At Gunpoint Celestial “Killers”: Why America Was Frightened of Russian “Bears” and “Swans”

At Gunpoint Celestial “Killers”: Why America Was Frightened of Russian “Bears” and “Swans”

http://tvzvezda.ru/news/forces/content/201412080837-zeby.htm
December 8, 2014, 8:37
 

Strategic bombers Tu-160 and Tu-95MS will be flown along the borders of Russia over the Arctic, Atlantic, Pacific and Indian oceans, providing military parity with the United States. This was recently announced by Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu, which aroused a storm of indignation in Washington and Brussels confident that the situation is “not justified” numerous flights of Russian strategic bombers regularly patrol remote areas of the planet.

 

Habitat
 
“Implementation of the crews flying over the Pacific, Atlantic and Arctic Ocean is considered natural for training pilots of strategic aviation work” – said the TV channel Star former commander of long-range aviation and a former Air Force Commander Peter Deinekin. – “In its duration and distance they are fully in line with those of the strategic bombers United States.” Therefore, the general did not see any problems that our missile went back to the traditional routes of the combat patrol.
 
“We have always shown their abilities to those who provoke us to all sorts of conflicts, – says Deinekin. – The crew of long-range aircraft, which I commanded, from the beginning of the “cold war” is constantly operating at reconnaissance aircraft carrier battle compounds USA. We drifted to the Faroe Islands in the west to the Philippines in the Pacific Ocean. In recent years, such operations for economic reasons was not done,  and the Americans have forgotten that we can still do.”
 
The General said, “flying around the corner,” as they call these pilots flying long-range aircraft, our Air Force began in the 80s of the last century in response to the deployment of US cruise missiles, long-range in northern Italy, southern Germany, and England. Takeoff from “Engels” near Saratov, our Tu-95MS (NATO members call him “Bear”) and Tu-160 (NATO classification in “Black Jack”, and we call this plane “White Swan”) can easily reach the coast of the US, Great Britain, suddenly find themselves in the Indian Ocean off the coast or Australia.
Under them were specially made by the so-called airfields “jump” intermediate base, where the crew can relax, technical services refuel, conduct maintenance of machinery. Today some of these airfields: near Vorkuta, Vladivostok, Belarus Baranovichi on Kant air base in Kyrgyzstan. Was tested the possibility of basing the Tu-160 in Venezuela. These sites allow aircraft to fly from our borders to 12 thousand kilometers, and even further.

“To fly to the United States ten, but even with two aerial refueling machine may just half an hour to be in close proximity to the coast of America, – says Peter Deinekin. – The appearance of our home bases in Latin America allows our aircraft to be  in close proximity to the United States indefinitely. And Americans, of course, do not like.”

On the edge of Europe
 
Subject border patrols military aircraft lifted last month on a regular basis, mainly in response to complaints from Western governments on Russian warplanes.
 
November 3 Commander of NATO forces in Europe, US Gen. Philip Breedlove said the growth activity of the Russian Air Force, stressing that the Russian aviation supposedly uses a more sophisticated combat system and an increasing number of planes and flies a little further than usual.
 
The representative of the US Department of State- Jen Psaki said that Russia has no need to increase the scale of training flights. She noted that the US authorities understand the need for training work in the armed forces. Nevertheless, she said, “we do not see that the security situation justify such activities.”
 
And together in NATO, according to sources, the newspaper Die Welt, said that “the Russian check our airspace throughout the year”. A NATO spokesman said on the “Voice of America” that “the intensity of these provocative flights higher than the height of the cold war. So last Sunday a few strategic bombers Tu-95 and Tu-22 were identified by the national armed forces of Latvia over the neutral waters of the Baltic sea, close to the outer border of the Latvian territorial waters, – with alarm reported by the press center of the Latvian army.

Under the wing of the plane

Bombers Tu-95MS and Tu-160 is the main reserve of the Supreme Commander-in-Chief in case of nuclear war. In the structure of launch on warning, counter-nuclear strike they were assigned the role of “killer cells” that make the “control head” after the impact of the strategic missile forces and strategic nuclear submarines. Air missile “off” survivor military infrastructure of the enemy. However, they could be used also as  the main percussive tool. The coordinates of the ground-based missile launchers known to the adversary. It is easy to track a strategic submarine in the ocean. But to understand where strategic bombers, almost impossible.
Onboard each machine – deadly arsenal: guided aerial bombs and cruise missiles and long-range. For example, the newest cruise missile Kh-555. According to some, their range is about 3.5 thousand kilometers. In flight, the machine not only changes the height, but may fly above the earth’s surface, around the terrain. Against her powerless not only modern anti-aircraft missile systems, but also created the American NMD. At the target the missile displays the homing head that retrieves data from it’s own opto-electronic, and multi-channel satellite navigation system GLONASS. The accuracy of hitting the target, plus or minus a few inches. Vladimir Putin was present at one of the final stages of testing X-555. The four released with bomber missile accurately hit the “window” of an abandoned home on the range “Pemba” under the Vorkuta, where the script was hiding terrorists.

Putin-fly-TU160.mp4
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=VIt3Gr_18do

Recently it was announced that from 2016 all Russian Tu-160 is equipped with upgraded turbojet engines of the type NK-32. Production of these engines was discontinued in 1993. The resumption of their production means that the Tu-160 will be the main striking force of strategic aviation in Russia for a long time.

According to the plans, each of the 66 heavy bombers Tu-160 and Tu-95 will get new management systems, navigation and sighting systems. This will allow machines to apply not only to new strategic cruise missiles, long-range Kh-555, but any other precision-guided bombs and missiles. And this, in turn, will give the opportunity to bring the bombers to solve not only the problems of nuclear deterrence, but also the application of missile attacks by conventional means.

Strategic stimulus

Constant combat duty long-range aviation aircraft Russia has decided to resume in 2007. From this moment, says General Deinekin, our aircraft has completed over several hundred sorties in remote regions of the world in terms of tactical anti-aircraft neighboring countries”. For comparison, in the period of greatest activity of our strategic aviation in the Soviet period 1985-1987 years of such flights was 170.

The patrol pilots learn not only how to navigate in unfamiliar airspace, refuel in the air, but also conduct electronic reconnaissance and practice the use of weapons (planes fly without missiles, but the goals are fixed radars, their coordinates are entered into the onboard computer). Plaque pilots increased from 40 to 140 hours per year. It is almost comparable with a touch of Americans – 180 hours.

Russia also may not like the fact that the American strategic bombers B-52 are in constant readiness for combat use,” explains General Deinekin. According to him, recently, the Americans threw six B-52 at Andersen air force base on GUAM. This is one of the four positions of the strategic bombers of the U.S. air force. The location of the database provides direct support to the crews of bombers to deploy forces in Europe, Southwest Asia and Pacific region. Andersen is one of the two most important U.S. military bases in the Asia-Pacific region. Another island of Diego Garcia in the Indian ocean.

“From a military point of view, the Americans are well aware, in any point of our bombers go on combat patrols, ” says General Deinekin. – Didn’t have time to turn their planes take positions on either side of us. Lead, pass each other on the chain. So something extraordinary in the words of Shoigu no,” said the General. Another thing is that due to aggravation of Russian-American relations is presented as something beyond. Especially because in recent years the Americans believed that Russia has lost the ability to perform such a long and difficult journeys, and because of “old age” aircraft is not able to reach the shores of America. Time has shown that this view was erroneous. “White Swans” and “Bears” again forced to remember that Russia has its own interests in the field of security in the world.

For reference

What was the beginning of the strategic aviation

The appearance of distant strategic aviation in its current form, Russia is obliged US. Atomic bombing of the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, in early 1946, the U.S. army strategic air command (SAC) demanded that the USSR develop adequate measures. April 3, 1946 resolution of the USSR Council of Ministers was established long-range aviation of the Armed Forces composed of three air armies, control of which was based in Smolensk, Vinnitsa and Khabarovsk. In 1947, in the far aviation has come a strategic bomber Tu-4, Arsenal which has nuclear weapons.

However, the main combat power and the takeoff of strategic aviation occurred in the 70-80-ies of the twentieth century. Then armed with entered combat aircraft, Tu-22M, Tu-95MS, Tu-160. It is today the burden of nuclear deterrence of potential adversary. Armed cruise missiles, long-range strategic bombers capable of inflicting powerful blows on any point of the globe both nuclear and conventional munitions. For example, the Tu-22M very effectively in the Afghan war.

Long-range aviation of Russia

Tu-95 was adopted in 1957, 64 pieces. Now the Tu-95MS is the basis of the strategic air forces of Russia. Wingspan – 50.04 m  (64 ft 5 in)
Length – 46.17 m (151 ft 6 in)
Maximum speed – 920 km/h (510 knots, 575 mph)
Range – 15,000  km
Crew of 8 people.
The aircraft up to 12,000 kg payload. The Tu-95MS she was introduced to free-fall bombs caliber from 1500 to 9000 kg, both high explosive and nuclear, suspended in the fuselage compartment. Tu-V took under the fuselage (dimensions not allowed to be placed in the compartment) tactical nuclear bombs with a capacity of 20 and 50 megatons, weighing up to 22 tons. Also provided for the suspension of the bomb with a capacity of 100 MT. The missile can also take on ventral suspension 2 containers for small calibre bombs. Can carry cruise missiles, long-range Kh-55 (nuclear) and Kh-555. Defensive armament Tu-95MS consists of 2 twin 23-mm twin cannon GSH-23L gun placed in the aft defensive installation. Ammo – 2500 shots.

Now the modernization of Tu-95MS to version Tu-MM. The replacement will be subject to electronic equipment. The bombers will have a new sighting and navigation system, which will allow you to use the new strategic cruise missiles X-101. Will also appear navigation system GLONASS. It is planned to upgrade a few dozen bombers, and the other to cheat. Modernization is designed to extend the life of the aircraft until 2025.

TY-160 adopted in 1987, released 15 pieces. Wingspan – 55.7/35.6 m Length – 54.1 m Height of 13.1 m wing Area of 232 sq m Maximum speed at an altitude of 2000 km/h Range with maximum bomb load: 10 a 500 km flight Duration 15 hours a Crew of 4 people. This is the most powerful aircraft in the world. On Board can accommodate 12 cruise missiles with nuclear warheads or bomb weapon weighing up to 40 tons. By the beginning of 1994 was released about 30 aircraft (at the beginning of 1993 19 aircraft were based in Ukraine). The bomber is equipped with a bed, toilet, and electronic device for heating food. Structurally, the Tu-160 is close to American strategic bomber B-1, but unlike it all the combat burden is on the inner gimbal. On the basis of Tu-160 Tupolev Design Bureau is currently developing advanced Russian bombers of the fifth generation.

US Strategic Air
 
Boeing B-52 Stratofortress was created in the 50 years of the twentieth century as a high-altitude bomber to attack using free fall nuclear bombs. Produced 85 pieces, 56 of them in the ranks. Wingspan – 56.39 m. The length of the aircraft – 49.05 m. Maximum speed – 1013 km / h. Crew – 6 people. Bomb load depends on the modification of the aircraft: B-52B – 19504 kg; In-52G – 23 000 kg; B-52H – 28,600 kg. Nuclear: 8 x B-28 (1.45 Mt) or 12 V-41 (1 Mt) or 12 V-53 (9 Mt) or B-61 Mod.1 (fusion). Guided missiles: 12 AGM-84 Harpoon; 12 KR AGM-86B (200 kt); SD 20 “air-to-air” AGM-69 SRAM. The US is now modernizing veteran bomber.

B-1 Lancer appeared in 1965, 88 pieces, the ranks are all instances. Wingspan – 41.67/23,84 m Length – 44.81 m (b-1A – 46 m). Maximum speed – 1324 km/H. the Practical range of 12,000 km Armament: three internal compartments can accommodate up to 84 bombs MK.82 caliber 227 kg (500 pounds) or 24 bombs MK.84 caliber 907 kg (2000 pounds); or up to 8 cruise missiles AGM-86B launched into the air, 24 the short-range missiles AGM-69, 12 atomic unguided bombs-28 or-43 or 24 bombs b-61 or b-83; such weapons can also be 8 external racks under the fuselage.

The number of strategic bombers in Russia:
As of 2012 in the long-range aircraft the Air Force had 32 Tu-95MS (about 60 in storage). These aircraft placed 512 cruise missiles, long-range. There are 16 Tu-160 with 168 cruise missiles X-555. The total number of nuclear warheads – 680.
 
The number of strategic bombers in the United States:
B-52H – 85 pieces (56 of them in the ranks), 1-1.4 thousand. Nuclear bombs. B-2 – 21 pieces (16 of them in the ranks) – 550 BU. The total number of nuclear warheads – 1950.

A Plea for Caution From Russia By VLADIMIR V. PUTIN SEPTEMBER 11, 2013

A Plea for Caution From Russia
By VLADIMIR V. PUTIN
SEPTEMBER 11, 2013

MOSCOW — RECENT events surrounding Syria have prompted me to speak directly to the American people and their political leaders. It is important to do so at a time of insufficient communication between our societies.

Relations between us have passed through different stages. We stood against each other during the cold war. But we were also allies once, and defeated the Nazis together. The universal international organization — the United Nations — was then established to prevent such devastation from ever happening again.

The United Nations’ founders understood that decisions affecting war and peace should happen only by consensus, and with America’s consent the veto by Security Council permanent members was enshrined in the United Nations Charter. The profound wisdom of this has underpinned the stability of international relations for decades.

No one wants the United Nations to suffer the fate of the League of Nations, which collapsed because it lacked real leverage. This is possible if influential countries bypass the United Nations and take military action without Security Council authorization.

The potential strike by the United States against Syria, despite strong opposition from many countries and major political and religious leaders, including the pope, will result in more innocent victims and escalation, potentially spreading the conflict far beyond Syria’s borders. A strike would increase violence and unleash a new wave of terrorism. It could undermine multilateral efforts to resolve the Iranian nuclear problem and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and further destabilize the Middle East and North Africa. It could throw the entire system of international law and order out of balance.

Syria is not witnessing a battle for democracy, but an armed conflict between government and opposition in a multireligious country. There are few champions of democracy in Syria. But there are more than enough Qaeda fighters and extremists of all stripes battling the government. The United States State Department has designated Al Nusra Front and the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, fighting with the opposition, as terrorist organizations. This internal conflict, fueled by foreign weapons supplied to the opposition, is one of the bloodiest in the world.

Mercenaries from Arab countries fighting there, and hundreds of militants from Western countries and even Russia, are an issue of our deep concern. Might they not return to our countries with experience acquired in Syria? After all, after fighting in Libya, extremists moved on to Mali. This threatens us all.

From the outset, Russia has advocated peaceful dialogue enabling Syrians to develop a compromise plan for their own future. We are not protecting the Syrian government, but international law. We need to use the United Nations Security Council and believe that preserving law and order in today’s complex and turbulent world is one of the few ways to keep international relations from sliding into chaos. The law is still the law, and we must follow it whether we like it or not. Under current international law, force is permitted only in self-defense or by the decision of the Security Council. Anything else is unacceptable under the United Nations Charter and would constitute an act of aggression.

No one doubts that poison gas was used in Syria. But there is every reason to believe it was used not by the Syrian Army, but by opposition forces, to provoke intervention by their powerful foreign patrons, who would be siding with the fundamentalists. Reports that militants are preparing another attack — this time against Israel — cannot be ignored.

It is alarming that military intervention in internal conflicts in foreign countries has become commonplace for the United States. Is it in America’s long-term interest? I doubt it. Millions around the world increasingly see America not as a model of democracy but as relying solely on brute force, cobbling coalitions together under the slogan “you’re either with us or against us.”

But force has proved ineffective and pointless. Afghanistan is reeling, and no one can say what will happen after international forces withdraw. Libya is divided into tribes and clans. In Iraq the civil war continues, with dozens killed each day. In the United States, many draw an analogy between Iraq and Syria, and ask why their government would want to repeat recent mistakes.

No matter how targeted the strikes or how sophisticated the weapons, civilian casualties are inevitable, including the elderly and children, whom the strikes are meant to protect.

The world reacts by asking: if you cannot count on international law, then you must find other ways to ensure your security. Thus a growing number of countries seek to acquire weapons of mass destruction. This is logical: if you have the bomb, no one will touch you. We are left with talk of the need to strengthen nonproliferation, when in reality this is being eroded.

We must stop using the language of force and return to the path of civilized diplomatic and political settlement.

A new opportunity to avoid military action has emerged in the past few days. The United States, Russia and all members of the international community must take advantage of the Syrian government’s willingness to place its chemical arsenal under international control for subsequent destruction. Judging by the statements of President Obama, the United States sees this as an alternative to military action.

I welcome the president’s interest in continuing the dialogue with Russia on Syria. We must work together to keep this hope alive, as we agreed to at the Group of 8 meeting in Lough Erne in Northern Ireland in June, and steer the discussion back toward negotiations.

If we can avoid force against Syria, this will improve the atmosphere in international affairs and strengthen mutual trust. It will be our shared success and open the door to cooperation on other critical issues.

My working and personal relationship with President Obama is marked by growing trust. I appreciate this. I carefully studied his address to the nation on Tuesday. And I would rather disagree with a case he made on American exceptionalism, stating that the United States’ policy is “what makes America different. It’s what makes us exceptional.” It is extremely dangerous to encourage people to see themselves as exceptional, whatever the motivation. There are big countries and small countries, rich and poor, those with long democratic traditions and those still finding their way to democracy. Their policies differ, too. We are all different, but when we ask for the Lord’s blessings, we must not forget that God created us equal.

Did Putin Just Bring Peace to Ukraine?

Did Putin Just Bring Peace to Ukraine?

Today in 12:42 POSTED

– Russian President Vladimir Putin

“What did we do to deserve this? What did we do to deserve being bombed from planes, shot at from tanks, and have phosphorous bombs dropped on us? ….
That we wanted to live the way we want, and speak our own language, and make friends with whom we want?

” – Alexander V. Zakharchenko, Chairman of The Council of Ministers of The Donetsk National Republic, The Vineyard of the Saker There is no way to overstate the significance of what has transpired in Ukraine in the last three weeks. What began as a murderous onslaught on the mainly Russian-speaking population of east Ukraine, has turned into a major triumph against a belligerent and expansionistic empire that has been repulsed by a scrappy, battle-hardened militia engaged in a conventional, land-based war.
The conflict in east Ukraine is Obama’s war; launched by Obama’s junta government, executed by Obama’s proxy army, and directed by Obama’s advisors in Kiev. The driving force behind the war is Washington’s ambitious pivot to Asia, a strategy that pits Russia against Europe to prevent further economic integration and to establish NATO forward-operating bases on Russia’s western border. Despite the overheated rhetoric, the talk of a (NATO) “Rapid Reaction Force”, and additional economic sanctions; the US plan to draw Ukraine into the western sphere of influence and weaken Russia in the process, is in tatters.
And the reason it is in tatters is because a highly-motivated and adaptable militia has trounced Obama’s troopers at every turn pushing the Ukrainian army to the brink of collapse. Check out this frontline update from The Saker: “The (Ukrainian Army) is not retreating on one, two or even three directions, it is retreating everywhere (except north of Lugansk). Entire battalions are leaving the front under orders of their battalion commanders and without the approval of the Junta leaders. At least one such battalion commander is already being judged for desertion. The entire Ukie leadership seems to be in a panic mode, especially Iatseniuk and Kolomoiski, while the Nazis are mad as hell at the Poroshenko administration. There are constant rumors of an anti-Poroshenko coup by outraged Nazi nationalists….. The bottom line is this: Poroshenko promised a victory in a matter of weeks and his forces suffered one of the most total defeats in the history of warfare. ….the most likely thing is that this ridiculous “Banderastan” experiment has seriously begun sinking now and that many rats are leaving the ship. “The War in Ukraine“, Vineyard of the Saker The fact that the demoralized Ukrainian army has been defeated by the superior fighting force is of little importance in the big scheme of things, however, the fact that Washington’s global resource war– which began on 9-11 and has reduced numerous sovereign countries into anarchic, failed states– has been stopped in its tracks, is significant. The so called War on Terror–which was recently rebranded under the ISIS moniker–has wreaked holy havoc and death on Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, and now Syria.
By routing the Ukrainian army the Novorussian Armed Forces (NAF) has put the kibosh on Obama’s Great Game strategy in Eurasia and torpedoed Washington’s plan to rule the world by force of arms. It could be that the battles of Lugansk and Donetsk are eventually regarded as the turning point, where the lumbering and over-extended empire finally met its match and began its precipitous decline. In any event, there’s no doubt that Friday’s ceasefire agreement is a serious blow to US hegemony. THE PROBLEM IS NATO “The defining factor in relations with NATO remains the unacceptability for Russia of plans to move the military infrastructure of the alliance towards our borders, including via enlargement of the bloc,” said Mikhail Popov, deputy head of Putin’s Security Council.
The issue has always been NATO expansion, not the ridiculous claim that Putin wants to rebuild the Russian Empire. The only one interested in in stitching together a global Caliphate is Barack Hussein Obama and his nutcase neocon advisors. Putin is not interested in an empire. Putin just wants to make money like everyone else. He wants to sell gas to Europe, raise living standards and rebuild the country. What’s wrong with that? Putin’s not a troublemaker. He’s not sticking a freaking first-strike nuclear missile system in Havana just 60 miles from Miami. But that’s what Obama wants to do. Obama want to establish NATO bases on Russia’s doorstep and deploy his fake-named “missile defense system” a couple hundred miles from Moscow. Putin can’t allow that. No one in their right mind would allow that. It’s a direct threat to national security. Here’s how Putin summed it up in a recent press conference: “Russia is an independent and active participant of international relations. Just like any nation it has national interests that must be taken into consideration and respected…..We stand against having a military organization meddling in our backyard, next to our homeland or in the territories that are historically ours. I just cannot imagine visiting NATO sailors in Sevastopol,” he stressed. “Most of them are fine lads, but I’d rather they visit us in Sevastopol than the other way around.” (Vladimir Putin) Washington’s harebrained gambit was doomed from the get go. Who made the decision to topple Yanuchovych, install a US-puppet in Kiev, fill-out the security services with neo Nazis, and wage a bloody ethnic cleansing purge on the Russian-speaking people in the east? Who was it? Isn’t there any accountability among the Obama team or is it all a matter of “failing upwards” like the Bush crowd? Here’s Putin again: “Our western partners created the ‘Kosovo precedent’ with their own hands. In a situation absolutely the same as the one in Crimea they recognized Kosovo’s secession from Serbia legitimate while arguing that no permission from a country’s central authority for a unilateral declaration of independence is necessary….
And the UN International Court of Justice agreed with those arguments. That’s what they said; that’s what they trumpeted all over the world and coerced everyone to accept – and now they are complaining about Crimea. Why is that?” Doesn’t Putin have a point? Isn’t this what we’ve seen over and over again, that there’s one standard for the US and another for everyone else? Of course it is. But Putin’s not going to stand for it. In fact, just this week, Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov expanded on Putin’s comments in an interview that never appeared in the western media. Here’s what he said: “The current stage of international relations is marked by a transition to a fundamentally new world order – a polycentric model based on due regard for the appearance of new economic and financial centres. And political weight comes with economic and financial influence. Transition to a polycentric world order reflects an objective trend according to which the world order should be based on the world’s cultural and civilisational diversity.
This is objective reality, which no one can deny. … After a long period of dominance in global economy and politics, these countries are trying to keep their positions by artificial means. They know that their economic positions are not as strong as they were after WWII, when America accounted for over half of global GDP, but they are trying to use all available military and political instruments, social media, regime-change technology and other instruments to keep back the objective process of the development of a democratic world order based on the equality of all sides. Not everyone has realized yet that it is impossible to move contrary to an objective historical process. We strongly hope that this will happen, because otherwise more illegal unilateral sanctions will be approved against Russia, to which we will respond accordingly, as we have already tried to do. But this, I repeat, is not our choice; we don’t want confrontation.” (Press Conference: Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov) “A new world order based on a polycentric model”? What a great idea.
You mean, a world in which other sovereign nations get a say-so in the way the world is run? You mean, a world in which the economic, political, and military decision-making does not emerge from one center of power that is dominated by privately-owned banks, transnational corporations and voracious western elites? You mean, a world in which international law can be applied evenly so that one country cannot unilaterally create off-shore gulags, or incite color coded revolutions, or carry out extra-legal abductions and killings, or order drone attacks on wedding parties or conduct any of the other heinous violations of human rights which imperial Washington engages in without batting an eye? The NAF’s victory in east Ukraine brings us all one step closer to actualizing the multi-polar world of which Lavrov and Putin speak so glowingly.
In fact, just hours ago Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko capitulated and signed a ceasefire agreement with the leaders of the anti-fascist militia, Igor Plotnitsky and Aleksandr Zakharchenko. (Remember: “We never negotiate with terrorists”?) Ukraine’s National Security Council (SNBO) has reported that its troops have halted all military actions. The government’s public statement reads as follows: “According to the decision of the President of Ukraine and the order of the chief of the General staff of the military units of Ukraine, troops in the area of anti-terrorist operations ceased fire at 15.00 GMT.” Peace at last? It sure looks like it. So while Obama is busy trying to ramp up the violence by rallying NATO to expand the wars around the world, international peacekeepers will begin the thorny task of implementing a seven-point peace plan put forward by none-other-than Vladimir Putin. The difference between the peacemakers and the warmongers has rarely been as stark as it is today.

#ELECTRONIC #JOURNALISM

Address at the meeting of the Council for Interethnic Relations

Vladimir Putin chaired a meeting of the Presidential Council for Interethnic Relations. The meeting participants examined the role of culture and education in strengthening unity and accord and in the civic and patriotic education of the younger generation.

Issues discussed included the state youth policy, Russian language study, raising literacy and linguistic skills and historical education.
Kremlin News
* * *

Address at the meeting of the Council for Interethnic Relations

PRESIDENT OF RUSSIA VLADIMIR PUTIN: Good afternoon, colleagues.

I would like to suggest that the Council meeting today focuses on culture and education and the special role they play in harmonising interethnic relations and in the civic and patriotic education of young people.

Currently over 30.5 million Russians are aged 15 to 29. As we all understand, their views largely determine the future of Russia.

It is important for young people to fully understand the significance of the ethnic policy and ethnic and cultural diversity. This diversity lies at the roots of this country’s strength as it accumulated various traditions, cultures and ethnic groups over the centuries. This mutual enrichment helped this huge country develop and strengthen its identity. Whenever this harmony was violated, the inner strength of the nation itself was also violated. This raises the demands to our ethnic, cultural and educational policy. It is obvious that an educated person with sufficient knowledge and a broad outlook is immune to the virus of nationalism and intolerance.

Unfortunately, there is a constant struggle going on in the world for ideological and informational domination. The goal is either to weaken certain countries, or to create a competitive advantage in politics or the economy by artificially provoking conflicts linked in one way or another to ethnic issues. We need constant systematic efforts to protect this country, its younger generation from such risks, to strengthen civic solidarity and interethnic accord.

Everyone must get involved in these efforts: state and municipal authorities, public organisations and, of course, the family. Most importantly, there should be no dogmatism or bureaucracy here, or we would achieve the opposite effect.

    “We need constant systematic efforts to protect this country, its younger generation from such risks, to strengthen civic solidarity and interethnic accord. Everyone must get involved in these efforts: state and municipal authorities, public organisations and, of course, the family.”

In this connection, I find it necessary to also consider improving the implementation of the state program for patriotic education. We should fill it with truly interesting initiatives that would be first of all clear to the young people; we should establish close partnership with public, students’, military, patriotic and search organisations and the like. Obviously, a lot depends on the individuals who are involved.

In addition, we must clearly formulate our priorities in the state youth policy. They should be directed at the overall development of a harmonious personality, at bringing up Russian citizens as mature and responsible people who combine love for their country and their home, their national and ethnic identity, who respect the culture and traditions of the people who live around them.

The Education Ministry is developing a set of youth policy priorities. I would like to ask our colleagues to speed up their work and to give special attention to the prevention of extremism among students.

A single system of monitoring interethnic relations and preventing possible ethnic conflicts should be of great help here. The Government is to launch it before the end of the year.

The system will cover all the country’s regions, while the federal monitoring centre that is to be set up will coordinate analytical and preventive activities of the authorities concerned, of research organisations and the academic community; it will generate recommendations and proposals in this area.

We have spoken many times of the irreplaceable role of literature, history, the Russian language and the languages of other peoples of Russia in educating the younger generation. It is largely thanks to this Council’s initiative that work was launched to develop unified cultural and historical educational standards.

In the past years, the state has done a great deal to raise the teachers’ status and to provide them with respectable working conditions. We expect all of this to have an impact primarily on the quality of school education, on teaching the principal subjects that form an individual’s mindset.

There are still quite a few problems here. Thus, the results of the National Final School Exam in the Russian language were far from excellent. I will not go into detail now. This is yet another reason to get back to Russian language teaching curricula and standards for the quality of teaching.

    “Our priorities in the state youth policy should be directed at the overall development of a harmonious personality, at bringing up Russian citizens as mature and responsible people who combine love for their country and their home, their national and ethnic identity, who respect the culture and traditions of the people who live around them.”

I expect that the recently established Council on the Russian Language will make a significant contribution to improving state policy on the development, protection and support of Russian philology. Of course, young people should be getting more knowledge on Russia historical, cultural and natural resources at school. This, I believe, is the best way to teach people to love their homeland and to strive to be of use to it.

Here, of course, we need modern methodology that would draw the interest of the young people. The Likhachev Russian Research Institute for Cultural and Natural heritage could be of great help here. The prime ministers of the CIS states at their meeting in Minsk on May 30 awarded it the status of the central organisation within the Commonwealth concerned with the preservation of world heritage. We should use this resource not only to preserve and promote the cultural and historical potential of the Russian world, of the peoples of Russia, but also for the patriotic education of the younger generation, for its spiritual and moral development.

One more proposal. I believe it would be useful for this Council to pursue another area of activity – information support for state ethnic policy implementation. It is important to clearly explain our moves in this area, to cooperate with the media and civil society institutions.

I would like to add that there is growing concern in many countries about the degradation of traditional moral and spiritual values. Unfortunately, we are seeing the revival of neo-Nazi organisations, which are acquiring political power, while ethnic and religious intolerance and calls for violence are used by forces that are fighting to gain power. In this connection, I find it important to create a legal basis for counteracting the revival of Nazi ideology and the glorification of Nazi criminals.

I am convinced that Russia’s strong educational traditions, our culture and our great history can play a decisive role in resolving all the tasks I have outlined here.

Let us proceed with our discussion.

Colleagues, I do not know if there is a more serious and important issue in terms of preserving our unity – I mean the unity of the Russian state, of our people. Any small crack in interethnic relations, not to mention a major split, does not affect the territory – it runs through the heart and soul.

    “Any small crack in interethnic relations, not to mention a major split, does not affect the territory – it runs through the heart and soul.”

It reaches the most subtle tissues of the heart; this is a very sensitive matter. Specialists are well aware of this, of course, while those who do not study this professionally feel it in their hearts, as I have said.

This is vitally important in the modern world in any country, even in those that consider themselves mono-ethnic, while in such multi-ethnic states (especially those that were formed as multi-ethnic) as Russia this is of special significance.

We have met for a regular discussion, however the issues we dealt with are extremely important also because the instrument we mentioned, the instrument we need to harmonise interethnic relations is of great value in and of itself – it is culture and education.

I would like to thank you for your proposals. We will do our best to implement them. Our job is to make sure these issues never leave the focus of public and state attention. We will continue working on it.

Thank you very much.

Conference of Russian Federation Ambassadors

Kremlin
President of Russia
Conference of Russian Ambassadors and Permanent Representatives.

2/3 Photo: the Presidential Press and Information Office Conference of Russian ambassadors and permanent representatives. July 1, 2014
POSTED
Vladimir Putin took part in a conference of Russian Federation ambassadors and permanent representatives on protecting Russia’s national interests and strengthening the foundations and principles of international relations.
Also taking part in the conference were the heads of the Government, both chambers of the Federal Assembly, ministries and agencies involved in international activities, and representatives of the national expert and business communities.

President awarded orders to eight Foreign Ministry employees and the honorary title of Honoured Worker of the Diplomatic Service of the Russian Federation to two.

* * *

Beginning of conference of Russian Federation ambassadors and permanent representatives

PRESIDENT OF RUSSIA VLADIMIR PUTIN: Colleagues, friends,
Meetings with the diplomatic corps have become a tradition. We need this direct conversation to make an overall assessment of the situation in the world, to set current and long-term foreign policy objectives and on that basis to more effectively coordinate the work of our missions abroad.

I would like to begin by saying that the Foreign Ministry and our embassies are under a lot of pressure; we see this, we are aware of this, but this pressure will not be reduced. It will only increase, just as the requirement to show efficiency, precision and flexibility in our actions to ensure Russia’s national interests.

You know how dynamic and unpredictable international developments may sometimes be. They seem to be pressed together and unfortunately are not all of a positive nature. The potential for conflict is growing in the world, old contradictions are growing ever more acute and new ones are being provoked. We come across such developments, often unexpectedly, and we observe with regret that international law is not working, the most basic norms of decency are not complied with and the principle of all-permissiveness is gaining the upper hand.

We are observing this in Ukraine as well. We need to understand clearly that the events provoked in Ukraine are the concentrated outcome of the notorious deterrence policy. As you may know, its roots go deep into history and it is clear that unfortunately, this policy did not end with the end of the Cold War.

In Ukraine, as you may have seen, at threat were our compatriots, Russian people and people of other nationalities, their language, history, culture and legal rights, guaranteed, by the way, by European conventions. When I speak of Russians and Russian-speaking citizens I am referring to those people who consider themselves part of the broad Russian community, they may not necessarily be ethnic Russians, but they consider themselves Russian people.

What did our partners expect from us as the developments in Ukraine unfolded? We clearly had no right to abandon the residents of Crimea and Sevastopol to the mercy of nationalist and radical militants; we could not allow our access to the Black Sea to be significantly limited; we could not allow NATO forces to eventually come to the land of Crimea and Sevastopol, the land of Russian military glory, and cardinally change the balance of forces in the Black Sea area. This would mean giving up practically everything that Russia had fought for since the times of Peter the Great, or maybe even earlier – historians should know.

I would like to make it clear to all: this country will continue to actively defend the rights of Russians, our compatriots abroad, using the entire range of available means – from political and economic to the right to self-defence envisaged by international humanitarian law.

I would like to stress that what happened in Ukraine was the climax of the negative tendencies in international affairs that had been building up for years. We have long been warning about this, and unfortunately, our predictions came true.

You know about the latest efforts to restore, to maintain peace in Ukraine. Foreign Ministry staff and the Minister himself took an active part in this. You know about the numerous telephone conversations we had on this subject.

Unfortunately, President Poroshenko has resolved to resume military action, and we failed – when I say ‘we’, I mean my colleagues in Europe and myself – we failed to convince him that the road to a secure, stable and inviolable peace cannot lie through war.

To be continued.
VIDEO
POSTED
russian.rt.com
Live coverage of the President of Russia Vladimir Putin at the meeting of ambassadors

“Events provoked by Ukraine became a concentrated expression of the policy of deterrence. This policy continued after the cold war. Under threat of our compatriots, the Russian people”, – said in the beginning of his speech the head of state.

In his speech, the President touched on the issue of the Crimea. “We had no right to leave the Crimea and Sevastopol to the mercy of radicals. We could not allow to earth of Sevastopol come NATO troops”, – said Vladimir Putin

The head of state commented on the decision of the President of Ukraine Petro Poroshenko refusal to cease fire. “Unfortunately, the President Poroshenko took the decision to resume hostilities. We could not convinced that the road to peace can not lie through war,” he said.

“Everything that happens in Ukraine – it’s up to the Ukrainian state. A growing number of refugees. But it is absolutely unacceptable is the murder of journalists. Who’s afraid of objective information? Those who commit crimes,” said the Russian President.

Speaking about the situation in the world, the head of state noted the erosion of spiritual and moral values. He also spoke about the attempts of the US to put pressure on European countries because of their cooperation with Russia. “What is now doing with French banks, nothing but internal disturbances is. We know about the pressure exerted our American partners on the French that they refused to supply Mistrale in Russia. What is it, if not blackmail” – asked the President of Russia.

Vladimir Putin spoke about the progress in the establishment of the Eurasian Association. Separately President of Russia noted the progress of negotiations with Kyrgyzstan.

The Russian President also focused on the project of construction of new pipelines. “We will promote the South Stream deal. More and more politicians and businessmen understand that they become hostages of the ideological policy,” said Vladimir Putin.

Speaking about the gas debt of Ukraine, Vladimir Putin noted that Russia is closely monitoring gas supplies to Europe. “No reverse no. Our gas, in fact, receive. We all see. We do not take action, so as not to aggravate the situation,” said the head of state.

The Russian President also pointed to the danger of interference in the internal Affairs of other countries. According to Putin, Europe needs a safety net to the Libyan, Syrian, Iraqi and Ukrainian crises were not infectious .

The head of state said that Russia is not going to cease relations with Washington. “We are not going to close our relationship the United States. We have always strived to be predictable partners. However, instead of our legitimate interests are often ignored. If we play the role of outsiders who do not have final say – then and these formats are interesting to us. We do not have to pay our interests because we are allowed to sit,” he said.

“We are ready for constructive dialogue, but on an equal basis,” Putin summed up.

According to the Constitution of the Russian Federation, “the President determines the main directions of foreign policy of the state”. It is the head of the country to a great extent form and position of Russia on the international arena. He represents Russia in international relations, appoints and recalls diplomatic representatives of foreign States and international organizations.

Russian President Vladimir Putin made a speech at the meeting of ambassadors and permanent representatives of the Russian Federation, which occurs every two years. He noted the importance of containing the spread of the crisis in Ukraine and noted that Russia will not pay national interests for the right to sit next to the other powers.