In this issue:

Strategy of Tension Moves to Central Asia

Russia Wary as New Members Join NATO

Russia Responds to NATO Air Patrols Over Baltic

Russia in Negotiations Over Terms of Trade with EU

'Radical Reduction' for Russian Government and Kremlin Staff

LaRouche Strategic Analysis Discussed in Russia

From Volume 3, Issue Number 14 of Electronic Intelligence Weekly, Published Apr. 6, 2004
Russia and the CIS News Digest

Strategy of Tension Moves to Central Asia

A series of bombings and confrontations between police and guerrilla units rocked the Uzbekistan capital Tashkent, and the ancient city of Bukhara, March 28-30. Foreign Ministry spokesman Ilkhom Zakirov said there were 19 dead and 26 wounded in the first two days of the clash. Ten died when a house being used as a bomb factory blew up in Bukhara, and three police were killed in two attacks, on a checkpoint and another location. On March 29, there were six killed (three police, one child, two bombers) in suicide bombings in a crowded Tashkent market, outside Detsky Mir children's store. On March 30, another 20 people were killed in a series of confrontations, involving a showdown at a checkpoint, a chase, and another explosion at a guerrilla safehouse.

Uzbekistan sealed its border with Tajikistan, and a state of siege was declared in Tashkent. Train and bus services were suspended; markets and schools were closed.

Uzbek President Islam Karimov took control of the investigation, charging that the attacks were organized from outside the country. He cited by name the Hizb ut-Tahrir organization, which is based in London. A Hizb ut-Tahrir spokesman denied responsibility and suggested that Karimov's regime had orchestrated the bombings as a pretext for a crackdown on political opponents. Russian and other commentaries also focussed on a possible role of the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan, which is based in Afghanistan, and speculated about links to Uzbek ethnic "al-Qaeda" operatives, killed or otherwise involved in the Pakistan operations on the border with Afghanistan.

Russia Wary as New Members Join NATO

After the March 29 White House ceremony to welcome Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia, and Slovenia into NATO, government spokesmen for the seven countries tried to emphasize their "open-door policy," and to eliminate fears that the eastward expansion could be considered a threat to Russia. Spokesmen for the Russian government, however, had a different focus. The main point addressed by them, was that the new members, especially the three Baltic states and Slovenia, which were not independent when the Conventional Forces in Europe treaty was signed, should now sign it. The CFE limits the numbers of troops in eastern Europe. Now, with the NATO expansion, there are more. Foreign Ministry spokesman Alexander Yakovenko stated, that "restrictions on conventional armaments, stipulated by the treaty, are not valid on the territory of the Baltic countries and Slovenia." He said Russia would insist that they join the treaty.

Furthermore, the mere expansion is seen as a threat. Yakovenko said in a statement released prior to the ceremony: "Without doubt, NATO's expansion touches Russia's political, military, and, to a certain extent, economic interests." Deputy Foreign Minister Vladimir Chizhov was quoted by Interfax saying, "If we feel this expansion poses a threat to us that demands a military response, this response will follow."

Russia Responds to NATO Air Patrols Over Baltic

No sooner had the NATO expansion formalities been completed in Washington, than four Danish F-16 fighter planes started patrolling the air space of the Baltic states. The new Foreign Minister Lavrov said March 29, "Russia fears gaps in its security." He added that, although Russia "had no problem with Russian troops in Rumania or Bulgaria," for the fight against terrorism, "new bases in the Baltic are not to be accepted."

Foreign Ministry spokesman Yakovenko addressed the issue of air patrolling: "If the alliance thinks the region needs such defenses, Russia has a right to draw its own conclusions, and will be forced to respond accordingly." He added, "It's unfortunate that in taking this decision, the NATO countries didn't get a realistic picture of the military situation in the region, where there are no direct security threats, partly because of unprecedented disarmament efforts by Russia and other states."

An indication of rising tensions between the Baltic states and Russia, is the recent expulsion of Russian diplomats by Lithuania on Feb. 27, and Moscow's explusion of three Lithuanian diplomats on March 30, on espionage suspicions. It is also reported that Estonia expelled two Russian diplomats, with Russia responding in kind.

Russia in Negotiations Over Terms of Trade with EU

Russian Minister of Economic Development and Trade German Gref spent nearly a week in Western Europe, beginning March 25, to negotiate Russia's relationship with the EU; he then attended a session on Russia's joining the World Trade Organization, and held bilateral meetings in Germany. Strana.ru in a commentary dated April 2, called the progress achieved by Gref in the EU talks "sensational," considering how far apart the sides had been on a wide range of "free-trade" issues. Prickliest is the question of the 10 countries, most of them former Comecon members or Soviet republics, that are still major Russian trade partners, joining the EU in May. Until now, the EU has refused to accommodate Russia's demand to renegotiate their Partnership and Cooperation Agreement (PCA) to take the expansion into account, though Russia stands to lose $300 million in trade annually, if the quotas and other terms of the existing PCA were extended to the new members. As of March 27, a spokesman for EC Trade Commissioner Pascal Lamy said there had been "no talks about compensation; now will there be."

According to RFE/RL Newsline, an EU spokesman said on March 31 that the EU was preparing a declaration to address Russian concerns about the impact of the expansion. Meanwhile, Strana.ru reported Gref's claim that progress had been made on Russia-to-EU nuclear-fuel exports (especially relevant for power plants in the Baltic countries, originally built when they were part of the Soviet Union), trade in steel and agricultural products, and anti-dumping procedures.

'Radical Reduction' for Russian Government and Kremlin Staff

At the April 1 Cabinet meeting of the Russian government, Prime Minister Mikhail Fradkov laid out the "sharp reduction" of senior staff, entailed in the current government reorganization. This is not a process of moving bureaucrats from chair to chair, he said, but will eliminate scores of "redundant" posts. Before, there were over 400 people with the rank of deputy minister or deputy chief of agency; now there will be 123. Each ministry will have a maximum of two deputy ministers (the Ministry of Economics and Trade currently has 12, the Finance Ministry 9). The new structure will emerge this month, said Fradkov and Dmitri Kozak, President Putin's close aide who now heads the government staff.

On March 25, Putin signed a decree to restructure the Presidential Administration, as well. Its chief, Dmitri Medvedev, will have only two deputies instead of seven. The survivors are the powerful, behind-the-scenes figures Igor Sechin and Vladislav Surkov. Several of the other deputies will still be employed as aides to Putin. The reorganization appears aimed, though, to end the Presidential Administration's functioning as a shadow to the government; for example, the economic department of the Presidential Administration has been eliminated, while several other sections were merged.

It may be noted that, however bloated the notorious "Soviet bureaucracy" was, both the government and the Kremlin apparat ballooned into even larger administrative structures during the 1990s.

At his residence in Sochi, the weekend of March 27-28, Putin staged a nationally televised "no neckties" briefing for the Kremlin press pool, to explain these moves. He said the Presidential Administration had emerged in the revolutionary period of the early 1990s, but now that turmoil was over, and a different kind of organization was needed. He also took the opportunity to tell why he had selected Fradkov as Prime Minister, stressing the latter's toughness—as in sending his young son to attend the Suvorov Military Academy in St. Petersburg in the mid-1990s, when others were looking for more comfortable careers in business—and selfless commitment to the state.

LaRouche Strategic Analysis Discussed in Russia

Two Russian publications issued in March indicate ongoing discussion of Lyndon LaRouche's strategic analyses in influential circles within Russia.

General Leonid Ivashov, former chief of the Russian Defense Ministry's international department and now Vice President of the Academy of Geopolitics, wrote in his March 25 "Topic of the Day" commentary for the MiK (Marketing and Consulting) web site, under the headline "International Terrorism Stems From Poverty," that the current outbreak of international terrorism can only be understood in the setting of the profound crisis of the world economy. Ivashov cited "Schiller Institute estimates" that the ratio of the virtual economy to real production is 10 to 1. "That is, an enormous dollar bubble has been inflated, a kind of financial pyramid, which is bound to pop," said General Ivashov. He attributed the attack on Iraq to "Washington's feverish attempts to save the situation" by grabbing oil, adding that such a maneuver "can only hasten the approach of the global collapse."

Under these circumstances, Ivashov underscored the insanity of the Russian liberals having "attempted to copy in Russia the immoral economic model" imported from the USA in the 1990s. He quoted Lyndon LaRouche as telling him that "you [Russia] have paid with your resources to support the collapsing world financial system, run by the oligarchical families of Britain and the United States."

The world crisis of the liberal monetarist system, Ivashov wrote, has bred a security crisis—most definitely for that system's promoter, the United States. Iraq is one example, but "the genie of violence, once out of the bottle, has flown all over the world, concentrating on the USA, Israel, Great Britain, and their allies in the anti-Iraq coalition," as seen most recently in the railway bombing in Spain.

The other publication is a lengthy unsigned discussion of European Security Policy put out on March 10 by the NAMAKON think tank, an analytical center run by ex-Soviet intelligence officers. The topic is "European Security Policy" and how it may be shaped during the current world crisis. The analysis reflects its authors' very detailed study of LaRouche's writings and speeches, as well as intelligence analyses published by EIR. Subsumed topics include Dick Cheney's role in the U.S. administration, the ideological leadership of Leo Strauss, Samuel Huntington's The Soldier and the State, the relationship of the economic crisis and strategic matters, and LaRouche's Eurasian Land-Bridge "grand design" as the centerpiece of a potential strategic shift in the world.

All rights reserved © 2004 EIRNS