, but that success probably would not extend to other areas. As for those countries that have already obtained nuclear weapons "illegally" or are striving to do so, they do not see any link between their own situations and the actions of the United States and Russia. As a rule, Iran, North Korea, Israel, India and Pakistan all want "the bomb" to control regional conflicts. Only a resolution of those conflicts would convince them to give up their nuclear ambitions, not the example set by Moscow and Washington.

 

U.S. advocates of an ideology-based foreign policy — from neoconservatives to liberal interventionists — accuse Obama of betraying certain ideals. They believe that he should dictate terms to Moscow, laying out how it must change if it wants to be a partner with Washington. The demands of the "moralists" reflect a long and extensive tradition in U.S. political thought, but they are at odds with the prevailing reality. In the 21st century, ideology will not be the driving force behind world politics. Ideology had its hour of triumph in the last century, but that time has passed.

 

Of course, a classic rivalry between the world's largest powers dominated the 20th century. But from the moment World War I ended until the collapse of the Soviet Union, ideology determined not only the form, but also the substance of that rivalry to a large degree. In addition to the 20th-century's two totalitarian ideologies of communism and Nazism, liberal ideology also played a key role. Former U.S. President Woodrow Wilson's model of internationalism was the first to promote that liberal ideology in the world arena, and after various advances and setbacks, it reemerged toward the end of the 20th century under the watchword of a "new world order." Former U.S. President George W. Bush's attempts at "promoting democracy" proved to be both the culmination and the undoing of the liberal ideology. The conviction that the imbalance in the global system could be restored by forcefully imposing social and political structures on "problem countries" led U.S. foreign policy into a dead end.

 

The much talked-about multipolar composition of today's world is not an abstract model proposed by Washington's rivals and detractors in Moscow and Paris. A significant number of players of varying caliber and quality have appeared on the global stage, each influencing the course of events in different ways. Compared to the Cold War era, when the standoff between the two superpowers gave them complete dominance in international affairs, the influence of the remaining players is now much greater than before. What's more, the United States does not have the power to make them toe the official Washington line.

 

Obama's new approach — the willingness to take others' views into account, reliance on international institutions and "consensus diplomacy" — does not yet constitute a new foreign policy, but is merely a wish list. Nobody knows whether those methods will work, just as it remains unclear whether the economic measures taken by his administration will produce the desired effect.

 

The main geopolitical tools of the 20th century — nuclear weapons and ideology — are losing their former value. The new priority is to maintain a complex balance between multiple states. But it is first necessary to understand the interests that drive numerous regional conflicts. Solving those conflicts would represent a greater success than formulating approaches to resolving global issues. That is why the main result of Obama's Moscow visit was the agreement on the transportation of U.S. military freight to Afghanistan through Russian airspace.

 

Obama's visit was probably more of a trial run than anything else. It is no accident that both sides purposely avoided the thorniest and most divisive bilateral issues, preferring to focus on secondary questions on which they could reach agreement easily.

 

Speaking about the end of the Cold War in his speech to the New Economic School, Obama said, "Now, make no mistake: This change did not come from any one nation. The Cold War reached a conclusion because of the actions of many nations over many years, and because the people of Russia and Eastern Europe stood up and decided that its end would be peaceful." That statement elicited fury from U.S. neoconservatives, who accused him of distorting history. Until now, nobody in the United States doubted that their country was the unequivocal winner in the Cold War. The claim that other countries or forces played a role is revolutionary, and, as we see, offensive to many in the United States.

 

I can recommend to the aggrieved parties that they adopt the Russian solution: Just like the Russian government -- thanks to the determined efforts of President Dmitry Medvedev -- is now legally and politically equipped to investigate attempts to falsify the results of World War II, the U.S. government can create its own commission and focus on alleged falsifications of the Cold War. For the most ideological-driven segment of the U.S. establishment, it will turn out no worse than it has for their Russian counterparts.

 

Fyodor Lukyanov is editor of Russia in Global Affairs.

Russia's interests in Central Asia are important, but the region deserves multiple partnership opportunities

 

Russia's interests in Central Asia are important, but the region deserves multiple partnership opportunities – Richard Boucher

 

The United States recognizes Russia's important interests in Central Asia, but would like the region's states to have numerous partners, U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for South and Central Asian Affairs Richard Boucher told Interfax.

 

"We certainly recognize that Russia has very important interests in this region. Russia is a very important partner for these countries. But they deserve all the opportunities: the opportunities of Russia, Europe, China, India, Pakistan and the United States. And, frankly, my counterparts here [in Russia] put it the same way I do," he said.

 

 "We need to help them have their independence secure and to have their own sovereign choices," he said.

 

"We are also not in competition with any other country there," he said.

 

"We all need to stop the drug flow and the terrorism. We all need to develop their economic choices. So whatever we do, or Russia does, or Europe does, is good for us all," he said.

 

Central Asian countries need to diversify opportunities for their oil and gas exports, Boucher said.

 

"We need multiple routes for the export of oil and gas. So we would like to see the expansion of pipelines through Russia, welcome pipelines to China and look for ways of hooking up to other pipelines to Europe. We are supporting efforts to export electricity to Pakistan. They need multiple routes, multiple options and multiple choices," he said.

 

Boucher said that the U.S. intended to increase its involvement in energy projects and field delivery in the Caspian region. "But only a small piece of that is for government. We can help to do the feasibility studies, but in the end it will be countries and companies, who make the decisions about which projects to do and which not to do. And as we see on most of these projects there are many international bidders and sometimes Americans win and sometimes it's others," he said.

 

Commenting on whether the U.S. was interested in promoting oil and gas export from Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan, he said: "These countries deserve the opportunity for investment, the opportunity to export and to get world prices for their oil and gas."
 North Korea's latest nuclear test is "a provocative act", which calls for a response from the international community, Boucher said.

 

The White House has made it absolutely clear that it was a provocative act, which runs counter to the aspirations of the whole of the international community, Boucher said, adding that measures will have to be taken within the United Nations.

 

The high-ranking diplomat also described the underground test as a dangerous step.
 U.S. President George W. Bush has already contacted his counterparts from all nations involved in the search for a solution to the impasse over North Korea's nuclear program, he said.

 

Representatives of five of the countries involved are discussing the issue now, Boucher said. If one takes a look at remarks made in these countries, one can see that they have a lot in common, the diplomat said. All countries unanimously denounced the test, he added.

 

The step by the North Korean authorities comes as a great disappointment for the Korean people because more interesting possibilities of cooperation with the rest of the world were offered to them, Boucher said.

 

International efforts to catch Osama Bin Laden will succeed, he said.
 "We'll get Bin Laden some day," he said. However, "we have to keep after the entire network, the entire structure," he said.

 

"If I knew where he was, we would get him. If the Afghans and the Pakistanis knew where he was, they would get him too," he said.

 

Boucher confirmed that Bin Laden is believed to be hiding somewhere in the border region between Afghanistan and Pakistan.

 

Commenting on the fight against drug trafficking in Afghanistan, he said: "We think that the anti-drug effort has been better this year than last."

 

Opportunities for cooperation between the United States and Uzbekistan still exist, Boucher said.

 

Commenting on how bilateral relations are developing after the withdrawal of the U.S. military base from Uzbekistan, he said: "I think that we still have a basis for cooperation with Uzbekistan. During my trip there we identified common interests - security areas, economic areas and even political and democratic development."

 

"Uzbekistan is a very difficult place to get anything done. They close down companies and local organizations. Making this cooperation real has been very difficult," he said.

 

"So we will continue to press them to do what is necessary for real cooperation and what is necessary to respect your population and to cooperate with your neighbors. But, how far this goes, will depend on the government of Uzbekistan," he said.

Money Out Of Spies

Initially, cases of the "scientists-spies" were useful for the career promotion by FSB officers. And later they learnt to get net profits out of it.

 

Andrei Soldatov, Irina Borogan

 

"Spy cases" are one of the signs of the Putin's epoch. Seeing the examples of journalist Pasko's case and diplomat Moiseev's case, the FSB high ranking officers and foot soldiers realized quickly that such cases could be a great career promotion for them. As a result, the real system was created for organizing such cases, which has been used during last ten years. Today, however, priorities have been shifted from getting the new posts to sharing out the property. Respectively, the system was transformed: those steamrollered got to be suspected not of espionage, but of illegal export of technologies and of economic crimes. Now the persons accused of being involved were directors of the research institutes with large budgets and profitable international contracts.

 

Beginning of the spy passions

 

Criminal case of a military journalist Grigory Pasko from the city of Vladivostok was the first swallow in 1997. As Mr. Pasko collaborated with a Japanese TV station and got his fees from the foreigners, he was an easy target for espionage accusations. A loud case was urgently needed by UFSB of Pacific Ocean Fleet headed by the late German Ugryumov. It was needed to distract attention from the scandals related to selling our aircraft carriers abroad with knockdown prices.

 

The outcomes of that legal persecution surpassed expectations: Pasko was put behind the bars while German Ugryumov got promotion and a post in Moscow where he became the deputy director FSB and headed the counter-terrorism department.

 

Less ranking officers from that case were promoted too, like Alexander Egorkin, who was the head of the investigative group. Afterwards, he followed his high ranking patrons and was moved to Moscow either, where he headed the military counter-intelligence division at the FSB Investigative Department.

 

So estimating the career development by Mr. Ugryumov, the special officers from Primorye Territory were the first to realize that the spy trials are a really worthy thing.

 

In the late 90's the city of Vladivostok became the leader in terms of catching the imaginary spies. In July 1999 searched were the apartment and the laboratory of the oceanologist professor Vladimir Soifer. That was justified with the grounding that his ecological research posed a real threat for the country's security. Having frayed professor's nerves greatly, the case was dismissed finally only due to an amnesty, in spite of the fact no crime had been found in the act. The professor did not give up and appealed the amnesty. In May 2001 the UFSB for Primorye Territory had to dismiss the case. But by that time the man, who initiated the case, that-time head of UFSB for Prymorye Territory, Verevkin-Rakhalsky, had moved to Moscow and he retired in 2005 from the post of the head of the Federal Service for economic and tax crimes having reached the rank of Lieutenant General.

 

Naturally, the career progress by the counter-intelligence officers from Vladivostok were noticed by their colleagues in Moscow and the spy passions began to run high. The case of Valentin Moiseev, former deputy director of the First Foreign Ministry Department for Asian countries, helped the investigators from the "spy" division of the investigative department of FSB to become the heads of the whole department.

 

Moiseev was accused of passing the secret materials to the South Korean intelligence service. The evidence was so poor that 5 judges had to be changed during the trial, as they failed to deliver the "right" sentence. Finally, the Supreme Court canceled the sentence of the Moscow court – that was 12 years of prison – and the term was reduced to three times as little.

 

The choice of investigators on the Moiseev's case caused scandals too. One of them turned out to be the son of that-time director of the Lefortovo Prison where Moiseev was kept. Other investigator, Yuri Plotnikov, took part in investigation of the Edmond Pope case, who was charged with espionage, while his father Oleg Plotnikov, was the prosecutor at the court proceedings. Both investigators got promotion after Moiseev's case was over.

 

Nikolai Oleshko, that-time head of the "spy" division in the investigative department FSB, who headed the investigative group on the Moiseev's case, turned out to be the main beneficiary of the trial done. He has the reputation of the master of falsification of the "spy" cases, which secured him brilliant promotion, despite the fact that people accused by him were rehabilitated after 20 years. In 2003 he reached the position of the deputy head of the Investigative Department of FSB. In 2003 he headed that department and up to the date he keeps that post in spite of his venerable age.

 

The system of control and managing

 

Having gone up the career ladder, the "spy hunters" began to adjust the system for themselves.

 

By 2004 Nikolai Oleshko had managed to change the system of investigation the spy cases all over the country and put his own people in control over such investigations.

 

Investigative department of FSB is one of the most important sections of this special service. It investigates all the criminal cases within the competence of FSB and so it is responsible for most loud trials in the country. The structure of this department practically repeats that of the whole central FSB apparatus consisting of divisions of counter-intelligence, economic security, struggle against terrorism etc.

 

Along with that, all the regional branches of FSB are featured with their own investigative divisions that used to be supervised by special 4th Department. Nikolai Oleshko, using his connections with the FSB deputy director Vyacheslav Ushakov, managed to convince the leadership of FSB to put his "spy" department in charge of all the regional branches. That increased the significance of the department and the importance of the "spy" area within the organization.

 

Probably, that was done to avoid the failures like those that happened during trials on the Danilov's case and Sutyagin's case.

 

Transformation of the system: forget the espionage

 

Finally, the scandals accompanying each "spy" trial made FSB look for solution to the side effects problem. FSB found out that it was better to give up the Articles from Criminal Code for espionage and state secret divulging. The charges of economic crimes were used instead, which gave even more preferences. The new technology was tried in the case of the director of Institute of the problems of superplasticity of metals, Oscar Kaibyshev, who attracted FSB attention in 2005. Initially, the 65-year-old scientist was charged with state secret divulging, but then his colleagues, academic community, journalists and the general public stood for him with a loud campaign.

 

Soon, however, the state secret article disappeared from the Kaibyshev's case, being replaced with the one dealing with commercial illegal schemes and export of the double-purpose technologies. In August 2006 Mr. Kaibyshev was sentenced for 6 years on parole, while FSB took that "useful" experience into account.

 

In October 2005 the Lefortovo inter-district court gave sanction for arrest of the academician Igor Reshetin, general director of TsNIIMASh-Export, his first deputy for economic matters Sergei Tverdokhlebov and his deputy for security matters Alexander Rozhkin. FSB investigators did not accuse them of espionage or state secret divulging. Instead they got charged with embezzlement and violations of the export control rules. Later they were accused of passing the double-purpose technology to China and of smuggling.

 

In December 2007 the court delivered the sentence and the accused got 5-11 years of prison. A few days later a letter by one of the convicted was published saying that "If our director had agreed for dialog with the law enforcement bodies, there would have been no terrible consequences, while his personal position and that by his firm would have strengthened in the market of the space technologies. The firm would have got protection presented by the economic security service of FSB". FSB did not prevent publishing of that letter probably hoping that the future involved persons would take that advice into consideration.

 

That way the system of organizing similar trials was completed.

 

Published in Novaya gazeta 16.04.08

How Great Britain Struggles With Russian Mafia

Andrei Soldatov

While films telling about Russian mafia were being shot and Russian businessman Mikhailov was being kept behind bars in Switzerland and some Russian citizens were buying up the gambling business in Spain, Great Britain remained a quiet place. Russian mafia did not make any shooting there, as the London City was chosen by the criminal as the place for financial laundering. It wouldn't be correct saying that British did not know what they were dealing with. And yet there is no ground to say they managed to invent the adequate response.

Several agencies were engaged in struggle with mafia in Great Britain in the mid-90's: those were several structures in the police, including the National Criminal Intelligence Service, and Scotland Yard. Besides, there was D7 in the counter-intelligence service, dedicated to organized crime. And the MI6 intelligence service organized the Drug Division in the late 80's.

The reason for participation by special services in the struggle with mafia was rather clear. After the cold war was over and the truce happened about the Irish Republican Army the special services needed to find new ways of being applied. It's then that MI6 invented a specific field of activities like aid given to Columbian government in its fighting against local drug barons. Similar way was followed by MI5 that tried to deal with a new threat posed by Chechen criminal groups activities. However, in 1993 they missed the murder of two Chechen brothers – Ruslan and Nazarbek Guziev – one of which was the informer for MI5. That failure aggravated relations between the police and the counter-intelligence service.

After 11/9 MI6 was allowed to deal only with Columbia and MI5 also was reduced its activities.

I arranged a meeting with an operative officer from MI5 in one of the expensive London hotels where I was brought in a roundabout way so that I cannot remember it.

A: We must secure the national safety for Great Britain. I promise that I shall not tell anyone about this meeting as it may be misinterpreted.

Q: Well, I'm a journalist and I'm not interested in these games. I only would like to know how you struggle with Russian organized crime today.

A: We are not engaged in that any longer.

Q: But you are responsible for the national safety, and this is part of the problem. At least till recently you have had a special department for struggle with organized crime.

A: Yes, we had some period in the mid-90's when it became clear that the Irish terrorism was going down, and so it was decided to get to deal with organized crime. However, several years ago MI5 was redirected to terrorism. And at the time being significant resources of MI5 are spent on counter-intelligence from Russia, as the level of espionage by Russia was recognized to be inadmissible.

Q: Is it that the number of spies has increased in the Russian embassy?

A: The problem is not that now there are more spies in the embassy. The problem is that this number is not getting reduced. As for organized crime, that's not our business anymore.

Such a statement is quite explicable. In 2006 the British government formed a new special service inside Home Office, that's the Serious Organized Crime Agency, or SOCA. It was made on the basis of several police divisions and was set a task of struggle with mafia, including the Russian one.

New low enforcement agency

However, SOCA failed to get to Russian organized crime. The new agency proved unlucky from the beginning. First of all, all other agencies shifted the cases on organized crime to it. That resulted in SOCA overloaded with work and practically paralyzed up to 2007. Easy quitting the mafia topic by MI5 caused a real backstage war between the two services. SOCA lacked people and it enticed many MI5 officers giving them higher salaries.

Probably, enticing was successful also due to the fact general director of SOCA, Stephen Lander, had headed MI5 before that appointment. Besides, after terrorist acts of 2005 the staff of MI5 was made two times as large, and our sources say that half of employees there have experience of no more than 18 months. As a result, MI5 developed a grey-green problem, i.e. lack of middle experienced workers, which contributed to worsening relations with SOCA. The leaks from hurt MI5 employees came down to press accusing SOCA of non-professionalism.

The operative officer from MI5, whom I met, confirmed to me that a couple of years ago a task was set again to the counter-intelligence service to apply resources for struggle with the Russian espionage. There was even hope that it might result in bettering SOCA-MI5 relations, as both services dealt with Russians. However, this has not happened so far.

Though, the problem of difficult relations between parallel services is only part of explanation why SOCA is not engaged practically with Russian mafia at the time being.

SOCA is something between a police structure and a special service. Our sources say that today intelligence service officers prevail there and the key role in that was played by Stephen Lander who possesses a clear thinking ability of a special service officer.

Probably, this is why the agency refused to give an official interview to a Novaya Gazeta correspondent and I had to use unofficial sources. According to them, today SOCA prefers collecting the intelligence without passing the case to the trial, as their sources get compromise there. It's exactly the low number of the passed to the court cases that is the main point of accusation at the SOCA's address in May this year.

Besides, today there is no department in SOCA responsible for Russian mafia exactly. This was confirmed to me by Stewart Hedley, the spokesperson of the agency. Unofficial sources also say there are no people in SOCA to be able to work with Russian diaspora. There are specialists for "Russian question", but all of them came from MI5 and they were invited personally by Mr. Lander and now hold posts in the leadership. There are no field agents with experience of working in Russian-speaking environment. There are some employees sent to work to Russia and Belarus. However, cooperation with Russian law enforcement bodies is practically reduced to zero.

It's been for long that a figure of one employee was the key for the cooperation mentioned. He managed to establish good contacts with Russian interior ministry and organize a celebrated case of the recent years: the arrest of three Russian hackers Ivan Maksakov, Alexander Petrov and Denis Stepanov. The guys had been blackmailing nine British and Irish bookmaker offices and casinos (their loss was about 2,000,000 pounds of sterling) with the use of a simple scheme. A bookmaker office working online during big sports events would receive an e-mail message saying "at the moment we are attacking your site. If you don't want your company to get ruined, you have to pay $40,000". Then a DoS attack began and the company's site received requests from hundreds of addresses simultaneously which caused the server going out of order and the company could not function for a while. After an exampling attack a new message arrived requiring money transfer to be done through Western Union to bank accounts in Riga. In October 2006 all the three hackers got sentenced for 8 years.

The British officer who supervised the investigation from the British side is suspended at the moment. In its turn, Russian interior ministry does not show much willingness for cooperation after Litvinenko's case. As a result, the above mentioned operation about Russian hackers remains the only success of joint working.

Finally, when SOCA was made to get to deal with investigations, and not only collecting information, Stephen Lander decided to concentrate on struggle with the drugs (about 60% of the agency's resource) and check over migrants.

At the same time, the agency made an attempt to convince the society it does not forget about Russian mafia. As a result of such a strange symbiosis of ideas, the SOCA leadership made a statement affirming that the agency's employees played the key role in arresting in London the leader of a "Russian" drug-dealing group, who was extradited to New York in February 2008. The point was about Ricardo Rotmann, aka Ricardo Fancini. He is considered to be the leader of an organized criminal group engaged in transporting the cocaine in Europe. Fancini was really famous in the 90's. He produced Kremlyovskaya vodka and had relations with Vyacheslav Ivankov and Umar Jabrailov. Incidentally, there is no intelligence that arrest of Fancini was assisted by Russian police.

However, the problem is that drugs is not exactly the kind of business Russian mafia prefers to deal with in London. It's reluctance in recognizing this fact of which Interpol has accused the SOCA leadership recently.

Specialization of "Russian mafia"

According to Misha Glenny, a British expert and journalist, the author of the hot-published book titled "McMafia. A journey through the global criminal underworld", there is strict specialization with the ethnic groups in Britain. The Turkish dominate traditionally in the heroin market, but they depend on Kurds and Albanians who are responsible for delivery. Albanians also control the brothels that were started in hundreds in the mid-90's. They also deal with slave trade from the Black Africa and Southern Europe. Vietnamese penetrated the market of transportation of marijuana from British Columbia to Great Britain. As for Russians, who were initially engaged in the racket, they left this business for more highly organized one – that's money laundering and crimes in the hi-tech sphere (stealing with the use of hackers), also trade in weapons.

Probably, the reason is that Russian mafia came to Britain following its own business. Money laundering being its main task, Iceland and London City were used for that. The City was convenient because the new Labourits had created especially favorable conditions for attraction means into economy of London.

According to our sources, a few parallel investigations are going on in SOCA related to laundering where one may see a "Russian" trace. But the result is expected to be achieved no earlier than two years.

All the British experts, whom I managed to talk with about this ticklish topic, agree that there is no political decision at present to persecute Russian groups for laundering, as it might undermine the City's reputation as the world financial capital.

Besides, there is no pressure from the society. A very specific situation has appeared in the British media: British papers are afraid of making big investigations regarding Russian oligarchs or small and medium sized firms, lawyers and specialists engaged in organizing schemes for money laundering.

The action by Grigory Luchansky against Times in 2001 was a tough lesson. Mr. Luchansky was barred from entry to Great Britain but that did not prevent him from gaining the suit about published by Times information that darkened his reputation. The newspaper called him to be a leader of a criminal group that laundered money through Bank of New York and was engaged in contraband of nuclear materials.

After several other lawsuits gained by Boris Berezovsky, the investigative divisions of many British newspapers took confidential decision to leave Russians alone. There is only one sphere regarding our oligarchs available for investigations by British press – that's sex and private life. This is traditionally given to the press and any court would take the paper's side in any lawsuit. The British colleagues told me this is why when Roman Abramovich was caught meeting with Darya Zhukova he had to arrange promptly his matters with his wife. His lawyers knew for sure that the press wouldn't be defeated in the court about this sphere.

So, there seems to have been several circumstances coinciding. Shifting the British special services from organized crime to terrorism and counter-espionage, fatal decision by Her Majesty to send not a police structure but intelligence service for struggling with mafia, and this service is more interested in getting information than catching the real culprits. Even the fact of suspending of the only officer who cooperated effectively with Russian interior ministry was to the Russian mafia's favor. Besides, the British press was disarmed with the recent-years practice of judicial practice. And the government is interested least of all in making pressure on the criminal part of the Russian London. So it appears that nothing may threaten Russian mafia in Great Britain at the moment.

London — Moscow / Published in Novaya Gazeta

Why Indo-Pak Composite Dialogue is Decomposed?

 

July26, 2009

 

Dear Editor: 

 

786* I dedicate all my journalistic, research writings to the memory of my grandmother Mohammad Meera Umma, who taught me alphabets and numericals first and was primarily responsible for my school and college studies.

 

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Why Indo-Pak Composite Dialogue is Decomposed?

-By Dr. Abdul Ruff Colachal

 

I

India keeps insulting Pakistan while Islamabad takes Indian snubs lying as low as possible, although both keep meeting in dialogues and on sidelines of regional summits. The fact that Pakistan does not stop mentioning about Kashmir is a cause of New Delhi's owes. The wars they waged have not made India to consider sovereignty issue of defenseless Kashmiris - now under Indian brute control with the tacit approval of anti-Islamic nations. Hardly a week passes by without the Indian terror forces killing a Kashmiri or raping a woman there, officially. The terror wars in Islamic world unleashed by the USA and allies have given extra strength to India to pursue the anti-Kashmiri policy. The crucial problem facing the world today is the dichotomy between words and deeds perpetuated especially by all big powers for advancing their narrow national interests against the weak countries. As a result, many state terror states like India and Israel unleash genocides steadily over their neighbors, making regional peace a mere mirage.

 

Even while championing the cause of secularism and democracy by killing innocent Muslims in and around, India felt nervous and ashamed of the fact world has recognized India as one of the influential terror states around. New Delhi bosses and strategists hate Pakistan more for the way it internationalized Kashmir issue and exposed Indian false claims over Jammu Kashmir. In order to counter act, Indian launched ploys of terrorism and cross border terrorism and maligned the Islamic state of harboring terrorism against an innocent Hindu state which has unleashed terror attacks on Kashmiris and destroyed mosques on its bogus economic and military strength.

 

Kashmiris look forward to obtaining back sovereignty snatched away by terror India in 1947, while Indo-Pak leaders keep talking about lasting peace without any substance both on the sidelines of big events or directly either in Islamabad or New Delhi aided by strategists and solemnized by heavy dinners of their choice. Any move from Indian side can only be possible if the UNSC shows the right path to India and ask the m to renounce terror path to silence the freedom seeking Kashmiris. The bottle neck is Indian stubbornness and arrogance and Pakistani mildness and cowardice. India employs the terrorism" ploy to scuttle the peace process and all "meets" end up disastrously. But nothing tangible has come out of these bull talks.

II

In the face of a fail-fail situation created by big India in the bilateral ties, once again in July Pakistani premier Yusuf Raza Gilani met his Indian counterpart Manmohan in Egypt the third such high-level meeting since last year's Mumbai Nov26 attacks derailed any rapprochement, perhaps for fun sake so that the photographers and columnists make some quick cash. Even as a naughty terror India keeps it military feet in alien Jammu Kashmir, the Pakistani premier has called for purposeful dialogue on the contentious issue while addressing NAN third world leaders in Egypt. Meanwhile, talks go on to "do some homework" in reducing tensions between the two nuclearized states in a meeting on the fringes ahead of regional meets. Other SA neighbors are annoyed that their "democratic" India steals water from their resources and illegally blocks river flows into their territories, but India remains undisturbed by external criticisms and goes on doing the same immoral operations.

 

Recently, the resumption of talks to determine how to move forward again began as Indian big boss, Manmohan Singh, as usual, warned against a "terrorist" Pakistan, President Asif Zardari, on the sidelines of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) moot in Yekaterinburg, Russia in June, literally snubbing a sovereign nation in public by directing Pakistan to "do more" to contain terrorism. India always does this systematically and Pakistan takes it coolly as if it is fate of Pakistanis. Pakistani President Zardari was "very happy to meet" Indian premier at SCO as the first meeting between the two leaders since the Mumbai Nov26 which India has jokingly, as usual, blamed on elements operating in Pakistan. Indian media and strategist hawks are keen any Indo-Pak meeting does to show to world a "softening" of India's stance, because India is a big boss around. The Zardari-Singh meeting resumption, thus, air at back Indian home not as a sub-continental dialogue, but as a sign of the Indian government's weakness, Indian strategist oppose any peace.

 

India abets terrorism in Jammu Kashmir killing innocent Kashmiris. Jammu Kashmir remains the core issue of tensions between the nuclear neighbors. Not only Indian leaders including the current premier Singh are avoiding punishment for the Indian terror genocides in Jammu Kashmir with Israeli weapons, India also avoids facing remerging new reality by according sovereignty back to Kashmiris, either voluntarily or by international pressure, Pakistan is keen to revive the five-year-old "composite dialogue" covering all disputes between the two countries. But India harps on "terrorism" to scuttle the peace process and Singh has insisted it must first show it is serious about taking action against LeT, as well as against other militant groups that launch attacks in the Indian part of the disputed Kashmir region and elsewhere in the country. The USA is keenly interested in resumption of talks between the two countries to ease tensions on Pakistan's eastern border with India, so it can focus on fighting Taliban militants on its western border with Afghanistan.

 

India continues to bully Pakistan under Indo-US nuclearism rules. It started with Manmohan Singh telling Zardari upfront that India expected Pakistan not to allow its territory to be used for terror attacks against it. Singh put Pakistan to the 'terrorism test' and said he had agreed to give Islamabad "some time" to take action against anti-India terror outfits before the two leaders meet again in Egypt mid-July. Manmohan Singh said he told the president to show the same "sincerity and determination" in dealing with anti-India terror as Islamabad has shown in dealing with the Al Maida and the Taliban. The decision to depute the foreign secretaries to discuss terrorism was taken at the Yekaterinburg ice-breaker meeting.

III

Mumbai and Lahore terrors reveal, India unleashes terror activities around and put the blame on Pakistan.. The SCO was used by an observer India as a forum to divert the global attention on Indian immoral polls and to make the world believe that Indians did not do any thing in Mumbai come closer to both China and Central Asian nations, while cementing ties with Russia. Indian gimmicks do play some role globally thanks to anti-Islamic media. It was an attempt to hide Indian terrorist infrastructures and to mobilize the support of the international community against "terrorism" from Pakistan amid a growing perception that the western powers were losing interest after expressing outrage over the Mumbai carnage seven months ago.

Clearly, anti-Islamic fascist tendencies from US-led NATO, Israel and India are in full action in Islamic world. Both Russia and China have also displayed their "displeasure" with Muslims in their territories. Russia has joined the anti-Islamic fascist forces in Afghanistan. CIA-Pentagon-Mossad-SIS-RAW led by US-Pentagon is interested only in terrorizing the global Muslims by enacting different terror dramas ably coordinated through murders. The military terror exercises in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan confirm this. America is keen to bring in Indo-Pak dimension to kill Muslims in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

 

The US has finally come out with its agenda in the region- GST (global state terrorism) killing Pakistanis and Afghans with drones from Israel. On June 26 Washington said it will support continuing dialogue between India and Pakistan them to find joint solutions to counter terrorism and to promote regional stability, but leave it to them how to go about it. The timing, scope, and content of any such dialogue are strictly matters for Pakistani and Indian leaders to decide. Referring to the June 16 meeting between Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and Pakistan President Asif Ali Zardari at the SCO summit, America feels such high-level engagement in the aftermath of the Mumbai terrorist attacks is "encouraging".

 

IV

 

The vague feel good factor seen in the company of USA provokes poor Indian leaders poke their long nose into Pakistani affairs. Terrorism is being promoted by New Delhi to evade any effective resolution of the strangled issue. While Pakistan seeks peace, India thwarts all attempts to reach agreements for regional peace; because it does not want to lose the stolen property called Jammu Kashmir seeks US support on payment basis in terms of terror military purchases.

 

Right from the days of Nehru, Indians have meticulously used every international forum to snub Pakistani leaders, the beginner of Nehru Dynasty. Now, midtongued, self-centred Indian premier Singh has been used by extremist strategists to say something "strongly" to Pakistan leader. The "soft" spoken "innocent" Singh has exhibited his special skills to scold Pakistan in the usual Indian format using "not enough" terrorism plank. He has not stopped genocide of Kashmiris or raps of females in the militarized valley and one does not know if he would tolerate the same is done to Sikhs also. If so, or not, Singh also should tried for genocides of Kashmiri and Gujarati Muslims.

 

The crux of the matter is India never desires any peace and every rhetoric and action from New Delhi's "giants" gives rise to apprehensions about India's seriousness about bringing peace to the South Asian region. Indian strategists don't want peace by surrendering sovereignty to the struggling Kashmiris nor does it want to slash resources year marked for the military readiness for terror activities. In reducing defense expenditures, Indian civil leaders would be facing wrath from the military bosses and the petrified commission agents who thrive on defense deals of the civil masters by sharing the booty with politicians, bureaucrats and other "concerned" personnel and persons. The issue of UK discovered NRI Hindu god Amarnath structure in Kashmir is being popped by India to complicate the problem further.

 

According to Indian sources, when the military establishment realized that the Kashmiris wanted freedom from both India and Pakistan, Musharraf a Delhiite banned the jihadi organizations and closed their training camps. Now there are only pro-Islamic Shari'a defenders there. In 2004 Musharraf opted for the composite dialogue and backed it by robust back channel diplomacy. Musharraf ended up only by appeasing Hindu Indians. India purposefully, and successfully, failed all his efforts. Today in the name of fighting terrorists, Indo-Pak-USA terrorists kill only the Pakistani Muslims. India, as a key resolve of Nehru India, wants to raise Hindu population to equal all other religions and out number global Muslims. President Zardari is following the footsteps of his predecessor in chair. Now the NATO is supporting the Indian agenda with Pakistani help. If Pakistan wants to pursue the path of self-destruction, none can rescue it, and since it does not have enough faith in the Almighty and His Sharia, one can only wish Allah will not give away this Islamic state.

 

To understand any new initiative, some background is necessary. India illegally occupies Jammu Kashmir since 1947 after it got independence form the British Empire by pumping in terror forces to the region equipped with lethal weapons and flushing out Kashmiri Muslims in the form of dead bodies. After wars, the Indo- Pak deadlock was broken in 1997 when India under IK Gujral regime accepted that Kashmir was a "dispute" and Pakistan under Nawaz Sharif agreed to a "composite" dialogue on all issues. Despite nuclear rattling in 1998, Sharif and Vajpayee reiterated the composite dialogue in Lahore in 1999. But then, after he seized power, President General Musharraf repudiated the composite dialogue as a "sell- out" by Sharif. In 2001 the Agra talks collapsed because India blocked any progress by playing marvelously the phrase "cross-border-terrorism" and insisted on posing "terrorist infiltration" from Pakistan as a core issue like Kashmir. Kargil war in 1999, provoked by Indian forces stationed there, brought the two countries to the brink of war. As a strategic American ally after Sept11, 2001 focusing on the border with Afghanistan, General Musharraf avoided conflict with India by announcing in 2002 that Pakistan would not allow any "terrorist infiltration" across the LoC or border into India. Many Pakistanis want Kashmir a part of Pakistan.

 

V

Peace and cooperation between these two South Asian nuclearized nations can guarantee not just prosperity on both sides of the international frontiers, but stability and development in the region. Peace is both an ideal proposition and also a long-term realism, but terror India never seems to seek peace with Pakistan for fear of losing out Jammu Kashmir for ever. That is how Pakistan's sincere desire to bring peace in the region and have friendly relations with India has always failed. But Indian media known for global mischief and regional fanaticism quickly find fault with Islamabad religiously and global media reproduces some of their post-paid "analyses".  Indian media admit that both India and Pak have done enough harm to each other, but they don't wish peace process well. That is Indian petrified position.

 

Among the NAN members, it is India that managed maximum benefits out of the cold war between two sets of ideologies by garnering mostly for industrialization and nuclearism, while at the same time, also got benefits form the USA by using lobbyists and pro-US agents in and outside India. NAN is no more Non Aligned nations, but just only the Nations Against Nations and most of nations seek favors from every big power. India now leads NAN as, and as a terror state cannot lead the developing nations now. It wants UNSC membership to lord over the world and offer counsel to USA and Russia as to how to "do enough" and "deliver" on counsels.

 

Except UNSC membership, India got most of the favors even from the West almost free. UK represents Indian interests in UNSC. India still enjoys big bossism in the region and beyond wants the UNSC to take note of its power. USA, however, restricted India from capitalizing on the "cold" rift, lest India would have become a super power by now threatening both USA and Russia on the one hand and China and Pakistan on the other. The expectations of India are to totally subordinate its neighbors to Indian dictates and in pursuance of Indian goals in their respective country, as India is doing for the USA and UK.

 

USA also talks about peace but is doing not enough on the issue. For USA, which is focused on killing of Afghans and Pakistanis alongside the Iraqis, Kashmir and Indo-Pak relations are a low priority which in international political science means no priority. What Washington seeks is genocides of Muslims and destructions of their properties. However, Robert O. Blake, Assistant Secretary of State for South and Central Asia India and Pakistan face common challenges said 'We will also continue to support dialogue between Indian and Pakistani leaders, and we will support continuing dialogue to find joint solutions to "counter terrorism" and to promote regional stability. In the name of terrorism, the GST rogues kill Muslims in a sustained manner, while the entire Islamic world is busy making extra wealth and kicking the poor.

 

Global state terrorism led by the USA has enabled regional terror India to ignore international cries over Indian tyranny in Kashmir. Never willing to keep its word, like Israel, India always believes in secret tracks in democracy and state terrorism. India and Pakistan have agreed for the ninth time to start talking again secretly. While Indian goal in the composite dialogue is to keep the Kashmir issue at bay for ever by creating terrorism at the crucial moments to stall the peace process, it is not evidently clear the mindset of Pakistani establishment, though people of Pakistan, like Kashmiris believe Pakistan is pursing Kashmir sovereignty cause with full dedication and sincerity. Is it wrong on their part to think that way?

 

The key problem with peace process is India considers Mrs. Clinton as part of its paid lobby in Washington streets. As usual, USA got what wants in India with lucrative deals in tools of mass murders (TMM). Mrs. Clinton seems to have done enough in India signing multi-billion dollar terror deals, apart from blasting Pakistan, a close terror ally, and praising "democracy" the "big cash lords" in India, an aspiring cash rich strategic partner. Any improvement in Indo-Pak relations would be possible only when both hands come together to clap, lest only Indian noise-cum-nuisance is heard every where. This Indian anomaly of over-acting has to be arrested first.   India efficiently engineered terror activities and blasts all round India and simply pass on the blame on Pakistan so that no peace could be possible and Jammu Kashmir could be a part of India for ever and for this it seeks a berth in discredited terror sponsoring UNSC. The ball is still lying in Indian courts - whether Indian leaders decide to kick it properly for SA regional peace or still want to play the usual mischief by blame games, remains to be seen. Indian leaders should rein in essentially anti-Muslim media for peace in the region.

-----------------------

Dr. Abdul Ruff Colachal

Independent Researcher in International Affairs, The only Indian to have gone through entire India, a fraud and terror nation in South Asia.

India's water aggression against neighbours

Asif Haroon Raja

Kashmir is the unfinished agenda of partition of India in 1947. India not only treacherously occupied two-third of Kashmir by force but also failed to implement the 1948 UNSC Resolution of holding a plebiscite to determine the wishes of the people of Kashmir whether they wanted to be part of Pakistan or India.

The Kashmiris kept demanding this right but their voices were suppressed through use of brute force. After 42 years of political struggle when the Kashmiris lost all hopes of an amicable solution, they decided to pick up arms in 1989 and confronted the Indian security forces. Tens of militant groups including Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT), Jaish-e-Muhammad (JeM) and Hizbul Mujahideen emerged in occupied Kashmir during nineties to achieve freedom from the shackles of India.

Over 7 lacs Indian security forces were inducted to crush the freedom movement but despite sustained ruthless operations and inhuman atrocities they could not extinguish the flame of liberty. Pakistan was morally bound to extend diplomatic and political support to UN sanctified freedom struggle much to the dislike of Indians.

The resistance movement was so fierce that India sought assistance from Israel how to tackle Islamic insurgency and also started to accuse Pakistan of aiding and abetting terrorism in Kashmir. Apart from teaching Indian security forces techniques of counter insurgency and providing requisite equipment, it also passed on the technique of indoctrinating Muslim youths and using them against Kashmiri Mujahids. Israel had established special schools where it was taught how clerics brainwashed recruits. Having mastered this art, it was put to use against Palestinians. This technique is now being used to brainwash suicide bombers and use them in Pakistan Once India became strategic partner of USA, the latter attended to Indian concerns more attentively. Throughout 1990s, India continuously parroted the theme of cross border terrorism and also accused Pakistan of developing an Islamic bomb. Western media raised the spectre of Islamic bomb going into the hands of radical states like Iran and Libya. Pakistan was placed on watch list of terrorism and cautioned to watch its steps. USA shared the idea of India that UN Resolutions on Kashmir had become outdated.

Acquisition of nuclear capability and delivery means by Pakistan led to forging of deeper collaboration between USA, Israel and India and the trio schemed how to destabilise, de-Islamise, denuclearise and possibly balkanise Pakistan.. 9/11 and pliant leadership in Pakistan provided an opportunity to them to make deep inroads into Pakistan and make certain parts restive.

In Indian Held Kashmir (IHK) and Siachen Indian troops are suffering from innumerable physiological diseases and cases of suicides are on the increase. Several cases of shooting of comrades and officers have also occurred because of mounting frustration and sense of guilt they carry against hapless Kashmiris. Over 100,000 Muslim Kashmiris have been killed since 1989, thousands maimed for life, 8000 young girls raped and 11000 persons gone missing.

India has been conducting farcical elections in IHK but each election was heavily rigged to ensure success of pro-Indian Kashmiri party aligned with Congress or BJP. IHK was put under federal rule in July 2008 following collapse of state government over Hindu-Muslim land dispute which triggered a series of massive anti-India riots. Illegal allotment of Muslims land to Amarnath set off protests.

Indian security forces retaliated with full force leaving many unarmed protesters dead. Elections were held in November-December 2008 in seven phases and terminated on 24 December under barrel of gun. It was phased because of highly volatile security situation and Kashmiris loud calls to boycott elections. Almost entire Kashmiri political leadership was interned. Anti-election protest marches were cruelly dealt with resulting in several deaths and critical injuries to many.

Azadi movement has got reinvigorated and so has brutality of Indian forces against Kashmiris. Failing to crush Kashmiri movement India devised a devious technique of water-theft to coerce and blackmail Pakistan to refrain from supporting Kashmiris.

Pakistan, Nepal and Bangladesh are victims of Indian water thievery. India has dispute with Bangladesh over Farraka Barrage, with Nepal over Mahakali River and with Pakistan over 1960 Indus Treaty. What can you expect from a country which stoops to lowest level of immorality by stealing water and blocking rivers to turn agricultural lands of its neighbour barren? Without any qualms, India is busy building dams on all rivers flowing into Pakistan from occupied Kashmir to regain control of water of western rivers in violation of Indus Treaty. This is being done under well thought out strategy to render Pakistan's link-canal system redundant, destroy agriculture of Pakistan which is its mainstay and turn Pakistan into a desert.

It is because of our survival resting on rivers that Kashmir has been referred to as Pakistan's jugular vein. India has plans to construct 62 dams/hydro-electric units on Rivers Chenab and Jhelum thus enabling it to render these rivers dry by 2014. Taking advantage of its influence over Afghanistan, India has succeeded in convincing Karzai regime to build a dam on River Kabul and setup Kama Hydroelectric Project using 0.5MAF of Pakistan water. It has offered technical assistance for the proposed project which will have serious repercussions on the water flow in River Indus. The controversial Baglihar Dam started in 1999 on River Chenab in Doda of IHK. Pakistan took the case to World Bank. The World Bank expert Raymond Lafitte approved the project in February 2007 but asked India to reduce height of the Dam by one and half meters. Baglihar Dam can block 7000 cusecs of water per day whenever India wishes to.

India has already built 14 hydroelectric plants on Chenab River and is building more plants which will enable it to block entire water of Chenab for 20-25 days. These dams have also enabled India to release huge quantity of water downstream to not only cause damage to standing crops but also to our canal systems. Chenab River provides water to 21 canals and irrigates about 7 million acres of agriculture land in Punjab.

Storage of water in Baglihar Dam reduced the flow of water in Chenab River during the sowing period of August to October 2008 and badly affected the agriculture sector of Pakistan. Pakistan lost 23000 cusecs of water; farmers could not irrigate their fields due to shortage of water and resultantly 3.5 million agriculture tracts got barren. The standing cotton, paddy crops of basmati rice of Kharif season in Punjab which were ripe got badly affected because of absence of water.

The sowing of next crop of wheat in September-October also got affected and so was the case with Rabi crop in January-February this year due to reduced flow of water. India has turned a deaf ear to our repeated requests for compensation and failed to provide data about water storage and release of Baglihar Dam. India has got away with this broad daylight robbery of water and intends to make it into a routine affair. India is constructing Kishanganga Dam on River Jhelum. It has now planned three dams on River Indus which will have devastating impact on Pakistan's Northern Areas.. These are Nimoo Bazgo, Dumkhar, and Chutak. Work on Nimoo Bazgo hydropower project, 70 km from Leh is already underway.

Chutak is under construction on River Suru. In case any of these dams collapse or large quantity of water is deliberately released, it will not only endanger our proposed Bhasha Dam but also submerge Skardu city and airport. KKH between Besham and Jaglot would wash away.

The world powers led by US preaching morality turn a blind eye to this blatant immorality. Pakistan will however not allow its land to turn barren at the hands of a depraved bully. It is an existential threat posed by India which 170 million Pakistanis would fight to the last to defeat its nefarious designs.