www.moderndiplomacy.eu
contents
HOW TO MAKE A RUSSIAN DEMON UNBIASED MEDIA / BIASED AGENDAS KURDS, THE INVISIBLE PEOPLE IS ONE PUTIN THINGS IN ORDER? NUCLEAR POWERS AT PLAY: RUSSIA, PAKISTAN, NORTH KOREA SPIEF 2015: TENDENCIES & EXPECTATIONS GLOBAL ENERGY PRIZE AWARD BOOKS: IDENTITY AND POLITICS IN CENTRAL ASIA AND THE CAUCASUS
04
THE CASPIAN PROJECT WEEKLY EDITION www.moderndiplomacy.eu PROJECT TEAM DImITrIS GIaNNaKOpOuLOS Dr. maTThEW CrOSSTON TEJa paLKO pETra pOSEGa LuíSa mONTEIrO NINa LavrENTEva GabrIELa paSChOLaTI DO amaraL TaYLOr mOrSE JJ harpEr
HOW TO Make a RUssian deMOn Unbiased Media / biasedagendas
A little over one yeAr Ago the world was given a foundational lesson in how an impartial press can unknowingly construct a partial opinion. The consequences of that lesson are still being heard today and much to the detriment of the Russian Federation.
Dr. Matthew Crosston Senior Editor Matthew Crosston is Professor of Political Science, Director of the International Security and Intelligence Studies Program, and the Miller Chair at Bellevue University
March 16, 2014 marked the day when the people of Crimea went to the voting booths to decide whether they would be part of Ukraine or part of Russia. While the referendum was no doubt important to people living in Crimea, I for one remained highly skeptical that the results would actually be the ultimate arbiter on the territorial decisions made about Crimea. The outside players, namely Ukraine, Russia, the United States, NATO, and the European Union, were simply too big and too influential to let this small peninsula play an independent role far beyond the geopolitical football that it represented. I felt deeply for the people of Crimea, but the bitter reality and perhaps even more bitter truth was that high politics on the global stage will still come off in such a blunt manner. Unfortunately, this type of cynical maneuvering has been going on for literally thousands of years and will likely not end with the current crisis between Russia and the West over Ukraine.
We have seen this fact by potential American military initiatives today involving the Baltics and recent egregiously reckless comments made by US representative to the UN Samantha Powers about Russia and Ukraine. Ending crises such as the one in Crimea is not only the work of governments, diplomats, and militaries. Reporters play a crucial role as well. While Western journalists as a whole tend to be a conscientious lot, simply pursuing an interesting story and often putting themselves in harm’s way in order to get it, the Cold War residue that remains between the United States and Russia has put a grimy film over more than just political actors. It often affects the way in which stories are told, the lens through which ‘impartial observers’ focus their attention. Unfortunately, this happens usually at a subconscious level, resulting in news stories that were meant to be ‘fair, free, and impartial’ instead having a decidedly biased perspective snaking its way from reporter to reader.
WWW.MOdeRndiPLOMaCY.eU THe CasPian PROJeCT
Look no further than the first reporting on referendum day from the highly respected and august news organization, Reuters. It reported how, ‘thousands of Russian troops have taken control of the Black Sea peninsula and Crimea’s pro-Russian leaders have sought to ensure the vote is tilted in Moscow’s favor.
THeRe aRe enOUgH ReaL deMOns in THe POLiTiCaL WORLd WiTHOUT THe fRee Media CReaTing MORe absenT-MindedLY That, along with an ethnic Russian majority, is expected to result in a comfortable ‘YES’ vote to leave Ukraine.’ These are actually two very different perspectives conflated into a single position. On the one hand, readers were given the distinct understanding that the referendum was basically rigged, commandeered by Crimean leaders, who were nothing but sycophants to the Kremlin. But the very next sentence also accurately mentioned that Crimea was majority ethnic Russian, which should have indicated to a reader that a free and fair referendum might end up producing the very result the reporters told us could not be genuine. So which was it? Was Crimea manipulated by local leaders and the Russian military or was its majority Russian population voting its free and voluntary will? By writing the piece so that the suspicious manipulation theory was conflated with the demographically true statistic,
a reader was either left confused or pushed into thinking the referendum itself was irrelevant and that Russia was rather, well, evil. The piece further reported, ‘the majority of Crimea's 1.5 million electorate support leaving Ukraine and becoming part of Russia, citing expectations of better pay and the prospect of joining a country capable of asserting itself on the world stage. But others see the referendum as nothing more than a geopolitical land grab by the Kremlin…Ethnic Tatars, Sunni Muslims of Turkic origin who make up 12 percent of Crimea's population, said they would boycott the referendum, despite promises by the authorities to give them financial aid and proper land rights.’ Again, this deftly presented evidence in a manner that delegitimized the ethnic Russian majority by highlighting a small minority group, ethnic Tatars, and how it would boycott the referendum. This is playing a bit fast and loose with the complex ethnic makeup of the former Soviet Union, portraying a picture that is not entirely accurate: ethnic Tatars have a long and rich history WITHIN the Russian Federation.One of the most powerful ethnic republics and richest regions in Russia today is Tatarstan. The idea that ethnic Tatars in Crimea were protesting the referendum because they were somehow worried or fearful of being part of Russia was simply fallacious. Much more likely, given the present environment of political turmoil and open discussions about autonomy and selfrule (let us not forget that Crimea was itself a semi-autonomous region within Ukraine under the Ukrainian Constitution), was that the ethnic Tatars saw what Crimean leaders were doing and hoped to also earn their own piece of newly acquired political and economic power.
Rejecting the Crimean offer of financial aid and proper land rights meant they weren’t arguing about principle anymore but just how big their piece of the pie would be. All of this background and subtle nuance would have made readers more informed and impressed at how complex and multi-layered the Crimean situation is. Instead, they were left with a picture that had Crimean authority mere puppets on Kremlin strings and oppressed minorities being politically stomped over in the process by Russian jackboots. The Reuters piece continued to explain the situation, stating ‘the protests began when Yanukovich turned his back on a trade deal with the European Union and opted for a credit and cheap oil deal worth billions of dollars with Ukraine's former Soviet overlord, Russia.’
I have written on this issue in the past and it continues to perplex me how the above transaction is only portrayed in Western media as Yanukovich simply being in the back pocket of Moscow. Entering into greater trade cooperation with the European Union, paving the way for closer relations, also means ultimately answering to European Union financial demands. Perhaps we could ask Greece, Italy, or Portugal how that goes at times? These realities, along with the inevitably cyclical and topsyturvy nature of the global economy, mean not all paths to the EU are paved with gold. Given such, why did Western media portray acceptance for a credit, oil, and gas deal worth ‘billions of dollars’ for Ukraine RIGHT NOW as being akin to a Faustian bargain made with a ‘Soviet overlord?’
WWW.MOdeRndiPLOMaCY.eU THe CasPian PROJeCT
What was the impact on uninformed readers who did not know that the Russian credit deal basically meant Russia forgave a massive amount of oil and gas debt owed by Ukraine? If a country was truly looking to be an ‘evil overlord’ might it not be far easier to simply call in one’s chips without remorse, rather than offering deals that eliminate debt with no repayment? Finally, the piece reported, ‘voters have two options to choose from - but both imply Russian control of the peninsula. On the surface, the second choice appears to offer the prospect of Crimea remaining with Ukraine. However, the 1992 constitution which it cites foresees giving the region effective independence within Ukraine, but with the right to determine its own path and choose relations with whom it wants - including with Russia.’ The problem I have highlighted is not that such journalists are unprofessional or have some anti-Russian personal agenda.
I have no personal knowledge of the journalists who wrote and contributed to the above Reuters piece and I am sure they take their profession with the utmost seriousness and have high personal standards of integrity. The problem, as I mentioned, is a pervasive subconscious Cold War residue that has major influence on how uninformed readers around the world learn about the situation in Crimea and Russia’s subsequent larger image even today. For example, the 1992 constitution mentioned above is the UKRAINIAN Constitution, not the Russian. It does indeed grant the Crimean region effective independence within Ukraine AND the right to determine its own path and relations with whomever it wants. Ukraine wrote those words in the immediate glowing aftermath of Soviet dissolution, when, quite frankly, most in the West felt the true political and economic prosperity path shone brightest for Ukraine and NOT Russia.
Many seem to have forgotten this but any simple source search back to the time period will reveal massive Western enthusiasm for Ukraine’s prospects while Russia was deemed too large, too ethnically diverse, and too dependent on decrepit and degraded Soviet infrastructure. It is easy to grant ‘autonomy’ when authorities feel confident that said autonomous chicken will never come home to roost. But now, a generation after the fall of the Soviet Union, no one makes comparisons anymore between Ukraine and Russia where Ukraine is the golden-child and Russia the basket-case. So yes, it was quite true that the constitution recklessly gave Crimea the opportunity to pursue the very path it was pursuing a year ago. But the hands that wrote that problematic constitution were Ukrainian, not Russian. This was a reality not revealed to readers. Instead, they were fed an opposite impression of the referendum as not only being illegitimate but manipulatively engineered by Russia and forced on the local people. Russia, no doubt, was not guiltless. No state is in complex geopolitics. It absolutely took advantage of the turmoil and instability of the Maidan revolution in Kiev. But it took advantage of this opportunity by maneuvering with a small peninsula that had always been militarily important to and, quite frankly, politically and culturally aligned with Russia. Was this maneuver ‘nice?’ No, it was not. But was it geopolitically strategic? Yes, it most certainly was. Which thought process do you think matters most to states on the global stage, the former or the latter?
THe PRObLeM is a PeRvasive sUbCOnsCiOUs COLd WaR ResidUe THaT Has MaJOR infLUenCe On HOW UninfORMed ReadeRs aROUnd THe WORLd LeaRn abOUT THe siTUaTiOn in CRiMea and RUssia’s sUbseqUenT LaRgeR iMage even TOdaY
What I wish to see more of is reporting that testifies to this inherent nature of geopolitics and the admission that most states, no, ALL states will be strategic before they choose to be nice. Be warned: this won’t make for light or fun reading, per se. But it would make for more informed and more accurate reading than the quasi-impartial pieces that clearly push a psychological caricature of one particular side to readers who do not have the background to know what is fact and what is farce. The consequence, of course, is the creation of a Russian demon that is not entirely deserved and most certainly does not serve anyone’s enlightenment or the amelioration of conflict. There are enough real demons in the political world without the free media creating more absent-mindedly.
WWW.MOdeRndiPLOMaCY.eU THe CasPian PROJeCT
invisiblepeople
Kurds: the fourth biggest nation in the Middle east OppressiOn, denial Of existence, prohibition of usage of mother language in public, the press and institutions, forced relocations, no recognition, fear of expressing identity, inequality, economic stagnation or decrease and false hopes are words that could describe the history of the largest ethnic group in the world without their own state. Though the numbers dier, there are around 30 million of Kurds. The exact number is unknown because their existence was denied even in the recent past in some countries and because some of the authorities report of smaller number of Kurdish people on their territory. In some countries Kurds are even afraid to define themselves as Kurds because of political oppression.
teja palkO Defense Editor Teja Palko is a Slovenian writer. She finished studies on Master’s Degree programme in Defense Science at the Faculty of Social Science at University in Ljubljana.
Reports show that Kurds are the fourth biggest nation in the Middle East behind Arabs, Turks and Persian people. Everyone has so far heard for Kurdistan but except the landscape with the same name cannot be found on the map. Kurdish destiny is decided by three main factors, dispersion, fragmentation and territorial policies. Kurds are people that in the past had no right to autonomy or self-determination and were not even recognized as minorities in some countries. They are spread across Iraq, Iran, Turkey and Syria restless territories. Based on CIA World Factbook in 2014 the biggest number of Kurds is in Turkey 14.7 million (18% of the population), than in Iran 8.1 million (10% of the population), Iraq 5.5 million (17.5% of the population) and Syria 1.7 million (9.7% of the population). History of Turkish Kurds is interacted with oppression, restriction of usage its own language publicly, political institutions, no freedom of expression, assembly and association, displacement as a result of conflict and confrontation with military, journalism activity no recognition and underdevelopment of its territories. Economic problems exist in southeastern part of Turkey, where most of the Kurds live with high unemployment levels. In 2002 Ankara had made some reforms about its very restrictive Kurdish policy, where Kurdish broadcast on radio and television was prohibited. The launch in 2009 of a public television channel broadcasting in Kurdish was a step forward.
However, the expression of Kurdish identity is still perceived as a threat to the country’s unity based on the 2011 European Commission against Racism and Intolerance (ERCI) report. ERCI reported that many Kurds live in concentrated in the poorest remote provinces of country with difficult economic and social conditions. Inequality is still seen among populations where Kurds are still not equal to the majority of the population. Through time we have seen active Kurdish political movement in the country. Almost all of the parties were prohibited after some time. Reasons for banishment were promoting separatism and Kurdish nationalism among others. A lot of party members were sent to prison and even sentence to jail. Conflict between Turkey and PKK that is composed of various Kurdish insurgent groups, listed also as a terrorist group by some countries, are demanding separation from Turkey and creating an independent Kurdistan or autonomy. The conflict started way back in 1974 and is still going in different phases.Both sides have been accused of atrocities and human rights violations.
WWW.ModerndiploMaCY.eu the Caspian proJeCt
Kurds are people that in the past had no right to autonoMY or self-deterMination and Were not even reCognized as Minorities in soMe Countries For many years it was in fact illegal for Kurds speak their own language, use Kurdish names or play their music, going even further with the Turkish government refused to recognize the existence of Kurds and named them Mountain Turks. The situation is yet to get resolved with many obstacles still on the way to peace and freedom. With elections and the HDP – The People’s Democratic Party recorded more than 10% of the vote and pass one of the highest electoral thresholds in the world, it will play an important role for Kurdish people. It was founded as a pro-Kurdish party in 2012. Its representatives will take seats in parliament for the first time and make Kurdish voices heard and improved their overall situation. In my opinion that kind of political solution is needed to help ending more than three decades lasting conflict. Situation in Iraqi Kurdistan is different and makes and exception in the position of Kurds. Semiautonomous region has been achieved through economic cooperation and opened the road to prosperity. Following the first Gulf war and with the United States (US) imposing a no-fly zone in northern Iraq, Iraqi Kurds have managed to develop de facto self-government since the year 1991.
After US invasion after 2003 after two years, followed the new constitution with emerging federal state and declaring Kurdistan’s special status. Even though right for autonomy comes from the constitution, Baghdad has done much to prevent self-government and wants to further lead centralized politics and control over the country. Main problem resides with oil and gas revenues that are found in this area. In the light of Turkey policy regarding large Kurdish population of its territory and often violent disputes country made a shift with supporting financial independence of the region and started doing business and abandoned its stance opposing the autonomy. Baghdad could block Kurdish-Turkish cooperation, but that could backfire in declaring Kurdistan’s independence. It looks like neither side wants such an outcome where Iraq would lose oil and gas revenues or even encourage other provinces to do the same and the other side challenges of independent states. In every way the region is shifting from the central order and rule to more decentralized one with international cooperation. In Iran Kurds are facing similar economic problems as other countries, such as poverty and underdevelopment. Iranian Kurds have in the 20 century established a semi-independent state which was abolished in one year. Amnesty International has reported of abuses and suppression of Kurdish people, their social, political and cultural rights and even of big number of Kurdish citizens being executed. Kurds in Iran are getting less international attention than in other countries, but political repression is present every day.
Iran remains second largest executer in the world and reports from international humanitarian organizations accused Iran of unfair trails and right violations against minorities and activists. Many Kurdish political prisoners were till this day executed. In May we have seen Kurds protests in Mahabad against authority, but their situation does not seem to be improving. Another country where Kurds are important minority is Syria. Syria’s Kurds have managed to declare their own autonomous region in the northeast part of the country. As a result of the Syrian war and the rise of the Islamic State, Kurds in Syria have established a selfruled region called Rojava which spans parts of northern Syria. Rojava is an inclusive system where local communities and groups have great influence on political and social issues. These communities are diverse and include Kurds, Arabs, Turkmens, Christians and so on. Kurds have unilaterally declared
self-rule in 2012 and since then protected territories from Islamic State forces. The People's Protection Unit (YPG) has been fighting against the Islamic State; with support from US-led airstrikes the PYD's and PKK's eectiveness in ground operations against Islamic State, most notably in the battle for Kobani in 2014, has led some experts to call for the United States to remove the PKK from its list of foreign terrorist organizations. It is not the last time we have heard about Kurdish problems, since there are many potential outbreaks of the conflict possible, with unresolved situations in four dierent countries regarding the same ethnical group. With further suppression and human rights violations the possibility of creating greater disagreement and walls against opposing sides is rising. The Kurdistan remains so far unreachable Kurds distant dream, but hopes and fight against injustice never dies. WWW.ModerndiploMaCY.eu the Caspian proJeCt
IS ONE PUTIN THINgS IN ORDER? russia is not wideLy known for its outstanding abilities in soft power. That could be explained, albeit not justified, for the strong concision characteristic of the communist regime during the Soviet Union years, which resulted in East European countries in general – and Russia specifically - understanding and applying a stricter conduct when it comes to international relations.
Luisa Monteiro MD Editor Luísa Monteiro is a bachelor in Social Communication. Her researches are closely linked to the studies of internet as a democratic agora and her latest academic production correlates the freedom experienced online and the (offline) social movements.
russian idoL One of the most interesting points of view concerning Russia’s soft power is the one elucidated by Joseph Nye, the scholar who coined the terms and definitions for hard, soft and smart power. He argues that what is intriguing is not the fact of Russia using soft power, but how the country conceives its theory. Whereas America is as good in causing amazement as it is in using its weapons, Russia still cannot read the American way of life – that is, for itself, an incredible tool of soft power – nor replicate it with facility. What the US have long understood is that it is not about diplomacy only, not about governmental spheres. They realized it was necessary to foment and sell a whole system whereunto culture, education, style and many other aspects of society convert and allure people to consume and admire it. All this enchantment caused by the Stars and Stripes does not undercover, but surely equilibrates the hardness with which it, more frequently than likely, makes use of the sticks.
The Slavic country, for its turn, tends to concentrate its source of culture and welfare transmission in the public administration. On its side, at least, it counts with a former Russian diaspora that results in people craving for identity in the neighbour countries. Also, communication, migratory fluxes and religion end up playing an important part in its relation with fellow nations. In terms of international affairs, it works for the construction of strong union between the ex-Soviet countries, through the Collective Security Treaty Organisation (CSTO), the Customs Union and the Eurasian Economic Union, that ideally would counter NATO and the EU. Russia counts on a vast communication group – RT, the former Russia Today – which is known not only internally, but abroad too. There, investments are high and the speaking languages Russian and English, so the spreading of information is effective, since the group is big in the niche. The pieces of news are diverse and multi biased, in a sense that many ideas are expressed in different ways, also meaning many opinions on a same topic, which sometimes appears dizzying.
WWW.MODERNDIPLOMACY.EU THE CASPIAN PROJECT
RUSSIAN SPEAkERS SHARE NOT ONLY THE LANgUAgE, bUT ALSO CULTURE, bELIEfS, SOMETIMES RELIgION THAT IS WHY TRADITIONAL vALUES END UP HAvINg gREAT INfLUENCE Besides, the country made it internationally appealing with Rusnet (‘Russia beyond headlines’) and influences the near countries with local transmission, like the First Baltic Channel (FBK), that counts with millions of viewers on the Baltic region, with a flood of articles, not necessarily information. That comes, nonetheless, under the label of freedom of expression – showing us that the media, be sides its advances, still has a long way to go. On the other hand, the country continues to be a dreamland for the several migrants from the near countries. With more work opportunities and a relatively easy procedure to grant citizenship, plenty of workers from Central Asia go to Russia to earn a living (and are undoubtedly an important trump for Russian statesmen when it touches political negotiation). Those Russian speakers share not only the language, but also culture, beliefs, some times religion. That is why traditional values end up having great influence, and politicians found an opportunity in that – a clear example was that the dissemination of the idea that the European politics accepted and stimulated homosexual romantic relationships and that Western behaviours indicated corrupted values kept politically divided and strongly traditional border countries from
approaching the European Union, luckily enough for a strong and moralizing Russia that dreams of enhancing its EEU bloc. The culture is, naturally, another instrument for gathering and working the national sentiment in the peoples spread inside and outside the Russian territory. Designed for this is Rossotrudnichestvo, the State’s agency for soft power. The Federal Agency for the Commonwealth of Independent States, Compatriots Living Abroad and International Humanitarian Cooperation promotes events in memoir of historical facts that are important for the community in the Commonwealth of Independent States (especially for those people who are abroad, that end up being somewhat enthusiasts and feeling closer to their roots). Ideally, the agency serves the objective of fostering friendly ties and, thus, helping achieve and reinforce Russian economic and cultural development. In April, as a matter of elucidation, the agency supported the St. George Ribbons campaign – a tradition that dates from the XVII century but gained a new meaning with the Russian victory over the Nazi Germany in World War II, exact 70 years ago. a soft spot for a hard conduct Diplomacy is not what Russia is widely known for, though. Amid the latest polemics, the annexation of Crimea in late 2014 brought extensive criticism for the Russian action towards Ukraine and, unavoidably, there were parallels between the situation then and in 2008, with South Ossetia. Back in that year, Georgia had some deep separatist issues with South Ossetia, a part of the population from a different ethnicity that wanted to join North Ossetia, an autonomic republic inside the Russian Federation.
It has never been proven that Russia really fomented the insurgents against Georgia, nonetheless history does not lie about what happened later and its aftermaths – Russia entered the Georgian territory, supporting South Ossetia and the thousands of Russian citizens that lived there during the process of separation, which culminated in the creation of a new country (recognized by Russia and heavily criticized by the NATO members). Here, even though one must claim the clearness of the use of hard power, it can also be argued that the Russian influence came long before in the region, both culturally and linguistically. Even more than that, in peace missions in Ossetia and Abkhazia. In Crimea, the situation was partly repeated. Hard power came with militarily intervention (claimed to be necessary to ‘normalize’ the situation in Ukraine), however soft power was already there, alive and kicking. Ethnically, they were Russians; democratically, decided to join another country. It should not be taken as sheer free will, especially because of the non-bellicose impregnation of Russian values in its neighbours;likewise, no sort of coercion through weaponry, vodka or Matrioshkas could result in a spontaneous demonstration of willingness to belong to another country in a plebiscite.
It is therefore to believe that a process of ‘conquering’ Crimea has started many years before 2014, be that for the importance of that region to the former Soviet Union, be that for the Russian population deeply dissatisfied with the Ukrainian instability in that moment. It is needless to say, on the other hand, that these measures, too, were not supported by the EU or the USA and they used their own hard power through sanctions and suspension of agreements related to Russia. After more than one year, the international community still believes that the intervention harmed Ukrainian sovereignty. What can be taken from that is that Russia aims to develop its persuasive politic manoeuvres and has been working hard towards it. Maybe in a more sinuous, Spartan way, that shows some points of improvement, but also gives the country the chance of analysing how much it is different from the West and in which points it really wants to be that distinct.
WWW.MODERNDIPLOMACY.EU THE CASPIAN PROJECT
NUCLEAR POWERS AT PLAY RUSSIA, PAkISTAN, NORTH kOREA
russian president putin engaged in a bit of saber rattling when he announced that Russia would field more than 40 new intercontinental ballistic missiles this year. Most news services interpreted the statement as a riposte to NATO’s announcement that it would pre-position heavy armored equipment in NATO’s Baltic members so as to deter Russian poaching.
eLena M. Intelligence Analyst
A quick review of the unclassified authorities on arms control issues shows that Russia has been working to modernize its strategic forces since 1997, but otherwise is in compliance with arms control agreements. The pace of modernization has been slowed significantly by the decline in the price of crude. The requirement, however, is becoming more urgent owing to the ageing of the systems. The Russian strategic triad is declining, say the experts at the Federation of American Scientists. One could say, Russia’s strategic position has similarities with North Korean and with Pakistan. It is similar to North Korea because both states have the capability to start a war, but lack the capability to win it. In the case of Russia, the war could span a continent. The Europeans are the least of Russian worries, which explains President Putin’s boldness. Europe is effete, increasingly aged and averse to confrontation. Its will to fight was squandered in Afghanistan.
China is Russia’s existential threat. Russian doctrine makes clear that tactical nuclear weapons would be used to defeat a Chinese attack. The willingness to use nuclear weapons to stop a conventional attack is the key insight from Putin’s statement. NATO and the US announced that they will position heavy equipment for armored cavalry or armored infantry units in the Baltic members of NATO. The stated purpose is to deter and defeat Russian aggression against NATO members. The US can move soldiers much faster than heavy equipment. In this solution, the major delay is the time it takes civil airliners to fly from the US to Vilnius, Riga and Tallinn. With reasonable and old fashioned intelligence warning, NATO could bring armored units with prepositioned equipment in the Baltics to full combat readiness faster than the Russians can field a combat attack force.
WWW.MODERNDIPLOMACY.EU THE CASPIAN PROJECT
CHINA IS RUSSIA’S ExISTENTIAL THREAT RUSSIAN DOCTRINE MAkES CLEAR THAT TACTICAL NUCLEAR WEAPONS WOULD bE USED TO DEfEAT A CHINESE ATTACk
NATO planners need to understand that in every race to mobilize, NATO beats Russia, provided US equipment is prepositioned. That leads to the second part of the discussion. If the US and NATO are clever enough to find a way to stop Russian conventional forces, Russia has few military options other than nuclear escalation, tactical or strategic. That makes Russia’s strategic position much like that of Pakistan.
After three general wars and two crises that approached general war, it is now clear that Pakistan cannot defeat India in a general conventional war. US intelligence analysts need to understand this as settled lore from decades of US intelligence experience: Pakistan cannot win a conventional war against India. In the near-war crises of 2001-2002, India achieved full combat readiness in less than three weeks, while the Pakistan Army, under President General Musharraf, failed to achieve full combat readiness. Pakistan’s failure to generate its conventional military power meant that its leaders thought they had no alternative to activating Pakistan’s strategic nuclear missile forces to stop an Indian conventional attack. That is the significance of Putin’s message. Russia cannot defend the national territory without using nuclear weapons. Pakistan and North Korea are in precisely the same position. That position does not imply that a conventional confrontation must go nuclear. It means that such a confrontation could go nuclear. Russia’s nuclear threats are serious because of the weaknesses of Russia’s conventional forces. A key question is how will NATO respond.
The 10 mosT impoRTanT Things you need To know on Caspian sea Region
the caspian daily newsletter Receive your daily roundup of Caspian Region news and analysis from sources around the globe
#CaspianDaily
SPIEf 2015 TENDENCIES & ExPECTATIONS Many heads of states and other high officials attended the Forum, turning it into the event of a global scale. Political officials and businessmen sign here cooperation agreements and The Forum aims to establish the frame- contracts worth millions of dolwork for developing ties between poli- lars. tics and business on local and the international level. This is a place where the president and his forum business faces politics and all the challenges the nowadays complex interna- In 2005 Vladimir Putin attended the SPIEF for the first time. Since tional situation brings. The First St. Petersburg Economic Forum then, unofficially called “presiwas held in 1997 under the aegis of the dential”, the Forum has transFederation Council of Russia and the formed into a highly political Inter-parliamentary Assembly of the event. The President became an Commonwealth of Independent States. excellent decoy for Russian and The next year St. Petersburg Forum foreign political and economic changed into a permanent body with a elite. He is the official identity of view to developing entrepreneurship in the Forum. In his speeches and Russia, strengthening relations with in- during round table discussions ternational trading partners and attract- Putin more often considers international politics issues. ing foreign investments. Within the next few years the Forum grew up from a conference focused on The atmosphere on the last the CIS integration processes to a grand year’s Forum was a perfect reeconomic event encompassing a wide flection of the tense relations range of business development issues between Russia and the West and drawing intense international atten- over the Ukrainian crisis. In partion. In 2007 the St. Petersburg Forum ticular, the economic sanctions, and the World Economic Forum signed coming after the annexation of the memorandum on participation of Crimea, were the main subjects to discuss. the WEF in the work of Forum.
this week the saint petersburg International Economic Forum, the biggest event in business life of Russia and its investors will take place. It is an annual gathering of influential Russian and international politicians and government officials, businessmen, representatives of academic community.
nina Lavrenteva MD Russia Editor Nina Lavrenteva is finishing her Master studies in “History of international relations and integration processes: cross-border cooperation” at the Institute of Political Studies, the University of Strasbourg
WWW.MODERNDIPLOMACY.EU THE CASPIAN PROJECT
Putin claimed that so far the sanctions target just “his friends, the people from his inner circle” and aim to “punish them, nobody knows why”. He also took the opportunity to deny once again that the annexation of Crimea was planned and the presence of Russian military in the region. Although, the St. Petersburg Economic Forum was a convenient framework for the foreign companies presented in Russia, the large companies decided to stay away from the risks and maintain their reputation. A number of big European and American companies boycotted the 2014 Forum. Among others, the representatives of Boeing, Goldman Sachs, Siemens, the Coca-Cola Company refused to come to St. Petersburg. Many companies reduced their representation in the event. The White House confirmed that the Administration of the U.S. President advised CEOs to ignore the Forum.
This year the Forum expects more than 5,000 of participants. “Recent changes require cohesive actions from the international community to ensure sustainable, long-term development”, President Putin says. He will hold a meeting with CEOs of big companies and corporations, and discuss new challenges for business with heads of investment funds. When the United States and Europe have blocked off the way to the West to a number of Russian politicians and businessmen and frozen the assets of several companies, Russian business faced serious challenges - many large Russian companies face difficulties in attracting European and American investors, purchasing of military equipment and dual-use goods. Also, a number of transactions in the energy sector were banned. However, the US and European companies involved in the Russian market are doing better than expected, although their activities are still subject to risk.
Russia has been living under the sanctions regime for a year already and the forthcoming Forum might be a useful platform for reflection on the future of Russian economics and business. Due to the Russian politics in Ukraine, a number of participants has been reduced significantly. Nevertheless, the organizers of the Forum are confident: "Political confrontation does not affect serious business". They are ready to welcome some large American and European companies soon. BCG and McKinsey & Company, Metro AG and TUI AG, Ernst & Young, Shell, BP, Societe Generale, Total, Schlumberger, Metro and Carlsberg are among them. new reference point - focus on asia The St. Petersburg International Economic Forum may be devoted to finding new allies, experts say. Most likely, they will be found in the Asia-Pacific region and Latin America. This year, Russian companies are preparing to conclude preferential agreements on international trade with the Shanghai Cooperation Organization and BRICS member states, as well as Turkey, Israel, South Korea, India and Peru. Also the possibility of establishing a free trade zone with ASEAN and further development of the Eurasian Customs Union are actively discussed.Already last year the tendency to reorient the big Russian companies to Asia became visible. For instance, Gazprom has struck the biggest bargain in its history with the Chinese CNPC – a contract worth $ 400 billion for 30 years. This year more representatives of Chinese business are expected to attend the Forum. The Japanese Toyota also plans to expand its presence in Russia, although with a view to
producing vehicles for Europe but not for Russian domestic market – as ruble has become weaker and the purchasing power of the population decreased. saint petersburg to become a business capital for a few days The Forum is a good opportunity to show the attractiveness of Saint Petersburg for Russian and foreign investors. The City Administration adopted the law which benefits investments in such areas as health care, education, culture and sport, science and innovation. The legal procedures for licensing of the future investors are being simplified as well. St. Petersburg will present its investment projects in transport infrastructure, science and innovation, energy, culture and tourism. A large part of the exhibition will be devoted to the development of the Arctic zone. The city will present the information about the region and its involvement in the development of these strategic for Russia territories. The models of the newest equipment for exploitation of the oil fields will be showcased. Without any doubts the Forum promises to be interesting. The confrontation between Russia and the West evolves – the White House claimed that the U.S. Authorities of any level will not be represented, while Alexis Tsipras, the Prime Minister of Greece, is expected at the Forum to discuss the “Greek question” with Vladimir Putin. The forthcoming Saint Petersburg Economic Forum will face the new challenges of today’s political situation. It will show the capacities of Russia’s economy to manage them.
WWW.MODERNDIPLOMACY.EU THE CASPIAN PROJECT
GLObAL ENERGY PRIzE AWARD
the Global enerGy prize 2015 award ceremony has been held as part of St. Petersburg Economic Forum. This year’s prize was awarded to Shuji Nakamura -professor of the University of California and B. Jayant Baliga - Professor of North Carolina University.
stella papadopoulou Journalist
The revolutionary inventions of two scientists changed the modern energy sphere and brought enormous commercial effect. “The Global Energy Prize - as repeatedly emphasized by the President of Russia – is a prize of the new millennium. It is awarded for exceptional scientific achievement in the field of energy. For scientific ideas that are not just theory, but have practical implementation and serve people”, - said Igor Sechin, president of OJSC Rosneft, head of the Presidential Commission for the Strategic Development of the Energy Sector who awarded the laureates on behalf of the Russian President Vladimir Putin. Professor Shuji Nakamura has invented the blue LED which allowed energy-efficient white lighting technology. He was already awarded for his invention with the Nobel Prize in Physics in 2014. "As a child I liked to read comic books. My favorite one was the "Mighty atom". Mighty atom was a robot invented by Professor Ochanomizu that fought with the "bad guys".
Over the time I desired to invent my own robot that could fight the "bad guys". This is how I’ve started my journey to becoming a scientist", - Shuji Nakamura shared with the audience. Professor B. Jayant Baliga, who has already been awarded by the President of the United States with the National Medal of Technology and Innovation (the highest engineering award), invented the Insulated Gate Bipolar Transistor which is one of the most important innovations for the control and distribution of energy. His technology forms the basis for famous smart grids. In the last 25 years, IGBTs saved over 73,000 TWh of energy, over 6 trillion gas liters, and decreased CO2 emissions by 49.5 billion metric tons. “The customer's savings exceeded $23.7 trillion”, - declared Prof. Baliga, adding that he aims to continue development of research in this filed. "I am happy to be awarded with the Global Energy Prize this year. For me personally it is a great honor.
WWW.MODERNDIPLOMACY.EU THE CASPIAN PROJECT
"Japan and Russia have established the diplomatic relations 160 years ago in 1855; the two countries have gone through various affairs, but keep on maintaining and developing the bilateral relations. Following the strategic and long-term perspective, I would like to further develop our cooperation in various spheres and raise the Japanese-Russian relations to a higher level. The mutually beneficial cooperation in the areas of energy and innovations is an important element of the Japanese-Russian relations that has great potential and new opportunities "- he said. But more important is that this award attracts the world's attention to my invention – the Insulated Gate Bipolar Transistor – and its implication for billions of people around the globe. In 1969 when I came to the United States from India, my dream was to create a technology that would benefit the whole humankind", - B. Jayant Baliga said. "Inventions of the scientists - are real global ideas, because they apply to everyone in every country. And they really change the world, fully complying with the concept of the "Global Energy", - Igor Sechin concluded. Japanese Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary to Russia Takehito Harada read the greetings from Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe and pointed that this is the third time when scientist from Japan is honored by the award.
The Global Energy Prize is an independent award for outstanding scientific research and technological development in energy, which contribute to efficiency and environmentally friendly energy sources for the benefit of humanity. Since 2003, The Global Energy Prize has been awarded to 33 Laureates from 10 countries: the UK, Germany, Iceland, Canada, Russia, USA, Ukraine, France, Sweden and Japan. The final choice of Laureates is decided by The Global Energy Prize International Award Committee, which consists of 25 respected scientists from 13 countries. The nominating pool of the Global Energy Prize is represented by 2800 scientists from 83 countries of the world. The award was established in Russia with the support of leading Russian energy corporations Gazprom, Surgutneftegas and the Federal Grid Company of Unified Energy System.
identity and politics in centRal asia and the caucasus MohaMMed ayoob (ed.) and Murad IsMayIlov (ed.) routledge- 2015
the MultIcultural regIon of Central Eurasia is living through its early post-independence years and as such serves as an ideal case to study and analyze theories of identity and foreign policy in a non-European context. Looking to re-introduce identity as a multidimensional factor informing state behavior, this book analyses the experiences of the different Central Eurasian states in their post-independence pursuits. The book is structured into two broadly defined sections, with the first half examining the different ways in which the combination of domestic, regional, international and trans-national forces worked to advance one national identity over the others in the states that comprise the region of post-Soviet Central Eurasia. In the second half, chapters analyze the many ways in which identity, once shaped, affected foreign policy behaviors of the regional states, as well as the overall security dynamics in the region. The book also looks at the ways in which identity, by doing so, enjoys an intricate, mutually constitutive relationship with the strategic context in which it bears its effects on the state and the region. Finally, given the special role Russia has historically played in defining the evolutionary trajectory of the regional states,
the book discusses the ways in which Russia itself and its post-cold war policies towards its former colonies have been conditioned by factors associated with Russia’s evolving post-Soviet identity. Indeed, by bringing identity back to the agenda in the study of regional security dynamics in post- Soviet Central Eurasia, the collection is meant to place the region firmly within the realm of existing theories of identity and state practices. Multicultural as it is and living through its early post- independence years, Central Eurasia serves as an ideal test case to study and analyze the workings of theories of identity and foreign policy in a non- European context. “
Petra Posega
www.modeRndiplomacy.eu the caspian pRoJect