Featured Post

SalaamOne NetWork

SalaamOne سلام   is   a nonprofit e-Forum to promote peace among humanity, through understanding and tolerance of religions, cul...

The old partition of the Middle East is dead?

The Lebanese Druze leader – who fought in a 15-year civil war that redrew the map of Lebanon – believes that the new battles for Sunni Muslim jihadi control of northern and eastern Syria and western Iraq have finally destroyed the post-World War Anglo-French conspiracy, hatched by Mark Sykes and François Picot, which divided up the old Ottoman Middle East into Arab statelets controlled by the West.
The Islamic Caliphate of Iraq and Syria has been fought into existence – however temporarily – by al-Qa’ida-affiliated Sunni fighters who pay no attention to the artificial borders of Syria, Iraq, Lebanon or Jordan, or even mandate Palestine, created by the British and French. Their capture of the city of Mosul only emphasises the collapse of the secret partition plan which the Allies drew up in the First World War – for Mosul was sought after for its oil wealth by both Britain and France. Keep reading >>>>>


NATO Re-surfaced Map of the New Middle East

By: Chris_Kitze
Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya writes: A relatively unknown map of the Middle East, NATO-garrisoned Afghanistan, and Pakistan has been circulating around strategic, governmental, NATO, policy and military circles since mid-2006. It has been causally allowed to surface in public, maybe in an attempt to build consensus and to slowly prepare the general public for possible, maybe even cataclysmic, changes in the Middle East. This is a map of a redrawn and restructured Middle East identified as the “New Middle East.”

“Hegemony is as old as Mankind…” -Zbigniew Brzezinski, former U.S. National Security Advisor

The term “New Middle East” was introduced to the world in June 2006 in Tel Aviv by Former U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice (who was credited by the Western media for coining the term) in replacement of the older and more imposing term, the “Greater Middle East.”

This shift in foreign policy phraseology coincided with the inauguration of the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan (BTC) Oil Terminal in the Eastern Mediterranean. The term and conceptualization of the “New Middle East,” was subsequently heralded by the U.S. Secretary of State and the Israeli Prime Minister at the height of the Anglo-American sponsored Israeli siege of Lebanon. Prime Minister Olmert and Secretary Rice had informed the international media that a project for a “New Middle East” was being launched from Lebanon.


* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Humanity, Religion, Culture, Ethics, Science, Spirituality & Peace
Peace Forum Network
Over 1,000,000 Visits
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Russia and China Really Do Like NATO's Occupation of Afghanistan


The United States is winding down combat operations in Afghanistan and suddenly Russia and China -- who thought the United States had no business there in the first place -- don't want U.S. troops to just turn off the lights behind them.

Senior Russian and Chinese officials have encouraged Afghanistan's leaders to sign the so-called Bilateral Security Agreement with the United States, according to a senior Western diplomat who maintains contact with the Afghan leadership. If signed, the pact would keep U.S. forces playing at least a limited military role for the foreseeable future. Keep reading >>>>>


* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Humanity, Religion, Culture, Ethics, Science, Spirituality & Peace
Peace Forum Network
Over 1,000,000 Visits
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Can Russia Sell Arms to Both India and Pakistan?

If this is indeed the case, Russia would have an easier time charting a balanced political course in South Asia. This can be done, for example, with the help of energy projects that connect Russia to the Central and South Asia. Besides, the launch of military-technological cooperation between Russia and Pakistan, in addition to the long-existing ties with India, would provide balance to Moscow’s relations with New Delhi and Islamabad. Russia could start its military-technological cooperation with Pakistan even before there is complete trust between that country and India. It needs to be very careful though.
Pakistan is interested in such cooperation. First, following the diminished American interest, the country fears greater dependency on its “any-weather friend,” China, and thus needs Russia to balance against the Chinese influence. Second, Islamabad is clearly interested in Russian arms. Third, the Pakistani armed forces have used Soviet and Russian military technologies in the past, receiving them either through occasional contracts with Russia (for instance, military transport helicopters) or through third countries, which include Belarus, Ukraine, and, of course, China.

Russia, too, would benefit from such cooperation. First, Moscow would thus be able to control the transfer of Soviet and Russian military technologies that presently end up in Pakistan by way of other countries. Second, stronger armed forces would allow Pakistan to more effectively counteract security threats in its tribal territories, which also negatively affect Russia’s own security. Some terrorists that are active in Pakistan come from Russia and the former Soviet republics, and may later return to their places of origin. Third, long-term cooperation with one of the largest armed forces in Asia offers prospects of hefty rewards for the Russian military industrial complex.

Because of the intimate nature and large scale of defense ties between Moscow and New Delhi, Russia’s cooperation with India will remain a priority regardless of prospects for military-technological cooperation between Russia and Pakistan. Therefore, if India raises reasonable objections to some prospective Russian arms or military technology transfers to Pakistan, the transfers would be unlikely to materialize.

Moscow can take a few steps to make New Delhi’s position more flexible. First, any negotiations on military-technological cooperation between Moscow and Islamabad should be made fully transparent for New Delhi. If necessary, the negotiations can be conducted in conjunction with the Russian-Indian consultations. This rarely happens on the international level; however, Russia might have to do it in the context of South Asia. Besides, Russia must ensure Pakistan’s strict compliance with the ban on transferring arms, military technologies, and documentation to third countries. This will alleviate New Delhi’s concerns about possible transfer of technologies Pakistan obtains through contacts with Russia to Beijing.

Second, since China’s potential concerns India no less, and perhaps even more, than Pakistan’s military capabilities, Russia could take India’s position on this issue into account and accommodate it whenever possible. It does not mean Moscow should curtail its military-technological cooperation with Beijing, but it may want to consider India’s concerns when signing its future contracts with China.

Third, while developing military-technological cooperation with Pakistan, Russia should also significantly enhance its relations with India in all areas. As far as military-technological cooperation is concerned, Moscow and New Delhi could initiate new strategic projects, similar to the BrahMos missile project. This would help Russia to strengthen its positions on the Indian arms market, since it would cooperate with India on the aspects of military technologies which other countries are not yet ready to cooperate on.

Developing new strategic projects would not only serve to expand the current military-technological cooperation between the two countries but would also bring their relations to a new level. Joint efforts by Moscow and New Delhi could enable them to produce components for strategic weapons systems or the systems themselves. Under the current conditions, such cooperation would be in Russia’s interests. Russia’s relations with a host of countries have been adversely affected by the Ukraine crisis, thus the country is now experiencing difficulties with receiving certain components necessary for its arms and military technology production. In addition, it would be imprudent to cooperate with China in this field given its record of technological espionage. Finally, India has acquired extensive experience in developing and using high technology in the military industrial sector during the last few decades thanks to its cooperation with Russia, Israel, France and a number of other countries.

Russian-Indian defense cooperation needs to intensify irrespective of the prospects for developing the Russian-Pakistani military-technological cooperation. Otherwise, the collaboration between Moscow and New Delhi may enter the period of stagnation. In this case, no contracts with Pakistan will offset the losses Russia is likely to suffer.

As this post was being written, a news item that both confirms and contradicts some of its contents appeared. The head of Rostec Corporation Sergey Chemezov informed the public that Moscow is open to military-technological cooperation with Pakistan, and the negotiations on the sales of Mi-35 multipurpose military transport helicopters to that country are already underway.

On one hand, Chemezov’s statement indicates that Russian authorities no longer see any obstacles to exporting arms and military technology to both India and Pakistan. On the other hand, such statements may harm military-technological cooperation between Russia and India, especially at the present time when Russia is trying to establish ties with the newly-elected Indian government. Perhaps, more fertile ground for such pronouncements should first be created through consultations with New Delhi officials and informing the Indian press. Quite frequently, the exact opposite is the case: such statements are followed by tardy explanations. To a great extent, the negative effect of the Russian-Pakistani military-technological cooperation on the Russian-Indian relations can be counteracted by consistently moving military-technological cooperation between Moscow and New Delhi into the truly strategic realm.
By Petr Topychkanov, carnegie.ru
  1. Russia lifts arms embargo to Pakistan: report - Yahoo New ...

    https://nz.news.yahoo.com/.../russia-lifts-arms-embarg...
    6 days ago
    Moscow (AFP) - Russia has lifted its embargo on arms supplies toPakistan and is holding talks on supplying ...


* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Humanity, Religion, Culture, Ethics, Science, Spirituality & Peace
Peace Forum Network
Over 1,000,000 Visits
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *