News items that look towards Ezekiel 38 & 39

[Shammu]

PM, Bush hold private meeting on Iran
jerusalem post correspondent
THE JERUSALEM POST
Nov. 28, 2007

Having depicted the wide Arab participation in Tuesday's Annapolis summit as a sort of victory for Middle East moderation over Iranian opposition, Prime Minister Ehud Olmert held his second private White House meeting of the week with President George Bush on Wednesday to try to translate the summit's momentum into a more effective effort to thwart Teheran's nuclear drive.

At a briefing prior to the Annapolis gathering, Olmert noted to The Jerusalem Post that the Iranians had made clear that they wanted their presumed allies to stay away and were "furious" about the high Arab turnout. Some 20 Arab and Muslim countries sent foreign ministers or other senior ministers to the gathering - including the Saudis and, most gallingly for Teheran, Syria, which dispatched its deputy foreign minister, Faysal Mekdad.

The Iranians wanted the Arab world to stay away, Olmert said, "and now see even the Syrians coming."

But Syria has stressed that it only came to Annapolis to ensure that its demand for the Golan Heights remained prominent on the Middle Eastern negotiating agenda. Damascus was testing "Washington's seriousness about working for peace this time. Its previous intentions have deluded us," according to the Syrian daily Teshreen.

And Saudi Arabian Foreign Minister Saud al-Faisal told reporters on Monday that his country's presence had no connection to any American hope of galvanizing a post-Annapolis wider consensus against Iran's nuclear drive.

"We have to worry about Israel first," Faisal said, and deal first with the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. This was a separate priority, he said, from the question of "whether Iran is developing weapons of mass destruction or interfering in Iraq."

Olmert had been saying consistently up until the last few months that he was confident Bush would find the means to stop Iran before leaving office. In an interview with the Post in September 2006, for instance, asked whether he felt that Bush would, one way or another, stop Iran from going nuclear, Olmert replied succinctly, "I believe so."

He elaborated that Bush "has the courage. There is no one in the world today who has greater courage and determination, and a sense of mission about these issues."

At this week's briefing, however, Olmert was more circumspect, saying only that Bush was "doing a lot on the Iranian issue" and that he and the president had been discussing it "for a long time."

Iran used both private diplomacy and public rhetoric to try to dissuade Arab participation in Annapolis - both because of its opposition to any reconciliation with Israel, and out of concern that changing alliances might leave it more isolated and more vulnerable to pressure over its nuclear drive.

And having failed to deter the Arab delegations, it publicly expressed its dismay.

The official Iranian media quoted President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as having flatly told Saudi King Abdullah by phone over the weekend: "I wish the name of Saudi Arabia was not among those attending the Annapolis conference. Arab countries should be watchful in the face of the plots and deception of the Zionist enemy."

And in a similar phone conversation with Syrian President Bashar Assad, he was reported as saying that "only the true representatives of the Palestinian people can take decisions" on their future.

He was more bitter still in a speech to a gathering of Iran's Basij religious militia, declaring that "attending this conference shows a lack of political intelligence... The names of those who give concessions to the Zionist occupiers by attending will not be remembered for goodness."

Ahmadinejad's rhetoric was also echoed by Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who predicted that Annapolis was "doomed to failure."

He told militia volunteers that "they hope the conference will help the usurping Zionist regime and save the honor of the Black House."

The Iranian-backed Hamas, presumably considered by Teheran to be among the "true representatives of the Palestinian people," also denounced the Annapolis gathering, as did the Iranian-backed Hizbullah in Lebanon.

And there were tellingly-timed new warnings from Hamas and from Iran itself about their development of new missile capabilities.

Iranian Defense Minister Mostafa Muhammad-Najjar announced "a victory for the Defense Ministry" on Tuesday in its development of a 2,000-kilometer-range missile, the "Ashura," which would bring European targets into range.

And Hamas spokesman Ahmad Yousef declared on Sunday that Hamas could make deadlier Kassam rockets to fire into Israel. In Damascus, meanwhile, Hamas leader Moussa Abu Marzouk warned of escalated violence after Annapolis "in all its forms and means."

Along with the Arab states, vital potential partners of the US and Israel in the bid to thwart Iran were notably present at Annapolis, with France, Britain, Germany, Italy, China and Russia all represented at the level of foreign minister. France and the UK are publicly committed to stepped-up sanctions aimed at persuading Teheran to change course.

Much of the international community is awaiting next month's United Nations Security Council discussion of new reports into Iran's nuclear program, including an assessment by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) of its scope and of the degree of Iranian compliance with inspection requirements.

The two key holdouts against intensified sanctions, Russia and China, have said they would reassess their positions in light of the imminent new reports. And there has been some speculation here that the revived talk of Russia hosting post-Annapolis talks on multilateral Middle East peace tracks - an idea the Russians say the US is now supporting in principle - may be part of an effort to give Moscow a greater peacemaking role and deepen its partnership with other international players in seeking to deter Iran.

Olmert has stated in the past that "Israel can't accept the possibility of Iranians having nuclear weapons, and we will act together with the international forces, starting with America, in order to prevent it."

Israel's strong preference is still for sanctions to deter Iran, rather than any resort, by any player, to immensely complex military action with potentially significant repercussions.

Plainly, though, time is limited, as Iran maintains its nuclear program in defiance of international pressure, and as the Bush administration heads into its final year. After Wednesday, Bush and Olmert may not have too many more opportunities to forge a definite position on thwarting Iran one way or another.

PM, Bush hold private meeting on Iran

[Shammu]

Iran's Ahmadinejad: Israel will not last

9 hours ago

TEHRAN (AFP) — Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on Wednesday predicted that Israel would not survive, as he lashed out at the US-hosted conference seeking to relaunch the Middle East peace process.

"It is impossible that the Zionist regime can last," state media quoted Ahmadinejad as saying in a cabinet meeting.

"Deterioration is in the nature of this regime as it has been built on aggression, lying, crime and wrongdoing," he added.

He said the meeting which united Israeli and Palestinian leaders in Annapolis, Maryland had "failed already and was stillborn. It lacked the cornerstones of effective political work."

The Islamic republic -- which has made non-recognition of Israel a cornerstone of its ideology -- was left isolated after its chief regional ally Syria and Saudi Arabia attended Tuesday's meeting.

"We regret that some people fell victim to the cursed Zionist regime and they are mistaken if they thought this meeting was an achievement for them or helps reinforce the Zionists," added the president.

Ahmadinejad has repeatedly courted controversy by predicting Israel is doomed to disappear, most notoriously calling in 2005 for the Jewish state to be "wiped off the map".

In an unusual diplomatic move, Ahmadinejad on Sunday chided Saudi King Abdullah in a telephone conversation for taking part in the Middle East peace meeting.

Despite sharing no borders, Israel and Iran are the region's two bitterest foes.

The tensions have intensified further over the Iranian nuclear programme, which Israel -- the region's sole if undeclared nuclear power -- charges is aimed at making an atomic bomb. Iran insists its atomic drive is peaceful.

Israel was an ally of the imperial regime of shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, developing close military and economic ties with Iran until the shah's overthrow in the Islamic revolution of 1979.

Iran's Ahmadinejad: Israel will not last

[Shammu]

ImaNutjob, is so delusional and warped, and he is livid about this peace summit. I think he is plotting to bring in the islamic mahdi. I also believe satan knows his time is growing short, and is gathering all of his end time arsenal.

It's so amazing to sit here and watch Biblical prophecy unfolding before our eyes!!

[Shammu]

Putin says will prevent foreign meddling

By Oleg Shchedrov Wed Nov 28, 11:27 AM ET

MOSCOW (Reuters) - President Vladimir Putin, who steps down next year, said on Wednesday he would not allow foreign powers to upset Russia's stability in the wake of two crucial polls, which will decide the country's future.

Anti-Western rhetoric has been a visible part of Putin's campaign ahead of December 2 parliamentary polls, in which he leads the United Russia party. Analysts expect a similar pattern in March 2 presidential polls to elect Putin's successor.

"We have done everything to safeguard Russia from internal disturbances and to put it firmly on the track of evolutionary development," Putin told diplomats and senior officials in a speech in the Kremlin.

"And I am forced to repeat myself -- we will not allow this process to be changed from outside," he said.

Allies credit Putin for presiding over an economic boom and for consolidating Russia. Critics say this has been done at the expense of democracy.

Putin is not allowed by Russia's constitution to run for a third term, but has said he wanted to maintain political influence after his departure to ensure his legacy survives.

His opponents blame the Kremlin for intimidating opposition figures ahead of the polls so United Russia can dominate the next parliament and a hand-picked ally takes over the Kremlin.

Putin rejected these suggestions.

"Our political course is clear and invariable," he said. "We follow the path of democratic development."

"We know the value of true democracy and want to conduct elections that are honest, as transparent as possible and open," said Putin. "We are sure this is the way these elections will be."

RHETORIC

Analysts say Putin, Russia's most popular politician, faces almost no risk in the transition of power.

But his prominent role in the polls and zero-tolerance of opponents will overshadow their outcome in foreign eyes.

Putin, a former KGB officer, has characterized Western fears as an attempt to impose alien standards and weaken Russia.

Last week, Putin accused his liberal opponents of being instruments of Western interference. Police have dispersed opposition rallies in Moscow and St Petersburg and arrested dozens of activists.

On Monday, Putin told the West not to poke their "snotty noses" in Russia. He blamed Washington for encouraging the election monitoring arm of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe not to send observers to the December 2 polls.

The OSCE's Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR) has said its decision was a reaction to obstructions by the Russian authorities.

Putin's harsh election rhetoric reflected growing foreign policy rifts between the West and Russia, which seeks to develop an assertive, independent role in international relations.

In a keynote speech earlier this year, Putin accused the United States of seeking to dictate its will to the world.

Russia opposes U.S. plans to deploy elements of its missile defence system in Europe, tackle Iran's nuclear program and accept independence for Serbia's breakaway province of Kosovo.

On Wednesday, Putin made clear this course will not change.

"A moment of truth is coming in global politics. We need to give up the policy of dictatorship and deterrent," he said.

"We will move nowhere until we agree on new, clear and mutually acceptable rules for cooperation in international affairs."

Putin says will prevent foreign meddling

[Shammu]

Iran May Seek to Lure Europe with Gas

Iran wants to use its massive gas reserves to wield influence over Europe. But if offering to supply Europe with gas via a pipeline through Turkey doesn't work, then the Revolutionary Guards may resort to plan B.

Iran is planning to leverage its massive gas reserves to increase its influence in Western Europe -- by fair means or foul. If selling gas to Europe doesn't work, then Iran's Revolutionary Guards may resort to violence in the worst-case scenario.

According to intelligence sources in the Middle East, Iranian leaders are considering making an unusual offer to supply Europe with large quantities of natural gas. The gas would be supplied via the planned Nabucco pipeline, which will run from Azerbaijan to Austria via Turkey.

The offer would be attractive to European leaders as it would allow Europe to reduce its dependence on Russian natural gas. Germany currently gets about a third of its natural gas requirements from Russia, and demand is expected to increase in the coming years. There are major concerns in Europe about the continent relying too heavily on Russia for its natural gas, particularly after a series of recent disputes in which Russia cut off energy supplies to Ukraine and Belarus.

According to minutes of a meeting obtained by SPIEGEL, a representative of Iran's Revolutionary Guard presented the proposal to Iran's National Security Council. The order to prepare the plan apparently came directly from Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, according to the intelligence sources.

Construction work on the Nabucco pipeline is expected to begin in 2009 and to be finished by 2011. The pipeline, which is being built by a consortium headed by the Austrian company OMV, will have a total length of 3,300 kilometers and cost around €5 billion. However the pipeline is controversial within the European Union and Moscow has already made its opposition to the project clear.

The project only makes economic sense if the pipeline is used to full capacity -- and Azerbaijan's natural gas reserves are not sufficient to guarantee that. Hence Iran, which has the world's second largest natural gas reserves after Russia, is the obvious natural partner for the project.

Tehran has yet to make an official offer, however. And any overture could cause political friction between the US and Europe: The US government has demanded that Berlin and Paris take clear diplomatic and economic action against Tehran over its suspected nuclear weapons program. German Chancellor Angela Merkel recently assured US President George W. Bush that Germany would apply strong economic pressure on Tehran (more...). Increased sanctions could make Iran's economy vulnerable.

However if a carrot doesn't work, then Iran might resort to a stick. Other alternatives were apparently also discussed at the meeting in Tehran. Iran's elite Quds force, a branch of the Revolutionary Guards, are reported to be charged with looking into possible ways to disrupt Berlin's energy partnership with Russia -- for example through terrorist actions against the planned Baltic Sea pipeline (more...) between Russia and Germany.

Iran May Seek to Lure Europe with Gas

[Shammu]

Poland Now In Range Of Iran's Missiles?

Warsaw, Poland - 29 November, 2007  As Poland's new Prime Minister is rethinking his country's participation in the US proposed missile defense shield, Iran has announced development of the "Ashoura" missile that, if the announcement is true, puts the Polish Capital City of Warsaw within range of a missile strike from Iran.

Not only is Warsaw is in range. The missile can also reach Moscow.

Development of a missile has been rumored for some time. And Iran has now confirmed the rumor.

"Iranian Defense Minister Gen. Mostafa Muhammad-Najjar announced on Tuesday that his country had developed a new ballistic missile with a range of 2,000 kilometers, capable of reaching Israel and US Army bases in the Middle East." See Iranian missile threatens Moscow

In the past many of Iran's weapons development claims have not been independently verified and the current claim falls into that class. Iran Says It's Produced New Missile.

In June, 2007, Doug Richardson, the editor of the London-based defense journal "Jane's Missiles And Rockets," commented on the state of Iran missile systems as it was known to exist at that time.

In order to get to Moscow you would have to get a missile of 2,000 kilometers range. We hear rumors of such developments from Iran but nothing very firm. We honestly don't have any real hard information on Iran's future missile plans, we've heard talk of something allegedly called the Shahab-3B; the story is rather vague. The reports talked about 2,000-2,500-kilometer range. There've been reports [about] Shahab-4 [but] the Iranians have said there is no such thing as Shahab-4. We have seen some pronouncement that there is a Shahab-4 but it's not a missile, it's going to be a satellite-launch vehicle. So there's just no hard information. We know they are doing a lot of rocket development work, 2,500 would not quite get you to Rome, it would probably get you to Zagreb, Budapest, you'd get most of Slovakia, it would get you a bit into the Czech Republic [and] up to Warsaw, Minsk, and not quite St. Petersburg. See Defense Expert Discusses Iran's Missile Capabilities

The new Ashoura missile is thought to have a range of 2000 to 2500 kilometers.

As Iran develops its missiles and nuclear capabilities of one sort or another, Europe has not done much to develop a defense.

The state of the placement of the missile shield in Poland is far from settled. The Tusk Government is going to be talking with the Russians and West Europeans before it makes a decision. And it wants to negotiate with the US for more benefits for allowing the base to be on Polish soil.

The Democrats in the US Government have cut funding for the proposed location in Poland. So even if Poland decides to go forward, there may not be money for either the base or more benefits.

Tusk wants to discuss the system with the Europeans because he sees NATO as very important. But NATO is little more than an augmented US force whose assets in Europe the interceptors are intended to defend. And NATO has already noted the importance of the missile shield but has taken the position that if the United States wants to pay for it, why should the Europeans? Poland's Choice On Missile Shield Is A Decision On Polish Defense

As Poland and Europe dither, Iran moves forward.

Russia, whose Government has been strenuously opposing the defense shield location in Poland is 2469 kilometers from Tehran. Now it is also within range of a missile attack by Iran.

If Iran has an effective delivery system, it is a matter of adding an appropriate payload that it might be able to buy. And it might not have to look far to get what it wants. The Israeli strike on the supposed nuclear weapons facility in Syria may have cut off one option. The Israeli "Nuclear Reactor Strike" and Syrian Weapons of Mass Destruction But with billions of dollars in oil money, Iran can well afford to get attention elsewhere.

Experts also believe Iran is developing the Shahab-4 missile, thought to have a range between 1,200 and 1,900 miles, that would enable it to hit much of Europe. And some sources claim that the Russians are helping a solid-fuel design team at the ubgone19 Bagheri Industrial Group in Teheran develop a 2,800-mile (4,505.2 kilometers) missile, capable of reaching London and Paris, and a 6,300-mile [10,000 km] range missile that could strike cities in the eastern United States. These reports are poorly documented

To Europe, Iran is like a thief with an empty gun. If the gun is pointed at you, do you assume it is loaded or not? And if the thief is as unstable as Iran's President seems to be, should you be more concerned? Should you even take him serious? And who should you depend on to protect you from him?

Russia and Poland now have to decide who and what is the bigger danger.

Russia will lose face and its domination of Poland with a US base on Polish soil. But it thinks that the US could eventually use the base against Russia.

If Poland agrees to the base it will have US backing against Russian domination and rogue missiles. But it will not make Russia happy.

The Iranian missiles may or may not be a clear and present danger. And Poland has to look after its own interests. The Polish Government has a tough decision to make in sorting out which are most important.

Iran has made its decision. It says that developing Iran's new missile is an important achievement.

Poland Now In Range Of Iran's Missiles

[Shammu]

Ukraine's Orange Revolution parties reach coalition deal

by Anya Tsukanova Thu Nov 29, 12:45 PM ET

KIEV (AFP) - The two parties that led Ukraine's Orange Revolution on Thursday reached a coalition deal, setting the stage for pro-Western Yulia Tymoshenko to return as prime minister.

The party of President Viktor Yushchenko and the Yulia Tymoshenko Bloc signed an agreement on forming the new government, interim speaker Roman Zvarych told parliament.

Applause broke out in the parliament chamber and some deputies presented Tymoshenko with a large bouquet of blue and yellow flowers representing Ukraine's national colours.

"I believe that we will succeed in forming an effective government and provide hope for systematic and deep reforms in the country," said Tymoshenko.

With her characteristic blond braids, Tymoshenko was Yushchenko's ally in the Orange Revolution, when hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians took to the streets in November 2004 for 17 days to protest rigged elections that handed victory to a pro-Moscow candidate.

But relations between them broke down just months after Yushchenko come to power in 2005, and critics took her to task as prime minister for a series of populist economic measures.

Tymoshenko became Ukraine's first female prime minister in February 2005 but was sacked in September amid bitter rivalry with Yushchenko.

A total of 227 deputies in the 450-seat Rada, or parliament, signed the coalition deal, paving the way for the appointment of a prime minister at a parliament session set for Tuesday.

But a key member of Yushchenko's party, Ivan Plyushch, refused to endorse the accord, underscoring the fragility of the deal that was backed by a slim majority in parliament.

Communist official Petro Tsybenko commented that the coalition endorsed by only 227 deputies "will not be viable. Every vote will be difficult."

The appointment of 47-year-old Tymoshenko as prime minister provides a first test for the coalition, with lawmakers close to Yushchenko reportedly reluctant to endorse her candidacy.

Ukrainian media have reported that Yushchenko's allies fear that Tymoshenko's return as prime minister could bolster her already strong popularity and turn her into a potential rival for the presidency.

Some pro-Yushchenko lawmakers have said that Tymoshenko should pledge not to stand in the 2010 presidential vote as a condition for her nomination as prime minister.

"I do not exclude the fact that we could support a single candidate in the presidential campaign," said Olexandr Turchinov, an aide to Tymoshenko, suggesting that they would rally behind Yushchenko.

Since Yushchenko came to power in 2005, three governments have been in office, as the country's political elites are torn by infighting.

Viktor Yanukovych, a pro-Russian politician who was Yushchenko's rival in the Orange Revolution standoff, resigned as prime minister on Friday after 15 months in office.

The move followed elections in September that were called to resolve months of wrangling between Yushchenko, who supports Ukraine's full integration with the West, including the NATO military alliance, and Yanukovych.

Ukraine's Orange Revolution parties reach coalition deal

[Shammu]

Fraud, intimidation and bribery as Putin prepares for victory

State workers forced to vote in effort to rig result for president

Luke Harding and Tom Parfitt in Moscow
Friday November 30, 2007

The Kremlin is planning to rig the results of Russia's parliamentary elections on Sunday by forcing millions of public sector workers across the country to vote, the Guardian has learned.

Local administration officials have called in thousands of staff on their day off in an attempt to engineer a massive and inflated victory for President Vladimir Putin and his United Russia party. Voters are being pressured to vote for United Russia or risk losing their jobs, their accommodation or bonuses, the Guardian has been told in numerous interviews with byudzhetniki (public sector workers), students and ordinary citizens.

Article continues
Doctors, teachers, university deans, students and even workers at psychiatric clinics have been warned they have to vote. Failure to do so will entail serious consequences, they have been told.

Analysts say the pressure is designed to ensure a resounding win for the United Russia party and for Putin, who heads its party list. The victory would give him a public mandate to maintain ultimate power in the country as "National Leader" despite being unable to stand for a third term as president in March.

In a televised speech yesterday Putin implored the nation to turn out and vote for United Russia, saying: "I count on your support." The president enjoys genuine popular backing but a spokeswoman for Golos, an independent organisation monitoring the elections, said "big pressure on voters across the country" was being used to balloon the result for United Russia.

"We are seeing a new phenomenon where voters are forced to get absentee ballots under threat of being sacked or being denied bonuses," she said. "People are then instructed to vote at their workplace where everything is tightly controlled." The spokesman said the pressure applied to private businesses as well as state-run enterprises.

Students have been told they risk the prospect of failing exams or being removed from courses if they do not vote for United Russia. Alexander, a journalism student at Oryol State University, said: "It's been made very clear that students who don't get absentee ballots and vote the right way could lose their place in the dormitory."

Anna, 31, a schoolteacher in Ulan Ude, said: "We were called to the staff room in my school about a month ago and asked to sign a formal declaration promising that we would vote for United Russia. I told them that I wanted to vote for another party, but they told me to sign it in such a manner that there was no way to refuse. They hinted I could lose my job."

A librarian in Buryatia region said she had been promised a premium on her salary if she voted for United Russia.

The Kremlin insists Sunday's elections will be free and fair, despite inviting only 400 international observers to monitor the poll, which is taking place in 95,784 polling stations across the world's biggest country. This month the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe's office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR) cancelled its mission to Russia after Moscow refused to give its experts visas.

Asked whether the Kremlin was planning to manipulate Sunday's election Vladimir Churov, the head of Russia's central election commission, told the Guardian: "They will be the most free, most transparent, and most suitable elections for citizens."

However, while state television has made no mention of electoral violations, websites and independent newspapers outside state control are seething with reports of attempts to pressure voters to turn out for United Russia.

Bloggers on Russia's most popular social networking site, Livejournal, have posted numerous accounts of intimidation. One in Murmansk wrote that he was told that if he didn't vote for United Russia "the management would get it in the neck".

Another in Yekaterinburg wrote: "Today my wife came home in shock. As the boss of a state company she has been told that all her workers living in different parts of town must take absentee ballots and go to vote in Kirovsky district. She has to go and sit all day on December 2 and call round everyone in her collective. Then she has to provide a list of who has voted." She then received a directive warning her to add anybody who didn't vote for United Russia to a list, and later those people would be "called to the office" of the local administration.

The Kremlin has cast Sunday's State Duma vote as a referendum on Putin. Although Putin is obliged to step down as president next May, a landslide victory may be used to legitimise his return to power, possibly as early as the summer.

The president's personal popularity remains high. But support for United Russia is less solid. Independent experts say the party's true ratings are around 35% - well below the 55% figure suggested by state-controlled opinion polls.

In a leak to Russian media this week, one senior election official said that regional governors had been told to deliver at least 65% of the vote for Putin's party, an "unrealistically high" total that could be achieved only through electoral fraud and by compelling people to vote.

"The elections are going to be falsified," said Mikhail Delyagin, an economist and the director of Moscow's Institute on Globalisation Problems. "The elections that took place in the Soviet Union were less falsified than this one."

He added: "All those who depend on state salaries have been forced to go and vote. This means workers on all levels of state power working for local government, all the military, and those who are in prison or psychiatric hospitals. Of course people have the possibility to lie. But there is enormous psychological pressure."

Regional election workers would also stuff ballot boxes - as they had done on previous occasions - boosting United Russia's vote by about 20%, he estimated. These results could be refined still further by using the election commission's central computer. "You can falsify as much as you want. But the result must be truthful-looking," he said.

Putin's decision to associate himself with United Russia's election campaign - and to stand as a candidate at the top of the party's federal list - has contributed to the scale of the fraud, analysts said.

"The scale of pressure is due to nervousness within the Kremlin administration since it announced that this is no longer a parliamentary election but a referendum on Putin," Fyodor Lukyanov, editor-in-chief of the journal Russia in Global Affairs, said. Lukyanov said he believed the amount of fraud on polling day would be small. "This is normal in contemporary advanced authoritarian systems. They are smart enough to organise the vote in quite a proper and correct way," he said.

cont'd next post

[Shammu]

Coercing people in advance was a more effective tactic, he added. "The consequences [of not voting for Putin] are not perhaps as bad as they promise. But there is psychological pressure, of course. I had thought Russian authoritarianism was much softer. We will see."

The squeeze on public sector workers follows numerous rule changes by the Kremlin to Russia's electoral system. Under a new law, all parties need 7% of the vote to enter parliament - up from 5% last time. Additionally, several democratic opposition parties have been banned from taking part. The Kremlin has also abolished constituency voting - in effect wiping out the last critics from the current Duma. It has also scrapped minimum turnout.

Critics allege that United Russia has received disproportionate media coverage on state-controlled TV while opposition figures have been blacklisted. Putin's speech at a US-style election rally in Moscow last week, in which he denounced Russia's opposition as "jackals", got 16 minutes on the main evening news.

"These elections are a farce," said Vladimir Ryzhkov, an independent MP banned from standing. The Kremlin liquidated his Republican party earlier this year, claiming it didn't have enough voters. "I call it a Kremlin biathlon. In a normal biathlon the sportsmen shoot at targets, but in the Kremlin biathlon, not only do the sportsmen shoot at their targets, but the judges shoot at the sportsmen," Ryzhkov said. "Half of Russia's politicians can't run. It's selection before election."

Yesterday the central election commission dismissed suggestions that public sector workers had been told they had to vote. Churov told the Guardian he regarded the allegation as a "provocation" put about by the opposition. "This is just propaganda," he said.

He also claimed it was "not possible" to manipulate results stored in the commission's central computer, nicknamed Elections. Voters could find out the result at their individual polling station by dialling 5503 on their mobile phones, he said.

It wasn't Russia's fault that the OSCE had cancelled its mission, he added. "I was waiting for the head of the ODIHR in Moscow. But instead he flew off to Washington," Churov complained.

Kremlin aides openly acknowledge that their aim is to push smaller parties out of parliament. "We have moved towards the purification of the legislature," said Putin's deputy spokesman, Dmitry Peskov.

Ivan, power station worker, Ufa
Every worker is being forced to take an absentee ballot and instructed to vote at one particular polling station with the rest of the workforce, all together for United Russia. It will be very easy for them to count who has turned up, who hasn't, and how they've voted. On every shift, in every department we are constantly being told that if you don't comply you'll get the sack.

Yelena, nurse, Ulan Ude
Every week we have a work briefing in our poliklinik [doctor's surgery]. They are always pressing on us to vote for United Russia. The head doctor ... says that if we don't vote for United Russia we won't get our Putin pribavki [federal funds added to nurses' salaries].

Dasha, 19, student, Moscow
I was hanging out with my friends in Novogireyevo [in Moscow] near the metro. There were six of us. We were approached by a car. A young man came out. He started talking to us about the elections and said if we wanted to vote for United Russia we could get 500 roubles. I didn't agree but four of my group did. They filled in some kind of form - name, surname and passport data. They were given the numbers of polling stations where they should go and vote and get the cash.

Anastasiya, 40, librarian, Buryatia
There was a meeting in the village where all doctors, teachers, nurses were gathered by the culture department of the local government ... The doors were closed and we were like hostages. We were told write a declaration saying "I, name and surname, pledge to vote for United Russia and these are my passport details ..." We were told that if United Russia got a high percentage in the village we would get a bonus on our salaries.

Natalia, 29, Novosibirsk
Some activists from United Russia came to my home. They asked if I was going to vote for their party. I said no because I don't agree with its ideology. And they replied, Well, look, there's blacklist of people who aren't voting for United Russia. We know where you live and we are going to add you to that list.

Masha, student, Vladimir
We were told - you study in a state university, so you should vote for the state party. I don't know what to do. I wanted to vote for another party. But it was so difficult to get into university, I don't want to be thrown out.

* Some names have been changed

Fraud, intimidation and bribery as Putin prepares for victory

[Shammu]

 U.S. says has proof of N.Korea uranium program

Sat Dec 1, 3:23 AM ET

SEOUL (Reuters) - The United States has evidence North Korea purchased equipment to enrich uranium, a key step in producing nuclear weapons, a U.S. envoy was quoted as saying on Saturday.
ADVERTISEMENT

The United States in 2002 first accused the North of running a covert nuclear program by enriching uranium, a charge that triggered the demise of a 1994 deal to disarm the North's nuclear arms program.

Despite North Korea's denial of the existence of a uranium enrichment program, there is "credible evidence" of its purchase of equipment and materials that could be used for just that, U.S. nuclear envoy Christopher Hill was quoted as saying by Yonhap news agency.

A U.S. embassy official in Seoul could not immediately confirm Hill's comments, which he said were made at a privately arranged function at a university.

Hill said he was confident the North would fully clear up the suspicion by the end of the year, including questions about how the centrifuges and aluminum tubes it had bought were used.

North Korea has an abundant supply of natural uranium but not all the equipment or even a reliable source of electricity to run a large-scale enrichment program, experts have said.

North Korea has agreed with regional powers to disable its plutonium-based nuclear facilities by the end of the year in exchange for aid and an end to its international ostracism.

It has also agreed to present an inventory of all its nuclear activities. Hill has previously said the North's declarations must come with no surprises or omissions.

Hill denied knowledge of North Korea's sale of uranium enrichment equipment to Syria, as reported by the Washington Times on Friday.

Hill is scheduled to make his second trip to the North this year on Monday, which would include his first visit to the North's Yongbyon nuclear complex.

U.S. says has proof of N.Korea uranium program

[Shammu]

Iran's Revolutionary Guards patrol Persian Gulf, U.S. says
Thu. 29 Nov 2007

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps has taken command of Iranian naval operations in the Persian Gulf, the U.S. military has revealed.

That means U.S. naval forces are operating in the same waters as an organization the United States considers a major supporter of terrorist activity.

Adm. Michael Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, made the disclosure Wednesday at the Army War College in Carlisle, Pennsylvania, where he was answering questions from military students.

Afterward, in a written statement, the U.S. Navy Fifth Fleet in Bahrain said, "Based on activities observed in the Arabian Gulf over the past several months, it appears the Iranian navy has shifted its patrol areas to the Strait of Hormuz and Gulf of Oman -- leaving the IRGC navy to provide the primary Iranian naval presence in the Arabian Gulf."

The move is of concern to the U.S. Navy, which has long viewed the IRGC's forces as more antagonistic than Iran's regular navy.

Mullen said Iran made a "strategic decision" in recent months to "essentially give the entire Gulf to the IRGC over the next four or five years."

"That's a big deal, because I think part of the leading-edge challenge with Iran is the IRGC specifically," Mullen said.

For the past several months, IRGC forces have occupied a sunken barge and crane near Iraqi oil terminals at the northern end of the Persian Gulf. The IRGC is using the site as an observation post for the area, which is patrolled regularly by U.S. and coalition naval forces.

Mullen's comments reflect the chairman's concern about not just Iran's nuclear program, but also its arms shipments to Iraq and Afghanistan and statements against Israel, a senior U.S. Navy official said.

The United States has long said it believes the IRGC is behind those arms shipments, but it has stopped short of saying the central government of Iran is responsible for those actions.

IRGC forces earlier this year seized a group of British sailors at the northern end of the Gulf and held them for several days. The British had been conducting a boarding of a merchant vessel, as part of an approved coalition operation in the Gulf.

Since that incident, security measures for boarding parties have been stepped up, a senior U.S. Navy official said. New procedures during all boardings include flying an armed helicopter overhead and having an armed vessel close by.

A U.S. Navy official in the region said that operations in proximity to Iran's regular navy have been "formal and correct," but added that IRGC forces "rarely respond" to U.S. Navy attempts at ship-to-ship communications with them.

Several U.S. Navy officials said the move is militarily significant for the United States because of the IRGC's terrorist affiliation. U.S. Navy ships would not want IRGC vessels sailing too close to them because of that concern, they said.

One official said Iran's regular naval forces evoke less concern because they "represent a nation state."

The IRGC was formed in 1979. Under Iran's constitution, the corps' task is to protect the revolution, which generally means that it makes sure that domestic forces don't threaten the theocratic state, said analyst William Samii of the Center for Naval Analyses. The center is a government-funded think tank for the Department of the Navy in Alexandria, Virginia.

In contrast, the conventional forces are tasked with protecting the country's borders and guaranteeing its security.

The naval move "makes perfect sense," Samii said in a telephone interview.

In recent years, the Iranian military has recognized that, in a toe-to-toe fight with the U.S. military, "they'd get squashed," Samii said.

In response, it has been focusing more on alternative tactics, in which the Revolutionary Guards excel, such as setting mine fields and using large numbers of small boats either packed with explosives or manned by personnel carrying rocket-propelled grenade launchers. The thinking is that at least one would be able to get close enough to a large enemy military vessel to attack it, Samii said.

"Iran is trying to send a signal that it is ready for any military eventuality and that it is prepared to defend itself aggressively," he said.

But the move could backfire by driving Iran's Gulf neighbors into the arms of the United States, which has guaranteed the security of Arab states in the Gulf for decades, Samii said.

Iran's Revolutionary Guards patrol Persian Gulf, U.S. says

[Shammu]

December 1, 2007, 20:00
Future Russia-EU deal falters
The Partnership Cooperation Agreement between Russia and the European Union has expired. It was signed ten years ago and will automatically be extended, but Russia says there is a need for a new long-term deal.

EU-Russia ties are facing critical challenges following a decade of global change.

“Today Russia is, of course, different from ten years ago and the EU today is absolutely not the same entity. Communication is bad - that’s why we need negotiations and that’s why we also need a new agreement,” notes Fyodor Lukyanov , Editor-in-Chief of the magazine 'Russia in Global Affairs'.

Since 1997 the EU has expanded and Russia's on the rise. Under these circumstances business seems to be catching up with the times. Currently Moscow and Brussels mediate through Partnership Cooperation Agreements: meetings, frameworks and objectives for contact. And business is booming through them.

According to President Putin European investment in Russia accounts for $US 43 BLN, while Russian investment in the EU is just one tenth of this at $US 4.3 BLN. However, profits could be bigger, relations more relaxed and processes more streamlined. So what’s the problem?

The reality is Russia's busy with elections and Europe is struggling to work out its future status after the failure of the EU constitution.

Marc Franco, head of EC delegation to Russia, says it's not an easy task to move forward. However, he believes, there light at the end of the tunnel, and ‘it’s not the train coming from the other side’.

Elsewhere, Poland blocked talks with Russia when Moscow imposed a meat ban after reports of unsanitary conditions. But with a change of government in Warsaw, tensions are easing.

So there is a certain hope a fresh partnership will be developing.

“It’s already clear that from the beginning of December both sides have come to the conclusion that the current agreement will be valid for another year automatically,” Presidential Special Envoy to EU, Sergey Yastrzhembsky, says.

It isn't the ten-year strategy both sides hoped for, but when new talks on the status of relations begin next year both Russia and Europe may be a little more prepared to work out future ties.

Future Russia-EU deal falters

[Shammu]

Putin, Gul satisfied with Russia-Turkey relations
01.12.2007 14:09 GMT+04:00 Print version Send to mail  In Russian  In Armenian

/PanARMENIAN.Net/ November 30, Russian President Vladimir Putin had a telephone conversation with President of Turkey Abdullah Gul.

The two leaders exchanged views on the current state of Russian-Turkish cooperation and the development prospects for relations. The two Presidents said they were happy with the rapid development of bilateral ties, which in many areas can already be characterized as an advanced and multi-faceted partnership.

The leadership in both countries sees continued all-round development of cooperation between Russia and Turkey as an important factor in ensuring security and stability across the Eurasian region.

Mr Putin, who sent Mr Gul a telegram earlier in the day following the plane crash in Turkey, repeated his condolences during the telephone conversation.

The telephone conversation took place on Turkey’s initiative, the Kremlin’s press office said.

Putin, Gul satisfied with Russia-Turkey relations

[Shammu]

Russia pulls out of arms treaty

By Stephen Fidler and James Blitz in London
updated 7:41 p.m. MT, Fri., Nov. 30, 2007

President Vladimir Putin signed a law on Friday suspending Russia's participation in a key post-cold war arms treaty, triggering an angry reaction from the US, which declared the move a "mistake".

In a significant new indication of the worsening diplomatic relationship between Moscow and Washington, Mr Putin personally ratified a law that means Moscow will suspend the Conventional Forces in Europe treaty (CFE) in a little under two weeks.

Western military experts believe the CFE, first signed in 1990, is a significant treaty that limits the number of battle tanks, heavy artillery, combat aircraft and attack helicopters deployed and stored between the Atlantic and Russia's Ural mountains.

It also contains a significant array of confidence-building measures, requiring all signatories to give other states advance notice of troop movements and missile launches.

Senior officials from the US and other Nato states said Russia was now all but certain to suspend the treaty from December 12, a deadline it gave earlier this year unless an agreement could be forged with Nato ­countries. "Russia has made a mistake in this unilateral behaviour of walking out of a major arms control treaty in Europe," said Nicholas Burns, the US under­secretary of state for political affairs.

Senior officials from other Nato states said Washington and its allies now needed to decide when they would themselves suspend the treaty provisions.

"From December 12, Russia will not be giving notification of its troop movements or allow external inspections," said a senior official from a Nato ­government.

"We will therefore see a gradual degradation in the application of the treaty. By March or April of next year we will have to decide whether we start to suspend the application of the treaty to our own forces."

Russian and US negotiators met in Madrid on Thursday to discuss the CFE but no progress was made, US officials said.

A senior US official said Russia had demanded that so-called "flank limits" limiting the movement of Russian troops should be lifted in advance, while those restricting Nato troop movements should be left in force. "That is so one-sided it really isn't workable," he said.

Russia also demanded there should be a collective ceiling on Nato forces. But the US official said the purpose of the discussions had been to secure ratification of a previously negotiated adapted version of the CFE treaty - and the proposals relating to collective ceilings and flank limits would have required the adapted treaty to be renegotiated.

Differences remained also on the stationing of Russian troops in Moldova and ­Georgia. He said Mr Putin's move meant that prospects for the survival of the treaty had moved "close to vanishing point".

Russia pulls out of arms treaty

[Shammu]

Voters weigh Chavez's bid for more power

by Marc Burleigh Sun Dec 2, 10:12 AM ET

CARACAS (AFP) - A referendum by President Hugo Chavez to change Venezuela's constitution went to the vote Sunday amid deep opposition to his ambitions to impose a socialist economy and rule for life.

The predicted closeness of the result raised the prospect of post-poll violence among supporters and opponents.

Chavez, a 53-year-old former paratrooper who is using his country's vast oil wealth to mount a leftist challenge to US influence in Latin America, has warned of a suspected CIA plot to stir up trouble over his reform.

He has vowed to cut oil supplies to the United States if unrest occurs.

"There will be no oil for anyone, and the price per barrel will go up to 200 dollars," he said Saturday.

On Friday, in his final campaign rally, the ally to Iran and Cuba said: "A vote 'yes' is a vote for Chavez -- a vote 'no' is a vote for (US President) George W. Bush."

Surveys released in the lead-up to the referendum showed the result too close to call, with many in Chavez's traditional powerbase -- the poor who make up 80 percent of the 27-million-strong population -- balking at the constitutional changes.

Measures Chavez is trying to usher in include allowing limitless re-election for the president, giving the government the right to gag the press in emergencies, and permitting the expropriation of property.

He is also seeking to cut the workweek from 40 hours to 36 and reinforce costly social programs improving literacy and health among the poor.

The president, who first came to power in 1999, has said he wants to remain in charge "until 2050," when he would be 95.

Tulio Hernandez, a professor at the Central University of Venezuela, said Chavez's undeniable charisma could play a crucial role in favor of the referendum.

"People have never voted to support his socialist projects," Hernandez told AFP. "But he is a living incarnation of the savior, which is a very Latin American tradition."

Voting, taking place under warm and sunny skies, was to end at 4:00 pm (2000 GMT), with official partial results expected three hours later.

There were long lines at polling stations in the capital.

"I admire Chavez for everything he's done for the poor," said a guard in one, Ruben Gonzalez, 43.

But Carlos Fuente, a 33-year-old bank employee, said that, while he had backed Chavez in the past, this time he voted 'no' because he did not want to see "power concentrated in the hands of one man."

In one polling station, a military officer at the door told AFP on condition of anonymity that he had orders to block access to journalists from CNN, which Chavez has repeatedly railed against for alleged bias.

Fears of fraud were voiced in some of the centers after the discovery that the ink used to color voters' thumbs as they arrived for their ballots was easily removed.

"It's a trick by Chavez supporters to rig the referendum," said a voter, Doris Gordonne, 47, after casting her ballot in the San Bernardino district.

Maria Di Benedetto, the head of the polling station, said she had delayed voting for 90 minutes to write up a report on the issue to electoral authorities.

But Vicente Diaz, a member of the National Electoral Council (NEC), dismissed the complaint, saying the ink had been approved by officials and the opposition before polling began.

"If there is a problem with the ink in one place, it must be an isolated incident," he told state VTV television.

Unlike in past elections, there were no EU or Organization of American States election monitors, only international observers invited by the government.

One of them, former Bolivian president Jorge Quiroga, was stripped of his accreditation after expressing opinions that were "very aggressive against the institutions of the state," another NEC member, Sandra Oblitas, said.

Voters weigh Chavez's bid for more power