Moscow, November 18 (RIA Novosti)
VEDOMOSTI
VREMYA NOVOSTEI
Russia set to export democracy
Representatives of United Russia's leftist platform wishing to promote democracy, suggested that the 2006 federal budget set aside 500 million rubles ($17.32 million, or _14.85 million) for supporting non-governmental organizations in Russia and elsewhere. Experts, who believe that support for foreign NGOs is a worldwide trend, doubt Russia's ability to export democracy.
"First of all, we must defend human rights and freedoms in the Baltic states, which are discriminating against the Russian diaspora," Deputy State Duma Speaker Vyacheslav Volodin, who co-authored this initiative, said.
Boris Shmelev, head of the Center of Comparative Political Studies at the Institute of International Economic and Political Studies (IMEPI), Russian Academy of Sciences, said that federal and regional institutions of state authority allocated small amounts of money to organizations uniting Russian-speaking diasporas in post-Soviet republics. "These sums hardly exceeded $1 million," Shmelev noted.
It seems that United Russia has decided to respond to a U.S. Congressional initiative that stipulates $4 million for promoting Russian democracy next year. And the Russian party of power wants to set aside 300% more money in order to defend national and foreign democracy.
"United Russia simultaneously wants to control public organizations and to promote democracy. Both intentions are hasty and lack transparency. It seems that the decision to set aside budgetary appropriations aims to finance a select few democratic organizations," Valentin Gefter, director of the Moscow-based Human Rights Institute, stressed.
The Russian opposition is making even tougher statements. "This has something to do with the forthcoming elections and fears of 'orange' moods," independent State Duma deputy and Yabloko member Sergei Popov said. "This is sheer nonsense. United Russia is trying hard to prevent our country's emergent civil society from asserting itself," Nikita Belykh, head of the SPS (Union of Right Forces) Political Council, claims.
MOSKOVSKY KOMSOMOLETS
Will Putin quit Kremlin ahead of time?
If President Putin has firmly chosen Dmitry Medvedev as his heir apparent, why has he made his move so early? It means surprise should be sought in the scheme of stepping down, rather than in the figure of the successor. And this makes plausible the supposition which but last week seemed incredible. What if the president has made up his mind to quit before 2008?
Until now a popular version has been that parliamentary elections will be moved, as at the end of 2007 the president will be a lame duck unable to rigidly control the make-up of a new State Duma. But if the president is re-elected early in 2007, then deputies will be lame ducks by the end of the year. Mass cash payments for the population, scheduled for 2006-2007, also provide an indirect confirmation of such a development of events.
In other words, there is a certain temporal cycle for nominating a successor. It is too early to name him two and a half years before the election. But there are no reasons to consider Medvedev a smokescreen. Too serious reserves have been committed. Putin has accepted too great sacrifices and inconveniences for himself. The new head of administration, Sergei Sobyanin, is unlikely to take the situation in hand fast enough. His deputies are certain to try to solve all problems directly with the president, bypassing the head of administration. All that will inevitably disorganize the work of the main body of political leadership in the country. The situation in the government is still worse. With the arrival of Medvedev, two No.1 men have appeared there at once. Only an early presidential election can resolve this contradiction.
The question is, how a very popular Putin will explain his early resignation to the public? He certainly has a concrete plan. Perhaps he will be offered to head a prestigious international organization or a newly created global structure. There may be several options. But everything will become clear only at the last moment.
This version conflicts only with the convictions of the president's confirmed opponents who are sure that Putin dreams of ruling forever.
MOSKOVSKIYE NOVOSTI
Blue Stream is Putin's foreign policy success
The principal political message of the Blue Stream gas pipeline from Russia to Turkey under the Black Sea is that President Putin has scored another foreign policy success, outstripping George W. Bush in a strategically important sector.
Turkey's Prime Minister Recep Erdogan has learned well the basics of the fine geopolitical game undertaken by Putin: Turkey is only a half-way station for Russian gas to southern Europe and the Middle East. Becoming the main source of energy for an increasing number of countries, Russia narrows down the area of possible military political counter-measures against itself.
The economic benefits of the gas pipeline from Russia to Turkey beneath the Black Sea are far from obvious. Blue Stream, which was yesterday officially opened in the presence of Russian, Turkish and Italian leaders, only complements the existing gas shipping corridor from Russia to Turkey across Ukraine, Moldova, Romania and Bulgaria. Blue Stream's design capacity is 16 billion cubic meters a year. Currently Ankara is taking about 5 bcm and in the foreseeable future is unlikely to take more - the Turkish market is oversaturated.
On the market of transit energy communications the Putin team is so far outperforming the Bush administration. While lobbying an alternative route - Shah-Deniz - Tbilisi - Erzerum - Ankara - the Americans failed to find common language with Erdogan. Washington, despite its once-given promise, is not overly enthusiastic in helping Ankara to achieve its cherished dream - join the EU. Russia, however, has already promised Turkey billions in investments for mobile telecommunications.
In the Caspian area and in Central Asia, the United States has less room for maneuver than Putin's Russia, which is not troubled by local tinpot dictators.
Putin has every chance of bringing Blue Stream also to Israel. Earlier the U.S. had on distant approaches torpedoed all attempts at a partnership by Russia and Israel in strategic areas. But if America fails to thwart Iran's nuclear ambitions, the ineffectiveness of its foreign policy will become apparent to Israel as well.
KOMMERSANT
India wants to create weapons jointly with Russia
India's Defense Minister Pranab Mukherjee ended his Russian visit on November 17. The talks he held here highlighted a new trend in bilateral cooperation: New Delhi wants to buy not what Russia offers but what it needs.
India accounts for some 40% of Russian arms exports. Pranab Mukherjee said that Russia remained the number one supplier of weapons and hardware to India. The total value of military contracts with Russia is nearly $10 billion; some of them have been partially fulfilled and others are in the pipeline.
New Delhi has moved from direct acquisitions in Russia to the joint creation of high-tech weapon systems of late. A relevant example is the draft agreement on the Il-214/MTA multirole transport plane.
The project will involve the Russian Irkut and Ilyushin aircraft manufacturing companies and the Rosoboronexport state exporter, and the Indian HAL Corporation. Moscow and New Delhi plan to invest in the project $190 million each, with 100 MTA planes to be built for the Russian Air Force and 45 for India.
India also wants to work jointly with Moscow in the creation of a new-generation fighter plane.
Moscow had invited New Delhi to take part in the creation of a promising frontline aircraft, which the Sukhoi Holding is designing at the request of the Russian Air Force. But India is not satisfied to be one of the key investors.
"India would have liked to join such a program at the stage of determining the plane's outlook and formulating requirements specifications," said the Indian ambassador in Moscow. "The Sukhoi project is long past this stage. Besides, India needs a smaller and lighter plane, which is why we plan to find another partner, possibly the MiG Corporation."
GAZETA.RU
Russian military to leave Baikonur space center
The Russian government has allowed the Defense Ministry to launch its spacecraft from Plesetsk, rather than Baikonur and Svobodny. It will cost Russian taxpayers an estimated 27.32 billion rubles ($946.31 million) to relocate equipment and other facilities from Baikonur. Over 2,500 people will lose their jobs. It's the price Russian space forces are ready to pay for their independence.
On November 17, the government approved a draft federal target program "The Development of Russian Space Centers in 2006-2015." The document merely aims to expand the Plesetsk space center in the Arkhangelsk region, the north of Russia. Moreover, the program is called on to stop all military spacecraft launches from Baikonur, Kazakhstan, and the Svobodny space center in the Amur region (Russian Far East).
The military are to provide the Federal Space Agency (Roskosmos) with a Proton launch facility, vehicle assembly buildings and some other installations by late 2005. Roskosmos is to receive several telecommunications centers, three telemetry centers and one computer center from Baikonur by mid-2006. Baikonur will only be used to test ballistic missiles after 2008. "Some space force facilities will be left in Svobodny," Russian Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov said.
The program notes that facilities for orbiting military spacecraft atop Soyuz-2 launch vehicles, as well as Angara launch pads, will be constructed during the initial stage, between 2006 and 2010. The Defense Ministry will have to spend 9.53 billion rubles ($330.1 million) for this purpose.
The required Angara launch infrastructure will be completed during the second stage in 2011-2015. This project will cost an estimated 17.79 billion rubles ($616.21 million).
This document attaches priority to building the ground-based Angara infrastructure. "Some 85-90% of the program's appropriations will be spend on this project," Ivanov stressed. "It will make it possible to implement independent space policies and to maintain satellite clusters."
