A New Beginning - Our 1992 Russian Federation

Russian Armed Forces Update I - Part II
  • In terms of military equipment, president Fyodorov left the consolidation to his experts who consolidated the equipment to serve the Russian Federation as a fast, heavily mechanised, high tech response force over the vast waves of conscripted armies of the late Soviet Union. This meant the list of non-infantry equipment was cut to

    MBTs:
    Schermafbeelding 2023-12-28 234205.png

    Artillery:
    Schermafbeelding 2023-12-28 234217.png

    Schermafbeelding 2023-12-28 234225.png

    Schermafbeelding 2023-12-28 234236.png

    Schermafbeelding 2023-12-28 234244.png

    IFVs, TDs & APCs (indicates BMP-1 to BMP-2 conversion planned):
    Schermafbeelding 2023-12-28 234254.png

    Schermafbeelding 2023-12-28 234302.png


    Trucks to be consolidated into GAZ for light trucks and ATV, Ural for medium trucks, KAMAZ for heavy trucks. The specialist vehicles are to be consolidated on those variants built on current platforms. Infantry equipment as OTL → Mainly trying to switch to AK-74M, PKP replacement program started.
     
    Last edited:
    Russian Armed Forces Update I - Part III
  • As for the airforce, unfortunately they also had to cut down on their flying hours and airframes. Thankfully some RDT&E time was allocated to them, enough to keep them somewhat current when the refits are done.

    Attack aircraft:
    Schermafbeelding 2023-12-29 004035.png

    Bombers (indicates reserve):
    Schermafbeelding 2023-12-29 004041.png

    AWACS and the like:
    Schermafbeelding 2023-12-29 004049.png

    Fighter and Interceptors (indicates reserve):
    Schermafbeelding 2023-12-29 230639.png


    As for the Navy, aside from investing in their submarine capabilities all other major vessels had to be (dry)docked, so the submarines could be funded and current construction could continue without delays.

    Large surface ships (indicates being constructed):
    Schermafbeelding 2023-12-29 004106.png


    Submarines (indicates docked):
    Schermafbeelding 2023-12-29 004116.png


    Edit: Should people with more knowledge have issues with my numbers, happy to edit.
     
    Last edited:
    Chapter Fifteen: NATO's bombardment of Serbia and the Nord Stream (January 1998 - March 1999)
  • 400px-Christ_the_Savior_Cathedral_Moscow.jpg

    (Rebuilt Cathedral of Christ the Saviour in Moscow)

    The Russian government, just like 83 countries around the world, signed the Kyoto Protocols, which committed all signatory states to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Russia, as a developing country, used its status to invest in overhauling its power-producing infrastructure by upgrading old and building more efficient power plants, including coal-fired plants. The government used the Kyoto Protocols to attract foreign investments into the Russian energy sector and the development of Siberia. American, Japanese and European companies would invest in the modernization and building of gas pipes from Siberia to Europe and Asia, which would help in the energy transition in Europe from coal to eco-friendly gas, bringing multi-billion dollar profits to Russia. In the meantime, the new government, under Prime Minister Boris Nemtsov, began to fulfill its many election promises. Starting with the compensation to the Russian Orthodox Church in the amount of 4 billion U.S. Dollars for all the Soviet crimes done between 1917 and 1991. The compensation represented a new beginning in the relationship between the church and the government. Metropolitan Alexy (Ridiger) of Leningrad, ascended the patriarchal throne in 1990 and presided over the partial return of Orthodox Christianity to Russian society after 70 years of repression, transforming the ROC to something resembling its pre-communist appearance; some 15,000 churches had been re-opened or built by the end of his tenure, and the process of recovery and rebuilding has continued under his successor Patriarch Kirill. According to official figures, in 2016 the Church had 174 dioceses, 361 bishops, and 34,764 parishes served by 39,800 clergy. There were 926 monasteries and 30 theological schools. The Russian Church also sought to fill the ideological vacuum left by the collapse of Communism and even, in the opinion of some analysts, became "a separate branch of power". Following the compensation, the Orthodox Church would have an increased role in political life in Russia in the coming decades.

    poland.jpg

    (First American troops arrived in Poland immidately after Warsaw's entry into NATO)

    NATO's expansion to the east resulted in diplomatic protests from President Fyodorov, who accused the West of breaking their promise made in 1990 following the unification of Germany. Furthermore, Russia tried to negotiate with NATO about the number of troops and types of weapons stationed in Poland and Romania, nevertheless, President Clinton tried to reassure Russia that the Western military presence in Poland and Romania would not be aimed at Russia. Behind the scenes, Russian diplomats opened talks with France and Germany, as both those states were against any expansion of NATO to the East, in order to avoid any tensions with Russia. Unfortunately for them, their stance was completely ignored by Washington, clearly indicating a difference in perception of which direction NATO should go. Meanwhile, applications to join the Union State of Russia and Belarus from Transnistria and Gagauzia were rejected by Moscow, citing that admission of both states would create unnecessary tensions with Ukraine and Romania. Another important promise made by Prime Minister Nemtsov was the decommunization of Russia, although it was only partially enacted by the new government. Actions taken by the government included: a public acknowledgment of crimes and errors committed by the Soviet state; revision of all Stalinist crimes; rehabilitation of victims; an apology for the Soviet crimes to victims in Russia and abroad; open access to Soviet archives; and a revision of the school curriculum to reflect new policy towards the Bolshevik rule between 1917 and 1991. To develop the vital Russian region of Siberia, the government took a number of the following initiatives:

    - tax breaks for Russian and foreign investors;
    - establishment of a federal agency for Siberia;
    - establishment of economic cooperation with China, Japan, USA, European Union, South Korea to attract investors in Siberia;
    - search and development of natural resources in Siberia like rare minerals, gas fields;
    - encouragement of tourism in Siberia;
    - investment in necessary infrastructure like railways, airports, roads, oil and gas pipelines etc.;
    - extensive study and search for more mineral excavation opportunities.

    127351_Kitaytsi_Gastarbayteri_Selyskoe_hozyaystvo_Arhiv_2007_Chelyabinsk__kitaytsi_760.jpg

    (Chinese immigrants arriving in Russia)

    Following the influx of hundreds of thousands of Chinese immigrants to the Russian Far East and Siberia, ethnic tensions between the local Russian population and Chinese immigrants were quickly raised, which forced the government to react before things got out of control. To ease the tensions, the government introduced immigration quotas to control the number of immigrants; additionally, a focus was put on the assimilation of Chinese immigrants into Russian society to avoid the formation of a closed immigrant community in Russia. In the meantime, Boris Nemtsov's government supported a number of policies and initiatives aimed at the establishment and support of democratic and civil society in Russia, including a reform of the judiciary system, ensuring that all Russian citizens had access to free and independent courts.

    The 1998 kidnapping of Mormon missionaries in Saratov involved the abduction of two missionaries of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS Church), Andrew Lee Propst and Travis Robert Tuttle, on March 18, 1998. One of the kidnappers had a friend invite the missionaries to his apartment in Saratov, Russia. Upon entry, they were hit in the head, driven to a separate location, and photographed as part of the kidnappers' demand for $300,000. A ransom note was left at the house of a local member of the LDS Church. The missionaries were released on March 22 after four days in captivity, without the ransom being paid. It was the first major incident involving foreign missionaries to occur in the "Russian heartland. Propst and Tuttle were abducted on Wednesday, March 18, 1998. They went to the apartment of a 20-year-old man – whom they had previously met at a church meeting – for an appointment to teach him more about their faith. When they arrived, they were "hit in the head with a metal baton multiple times, handcuffed, and tied up." Their eyes and mouths were taped shut. The kidnappers demanded $300,000 and photocopies of the missionaries' passports in return for the safe release of Propst and Tuttle, and threatened to kill them if police were notified. When the captors did not call to arrange a meeting as promised in the ransom note, church officials thought that the media coverage had prompted them to kill the missionaries.

    Propst and Tuttle were taken to a shed 45 minutes outside of Saratov, Russia, and handcuffed to a coal-fueled radiator so tightly that both suffered nerve damage. While in captivity, the two "played word games, practiced Russian grammar and devised a dream team of professional baseball players." They conversed frequently with the younger man who had kidnapped them, with topics ranging from sports to politics to religion; Propst hoped that forging a friendship might later prevent their captor from being able to kill them. Both Propst and Tuttle had read Dale Carnegie's book How to Win Friends and Influence People and tried using techniques from the book. One of the kidnappers shared his "life story" with the missionaries. Propst later told Idaho Business Review that his captors had been struggling financially, and that that was one of their motivations for kidnapping them. They were fed small portions of food once or twice per day and were given dirty water to drink. Their eyes remained taped the entire time. Both missionaries escaped with only minor injuries, including soreness from the handcuffs and bumps from being hit in the head. After being released by their kidnappers outside of the city of Saratov, they found a ride back and called police and church officials. They were then brought to the police station and, under the protection of church officials and two American Embassy Consul officers, stayed in Saratov to help police find their kidnappers. The Mission president at the time, Donald Jarvis, stated that no ransom was paid. Both Propst and Tuttle finished their missionary service in England.

    Multiple U.S. politicians became involved in the case. Representative Merrill Cook of Utah told the Provo Daily Herald that he encouraged "aggressive American involvement in getting these boys back safely." The U.S. Department of State called the situation "a grave matter" and did not release details of the kidnapping at the time in order to protect the missionaries. Senator Bob Bennett commented that the captors were after money and not the LDS church specifically, and that he was coordinating efforts between church and government officials on the matter. He also used the opportunity to condemn a recent Russian law restricting minority religions. Senator Gordon H. Smith of Oregon, himself a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, spoke with President Bill Clinton on the matter; President Clinton responded that he would help however he could. Four FBI agents were dispatched to Russia, one of which spoke Russian and was experienced in hostage situations. At a briefing, State Department spokesman James B. Foley said that the kidnapping was an "isolated incident," and that U.S. foreign policy with Russia in no way provoked the kidnappers. Secretary of State Madeleine Albright told Senator Gordon Smith after the release of the missionaries that the culprits set them free because "the noose was tightening." The First Presidency of the LDS church thanked American and Russian officials for their work. The Russian FSB (Federal Security Service) also became involved during the abduction and after, particularly in arresting suspects. Worldwide Television News reported that Governor Dmitri Akyatskov of Saratov threatened to extract the remaining LDS missionaries from the region if the $300,000 ransom was paid. Akyatskov continued to say that "in the near future all missionaries, including Mormons, will be asked to find another place for their activities.


    Chagaiatomictests.jpg

    (Pakistani underground nuclear test)

    Chagai-I is the code name of five simultaneous underground nuclear tests conducted by Pakistan at 15:15 hrs PKT on 28 May 1998.The tests were performed at Ras Koh Hills in the Chagai District of Balochistan Province. Chagai-I was Pakistan's first public test of nuclear weapons. China's supply of nuclear reactor in 1993 and nuclear technology prior to that for the Chashma Nuclear Power Plant helped to achieve it. Its timing was a direct response to India's second nuclear test Pokhran-II, on 11 and 13 May 1998. These tests by Pakistan and India resulted in United Nations Security Council Resolution 1172 and economic sanctions on both states by a number of major powers, particularly the United States and Japan. By testing nuclear devices, Pakistan became the seventh country to publicly test nuclear weapons. Pakistan's second nuclear test, Chagai-II, followed on 30 May 1998. Several historical and political events and personalities in the 1960s and early 1970s led Pakistan to gradually transition to a program of nuclear weapons development, that began in 1972. Plans for nuclear weapons testing started in 1974. Chagai-I was the result of over two decades of planning and preparation, Pakistan becoming the seventh of eight states that have publicly admitted to testing nuclear weapons. The timing of Chagai-I was a direct response to India's second nuclear tests, Pokhran-II, also called Operation Shakti, on 11 and 13 May 1998. Chagai-I was Pakistan's first of two public tests of nuclear weapons. Pakistan's second nuclear test, Chagai-II, followed on 30 May 1998.

    In 2005, Benazir Bhutto testified that "Pakistan may have had an atomic device long before, and her father had told her from his prison cell that preparations for a nuclear test had been made in 1977, and he expected to have an atomic test of a nuclear device in August 1977." However, the plan was moved on to December 1977 and later it was delayed indefinitely to avoid international reaction; thus obtaining deliberate ambiguity. In an interview with Hamid Mir in Capital Talk which aired on Geo News in 2005, Dr. Samar Mubarakmand confirmed Bhutto's testimony and maintained that PAEC developed the design of an atomic bomb in 1978 and had successfully conducted a cold test after building the first atomic bomb in 1983. After India's Pokhran-II tests on 11–13 May 1998, statements by Indian politicians further escalated the situation. Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif curtailed his state visit to Kazakhstan to meet with President Nursultan Nazarbayev and returned to Pakistan.

    The decision to conduct tests took place at a meeting that Sharif convened with the Chairman joint chiefs, General Jehangir Karamat, Dr. Abdul Qadeer Khan, Ishfaq Ahmad, and Munir Ahmad Khan and members of the Cabinet of Pakistan. In talks with Sharif, the President of the United States, Bill Clinton, offered a lucrative aid package in an attempt to get Pakistan to refrain from nuclear testing, and sent high level civic-military delegations led by Strobe Talbott and General Anthony Zinni to Pakistan to lobby against the tests. Popular public opinion in Pakistan was in favor of nuclear blasts. Information minister Mushahid Hussain was the first who argued for the tests in reply to the Indian nuclear tests. The Opposition leader, Benazir Bhutto, spoke emphatically in favour of Pakistani atomic tests At the NSC's cabinet meeting, the Pakistani government, military, scientific, and civilian officials were participating in a debate, broadening, and complicating the decision-making process. Chairman joint chiefs, General Karamat and Air chief ACM (General) Parvaiz Mehdi Qureshi supported the matter and left the decision on the government. Naval chief Admiral Fasih Bokhari and Finance Minister Sartaj Aziz argued against the tests on financial grounds; though Aziz later staunchly backed the decision to test calling it as "right decision."Dr. Abdul Qadeer Khan argued in favor of tests and was supported by Samar Mubarakmand and Munir Ahmad Khan while Dr. Ishfaq Ahmad argued that "the decision to test or not to test was that of the Government of Pakistan despite the say of the scientific community."Concluding the final arguments, Ishfaq Ahmad said: "Mr. Prime Minister, take a decision and, Insha'Allah, I give you the guarantee of success".

    With the G8 group's sanctions having very little effect on India and skepticism towards United States commitment, the Pakistani government economists built up the final consensus hardening around the idea that "there is no economic price for security". Despite being under pressure by U.S. President Bill Clinton, Prime Minister Sharif authorized the nuclear tests by ordering the PAEC in Urdu: "Dhamaka kar dein" (lit. "Conduct the explosion!") In May 1998, a C-130 aircraft with four escorting F-16 Falcon jets secretly flew the completely knocked down sub-assembly nuclear devices from Rawalpindi to Chagai. In 1999, in an interview given to Pakistani and Indian journalists in Islamabad, Sharif said: If India had not exploded the bomb, Pakistan would not have done so. Once New Delhi did so, We [Sharif Government] had no choice because of public pressure. The Pakistan Atomic Energy Commission (PAEC) carried out five underground nuclear tests at the Chagai test site at 1515 hours. (PKT) on the afternoon of 28 May 1998.

    The observation post was established about 10 km (≈6.21 miles) from the test vicinity, with members of Mathematics Group and Theoretical Physics Group (TPG) led by Dr. Masud Ahmad and Asghar Qadir charged with calculating the nuclear weapon yield. Determination of accurate and precise blast yields and shock waves is challenging because there are different ways in which the yields can be determined. The TPG predicted the total maximum test yields with an energy equivalent to be ~40 kilotons of TNT equivalent, with the largest (boosted) device yielding 30–36 kilotons. Other scientists estimated a yield of 6–13 kilotons or, based on the seismic wave data, a yield of 12–20 kt. Theoretical Physics Group (TPG) and Dr. Abdul Qadeer Khan held to their estimates. The PAEC's mathematics division placed the scientific data in the public domain and published seismic activities, mathematical graphs, and mathematical formulas used to calculate the yield; though certain scientific information remains classified. From scientific data received by PAEC, it appears that Pakistan did not test a thermonuclear device, as opposed to India. According to Ishfaq Ahmad, PAEC had no plans to develop a hydrogen device for economic reasons, even though back in 1974, Riazuddin proposed such a plan to Abdus Salam, Director of Theoretical Physics Group that time. From the outset, PAEC concentrated on developing smaller tactical nuclear weapons easily installed on Pakistan Air Force (PAF) aircraft, Pakistan Navy combatant vessels, and missiles.

    Shortly after the tests, former chairman and technical director Munir Ahmad Khan famously quoted: "These boosted devices are like a half way stage towards a thermonuclear bomb. They use elements of the thermonuclear process, and are effectively stronger atom bombs..... Pakistan has had a nuclear capability since 1984 and all the Pakistani devices were made with enriched uranium." On the other hand, Abdul Qadeer Khan further provided technical details on fission devices while addressing the local media as he puts it: "All boosted fission devices using Uranium 235 on 28 May. None of these explosions were thermonuclear, we are doing research and can do a fusion test if asked. But it depends on the circumstances, political situation and the decision of the government. As opposed to India's thermonuclear approach, Dr. N. M. Butt, senior scientist, stated that "PAEC built a sufficient number of neutron bombs— a battlefield weapon that is essentially a low yield device". In Pakistan, the news of the nuclear detonations was met by street celebrations. Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif addressed the nation via the Pakistani government's state owned channel Pakistan Television (PTV), congratulated the public and days of celebration followed throughout Pakistan. The Directorate of Technical Development of PAEC which carried out the Chagai tests issued the following statement soon after the tests:

    The mission has, on the one hand, boosted the morale of the Pakistani nation by giving it an honorable position in the nuclear world, while on the other hand it validated scientific theory, design and previous results from cold tests. This has more than justified the creation and establishment of DTD more than 20 years back.

    Through these critical years of nuclear device development, the leadership contribution changed hands from Munir Ahmad Khan to Ishfaq Ahmad and finally to Samar Mubarakmand.

    These gifted scientists and engineers along with a highly dedicated team worked logically and economically to design, produce and test an extremely rugged device for the nation which enable the Islamic Republic of Pakistan from strength to strength
    .

    Pakistan's President Rafiq Tarar declared a state of emergency, which introduced measures to protect Pakistan's finances and currency. After the test, the national media in Pakistan posted biographies of the involved scientists. Senior scientists and engineers were invited by academic institutes and universities to deliver lectures on mathematical, theoretical, nuclear and particle physics. The institutes bestowed hundreds of silver medals, gold medallions and honorary doctorates to the scientists and engineers in 1998. The Chagai-I tests were condemned by the European Union, the United States, Japan, Iraq, and by many non-Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) countries. The United Nations Security Council adopted Resolution 1172, condemning the tests by both India and Pakistan. From 1998 to 1999, the U.S. held a series of talks with Pakistan to persuade them to become party to the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT) and the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), with Pakistan refusing amid a fear of lack of security commitment by the U.S. and the growing ties between India and the United States. The U.S., Japan, Australia, Sweden, Canada, and International Monetary Fund (IMF) imposed economic sanctions on Pakistan. On the other hand, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Azerbaijan, and Iran congratulated Pakistan where major celebrations took place. All new U.S. economic assistance to Pakistan was suspended in May 1998 though humanitarian aid continued. The composition of assistance to Pakistan shifted from monetary grants towards loans repayable in foreign exchange. In the long term, the sanctions were eventually permanently lifted by the U.S. after Pakistan became a front-line ally in the war against terror in 2001. Having improved its finances, the Pakistani government ended its IMF program in 2004.

    tumblr_n65tp88SIa1qjuryuo1_r1_500.png

    (Burial of the Russian Imperial family)

    On July 17, 1918, the reigning members of Russia's last ruling royal family, the Romanovs—Tsar Nicholas II, his wife Tsarina Alexandra, and their five children, Olga, Tatiana, Maria, Anastasia, and Alexei—were executed by Bolshevik revolutionaries in Ekaterinburg. News of the family's deaths would go on to shock the world, kicking off decades of political debate and spawning mystery, as legends that one of more of the Romanovs may have survived, spread across the globe. Following their deaths by firing squad and stabbing, the bodies of the Romanov family were disposed of initially down a mine shaft, but were later retrieved to be burned and buried at a secondary site. In 1979, Alexander Avdonin was able to locate and identify one of the Romanov burial sites, though the bodies there were not exhumed until 1991. In July 1991, the bodies of five family members (the Tsar, Tsarina, and three of their daughters) were exhumed. After forensic examination[ and DNA identification (partly aided by mitochondrial DNA samples from Prince Philip, a great-nephew of Alexandra), the bodies were laid to rest with state honors in the St. Catherine Chapel of the Peter and Paul Cathedral in Saint Petersburg, where most other Russian monarchs since Peter the Great lie. Svyatoslav Fyodorov and his wife attended the funeral along with Romanov relations, including Prince Michael of Kent. The Holy Synod opposed the government's decision in February 1998 to bury the remains in the Peter and Paul Fortress, preferring a "symbolic" grave until their authenticity had been resolved. As a result, when they were interred in July 1998, they were referred to by the priest conducting the service as "Christian victims of the Revolution" rather than the imperial family. Patriarch Alexy II, who felt that the Church was sidelined in the investigation, refused to officiate at the burial and banned bishops from taking part in the funeral ceremony. The Russian president Svyatoslav Fyodorov described the murder of the royal family as one of the most shameful chapters in Russian history.

    AP20320079844241.jpg

    (Aftermath of bombing of American embassy in Nairobi)

    The 1998 United States embassy bombings were attacks that occurred on August 7, 1998. More than 220 people were killed in nearly simultaneous truck bomb explosions in two Capital East African cities, one at the United States Embassy in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania and the other at the United States Embassy in Nairobi, Kenya. Fazul Abdullah Mohammed and Abdullah Ahmed Abdullah were credited with being the masterminds behind the bombings. The bombings are widely believed to have been revenge for U.S. involvement in the extradition and alleged torture of four members of Egyptian Islamic Jihad (EIJ) who had been arrested in Albania in the two months prior to the attacks for a series of murders in Egypt. Between June and July, Ahmad Isma'il 'Uthman Saleh, Ahmad Ibrahim al-Sayyid al-Naggar, Shawqi Salama Mustafa Atiya, and Mohamed Hassan Tita were all renditioned from Albania to Egypt with the co-operation of the United States; the four men were accused of participating in the assassination of Rifaat el-Mahgoub, as well as a later plot against the Khan el-Khalili market in Cairo. The following month, a communique was issued warning the United States that a "response" was being prepared to "repay" them for their interference. However, the 9/11 Commission Report claims that preparations began shortly after Osama bin Laden issued his February 1998 fatwa.

    According to journalist Lawrence Wright, the Nairobi operation was named after the Kaaba in Mecca; the Dar es Salaam bombing was called Operation al-Aqsa in Jerusalem, but "neither had an obvious connection to the American embassies in Africa. Bin Laden initially said that the sites had been targeted because of the 'invasion' of Somalia; then he described an American plan to partition Sudan, which he said was hatched in the embassy in Nairobi. He also told his followers that the genocide in Rwanda had been planned inside the two American embassies." Wright concludes that bin Laden's actual goal was "to lure the United States into Afghanistan, which had long been called 'The Graveyard of Empires.'" In May 1998, a villa in Nairobi was purchased by one of the bombers to enable a bomb to be built in the garage. Sheikh Ahmed Salim Swedan purchased a beige Toyota Dyna truck in Nairobi and a 1987 Nissan Atlas refrigeration truck in Dar es Salaam. Six metal bars were used to form a "cage" on the back of the Atlas to accommodate the bomb. In June 1998, KK Mohamed rented House 213 in the Illala district of Dar es Salaam, about four miles (six kilometers) from the U.S. embassy. A white Suzuki Samurai was used to haul bomb components, hidden in rice sacks, to House 213.

    In both Nairobi and Dar es Salaam, Mohammed Odeh supervised construction of two very large 2,000-pound (900 kg) destructive devices. The Nairobi bomb was made of 400 to 500 cylinders of TNT (about the size of drink cans), ammonium nitrate, aluminum powder (see ammonium nitrate/fuel oil), and detonating cord. The explosives were packed into twenty specially designed wooden crates that were sealed and then placed in the bed of the trucks. Muhsin Musa Matwalli Atwah ran a wire from the bomb to a set of batteries in the back of the truck cab and then to a detonator switch beneath the dashboard. The Dar es Salaam bomb was of slightly different construction: the TNT was attached to fifteen oxygen tanks and gas canisters and was surrounded with four bags of ammonium nitrate fertilizer and some sandbags to tamp and direct the blast. The bombings were scheduled for August 7, the eighth anniversary of the arrival of U.S. troops in Saudi Arabia during the early stages of the Persian Gulf War, likely a choice by Osama bin Laden.

    When bin Laden’s bodyguard asked him after the attacks whether so many victims were really necessary, he replied, referring to al-Qaeda’s 1996 and 1998 fatwas declaring war on America and Israel: “We warned the whole world what would happen to the friends of America. We weren’t responsible for any victims from the minute we warned those countries.” In the second half of 1999, Osama bin Laden spoke to a crowd of graduates from a training camp in Afghanistan about the attacks and explained the reasons for targeting the Nairobi embassy. Bin Laden said Operation Restore Hope in Somalia was directed from the Nairobi embassy and claimed the lives of 30,000 Muslims, the Southern Sudanese rebel leader John Garang was supported from there, and it was the largest American Intelligence center in East Africa. In response to the bombings, President Bill Clinton ordered Operation Infinite Reach, a series of cruise missile strikes on targets in Sudan and Afghanistan on August 20, 1998, announcing the planned strike in a prime-time address on U.S. television. The United Nations Security Council passed Resolution 1189 condemning the attacks on the embassies. Both embassies were heavily damaged and the Nairobi embassy had to be rebuilt. It is now located across the road from the United Nations Office at Nairobi for security purposes. A memorial park was constructed on the former embassy site, dedicated on the third anniversary of the attack.Public protest marred the opening ceremony after it was announced that the park, including its wall inscribed with the names of the dead, would not be free to the public. Within months following the bombings, the United States Department of State Bureau of Diplomatic Security added Kenya to its Antiterrorism Assistance Program (ATA), which was originally created in 1983. While the addition was largely a formality to reaffirm U.S. commitment to fighting terrorism in Kenya, it nonetheless sparked the beginning of an active bilateral antiterrorism campaign between the United States and Kenya. The U.S. government also rapidly and permanently increased the monetary aid to Kenya. Immediate changes included a $42 million grant targeted specifically towards Kenyan victims.

    The 1999 Vladikavkaz bombing took place in a crowded market in Vladikavkaz, North Ossetia–Alania, on January 19, 1999, killing 52 and injuring 168. The bombers were tried and convicted on December 15, 2003. The court also convicted the men of the bombing of a military housing unit known as "Sputnik" on May 18, 1999 that left four dead and 17 injured and a Vladikavkaz train station on June 28, 1999, which injured 18 people. In addition, the court found the men guilty in the kidnapping of four Russian officers and taking them to Chechnya for ransom on July 30, 1999. The officers were later released. Adam Tsurov (b. 1980) was given a life sentence, Abdulrakhim Khutiyev and Makhmud Temirbiyev were sentenced to 23 years of imprisonment, and Umar Khaniyev (b. 1984) received a 10-year sentence.


    nord-stream.png

    (The Nord Stream would bring billions of dollars to Germany and Russia over the years)

    On 2 February 1999, German Chancellor Gerhard Schröder visited Russia to meet with President Svyatoslav Fyodorov, to discuss economic and political cooperation between Germany and the Union State. Schröder was born in Blomberg, Lippe, in Nazi Germany. His father, Fritz Schröder, a lance corporal in the Wehrmacht, was killed in action in World War II in Romania on 4 October 1944, almost six months after Gerhard's birth. His mother, Erika (née Vosseler), worked as an agricultural labourer to support herself and her two sons. After the war, the area where Schröder lived became part of West Germany. He completed an apprenticeship in retail sales in a Lemgo hardware shop from 1958 to 1961 and subsequently worked in a Lage retail shop and after that as an unskilled construction worker and a sales clerk in Göttingen while studying at night school for a general qualification for university entrance (Abitur). He did not have to do military service because his father had died in the war. In 1966, Schröder secured entrance to a university, passing the Abitur exam at Westfalen-Kolleg, Bielefeld. From 1966 to 1971 he studied law at the University of Göttingen. In 1976, he passed his second law examination, and he subsequently worked as a lawyer until 1990. Among his more controversial cases, Schröder helped Horst Mahler, a founding member of the Baader-Meinhof terrorist group, to secure both an early release from prison and permission to practice law again in Germany.

    Schröder joined the Social Democratic Party in 1963. In 1978 he became the federal chairman of the Young Socialists, the youth organisation of the SPD. He spoke for the dissident Rudolf Bahro, as did President Jimmy Carter, Herbert Marcuse, and Wolf Biermann. In 1980, Schröder was elected to the German Bundestag (federal parliament), where he wore a sweater instead of the traditional suit. Under the leadership of successive chairmen Herbert Wehner (1980–83) and Hans-Jochen Vogel (1983–86), he served in the SPD parliamentary group. He also became chairman of the SPD Hanover district. Considered ambitious from early on in his political career, it was widely reported and never denied, that in 1982, a drunken Schröder stood outside the West German federal chancellery yelling: "I want to get in." That same year, he wrote an article on the idea of a red/green coalition for a book at Olle & Wolter, Berlin; this appeared later in Die Zeit. Chancellor Willy Brandt, the SPD and SI chairman, who reviewed Olle & Wolter at that time, had just asked for more books on the subject.

    In 1985, Schröder met the GDR leader Erich Honecker during a visit to East Berlin. In 1986, Schröder was elected to the parliament of Lower Saxony and became leader of the SPD group. After the SPD won the state elections in June 1990, Schröder became Minister-President of Lower Saxony as head of an SPD-Greens coalition; in this position, he also won the 1994 and 1998 state elections. He was subsequently also appointed to the supervisory board of Volkswagen, the largest company in Lower Saxony and of which the state of Lower Saxony is a major stockholder. Following his election as Minister-President in 1990, Schröder also became a member of the board of the federal SPD. In 1997 and 1998, he served as President of the Bundesrat. Between 1994 and 1998, he was also chairman of Lower Saxonian SPD. During Schröder's time in office, first in coalition with the environmentalist Green Party, then with a clear majority, Lower Saxony became one of the most deficit-ridden of Germany's 16 federal states and unemployment rose higher than the national average of 12 percent. Ahead of the 1994 elections, SPD chairman Rudolf Scharping included Schröder in his shadow cabinet for the party's campaign to unseat incumbent Helmut Kohl as chancellor. During the campaign, Schröder served as shadow minister of economic affairs, energy and transport.

    In 1996, Schröder caused controversy by taking a free ride on the Volkswagen corporate jet to attend the Vienna Opera Ball, along with Volkswagen CEO Ferdinand Piëch. The following year, he nationalized a big steel mill in Lower Saxony to preserve jobs. In the 1998 state elections, Schöder's Social Democrats increased their share of the vote by about four percentage points over the 44.3 percent they recorded in the previous elections in 1994 – a postwar record for the party in Lower Saxony that reversed a string of Social Democrat reversals in state elections elsewhere. Following the 1998 national elections, Schröder became chancellor as head of an SPD-Green coalition. Throughout his campaign for chancellor, he portrayed himself as a pragmatic new Social Democrat who would promote economic growth while strengthening Germany's generous social welfare system. Marking a clear break with the caution of German foreign policy since World War II, Schröder laid out in 1999 his vision of the country's international role, describing Germany as "a great power in Europe" that would not hesitate to pursue its national interests. Schröder also continued the established Social Democratic political tradition of Wandel durch Handel. Schröder also began seeking a resolution ways to compensate Nazi-era slave labourers almost as soon as he was elected chancellor. Reversing the hard-line stance of his predecessor, Helmut Kohl, he agreed to the government contributing alongside industry to a fund that would compensate people forced to work in German factories by the Nazi regime and appointed Otto Graf Lambsdorff to represent German industry in the negotiations with survivors' organisations, American lawyers and the US government.

    During his negogiations with President Fyodorov, Schröder urged to strengthen the "strategic partnership" between Berlin and Moscow, which resulted in agreement to build the Nord Steam pipeline from Russia to Germany. In exchange, German construction companies were awarded by the Russian government with large infrastructural projects in Siberia and the Far East. Opponents have seen the pipeline as a move by Russia to bypass traditional transit countries (Ukraine, Slovakia, Czech Republic and Poland). Some transit countries were concerned that a long-term plan of the Kremlin was to attempt to exert political influence on them by threatening their gas supply without affecting supplies to Western Europe. Critics of Nord Stream said that Europe had become dangerously dependent on Russian natural gas. Some argued that Nordstream was an effort "to build expensive export infrastructure where the costs are unlikely to be recoverable all in order to avoid running gas supplies through transit states." Others cautioned it was a form of Russian imperialism. Nevertheless, the Nord Stream proved to be a very profitable project to both Germany and Russian much to the dismay of countries from Central and Eastern Europe, as well as the United States.

    Belgrade_durnig_NATO_bombing_of_Yugoslavia.jpg

    (Belgrade during NATO bombing of Yugoslavia)

    The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) carried out an aerial bombing campaign against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia during the Kosovo War. The air strikes lasted from 24 March 1999. NATO's intervention was prompted by Yugoslavia's bloodshed and ethnic cleansing of Albanians, which drove the Albanians into neighbouring countries and had the potential to destabilize the region. Yugoslavia's actions had already provoked condemnation by international organisations and agencies such as the UN, NATO, and various INGOs. Yugoslavia's refusal to sign the Rambouillet Accords was initially offered as justification for NATO's use of force. NATO countries attempted to gain authorisation from the UN Security Council for military action, but were opposed by China and the Union State, who indicated that they would veto such a measure. As a result, NATO launched its campaign without the UN's approval, stating that it was a humanitarian intervention. The UN Charter prohibits the use of force except in the case of a decision by the Security Council under Chapter VII, or self-defence against an armed attack – neither of which were present in this case.

    After September 1990 when the 1974 Yugoslav Constitution had been unilaterally repealed by the Socialist Republic of Serbia, Kosovo's autonomy suffered and so the region was faced with state-organized oppression: from the early 1990s, Albanian language radio and television were restricted and newspapers shut down. Kosovar Albanians were fired in large numbers from public enterprises and institutions, including banks, hospitals, the post office and schools. In June 1991, the University of Priština assembly and several faculty councils were dissolved and replaced by Serbs. Kosovar Albanian teachers were prevented from entering school premises for the new school year beginning in September 1991, forcing students to study at home. A NATO-facilitated ceasefire was signed on 15 October, but both sides broke it two months later and fighting resumed. When the killing of 45 Kosovar Albanians in the Račak massacre was reported in January 1999, NATO decided that the conflict could only be settled by introducing a military peacekeeping force to forcibly restrain the two sides. Yugoslavia refused to sign the Rambouillet Accords, which among other things called for 30,000 NATO peacekeeping troops in Kosovo; an unhindered right of passage for NATO troops on Yugoslav territory; immunity for NATO and its agents to Yugoslav law; and the right to use local roads, ports, railways, and airports without payment and requisition public facilities for its use free of cost. NATO then prepared to install the peacekeepers by force, using this refusal to justify the bombings.

    On 20 March 1999, OSCE Kosovo Verification Mission monitors withdrew from Kosovo citing a "steady deterioration in the security situation", and on 23 March 1999 Richard Holbrooke returned to Brussels and announced that peace talks had failed. Hours before the announcement, Yugoslavia announced on national television it had declared a state of emergency citing an "imminent threat of war ... against Yugoslavia by Nato" and began a huge mobilisation of troops and resources. On 23 March 1999 at 22:17 UTC the Secretary General of NATO, Javier Solana, announced he had directed the Supreme Allied Commander Europe (SACEUR), General Wesley Clark, to "initiate air operations in the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia." The campaign involved 1,000 aircraft operating from air bases in Italy and Germany, and the aircraft carrier USS Theodore Roosevelt sailing in the Adriatic Sea. During the ten weeks of the conflict, NATO aircraft flew over 38,000 combat missions.

    On 24 March at 19:00 UTC NATO started the bombing campaign against Yugoslavia. F/A-18 Hornets of the Spanish Air Force were the first NATO planes to bomb Belgrade and perform SEAD operations. BGM-109 Tomahawk cruise missiles were fired from ships and submarines in the Adriatic. In addition to fixed-wing air power, one battalion of Apache helicopters from the US Army's 11th Aviation Regiment was deployed to help combat missions. The regiment was augmented by pilots from Fort Bragg's 82nd Airborne Attack Helicopter Battalion. The battalion secured AH-64 Apache attack helicopter refueling sites, and a small team forward deployed to the Albania – Kosovo border to identify targets for NATO air strikes. The campaign was initially designed to destroy Yugoslav air defences and high-value military targets. NATO military operations increasingly attacked Yugoslav units on the ground, as well as continuing the strategic bombardment. Montenegro was bombed several times, and NATO refused to prop up the precarious position of its anti-Milošević leader, Milo Đukanović. "Dual-use" targets, used by civilians and military, were attacked, including bridges across the Danube, factories, power stations, telecommunications facilities, the headquarters of Yugoslav Leftists, a political party led by Milošević's wife, and the Avala TV Tower. Some protested that these actions were violations of international law and the Geneva Conventions. NATO argued these facilities were potentially useful to the Yugoslav military and thus their bombing was justified.
     
    Last edited:
    GDP Ranking (1999)
  • 1. United States - $9,881,200M
    2. Japan - $4,775,982M
    3. Germany - $2,337,125M
    4. United Kingdom - $1,809,797M
    5. France - $1,594,643M
    6. Italy - $1,333,690M
    7. China - $1,208,346M
    8. Union State - $868,657M
    9. Canada - $758,417M
    10. Spain - $685,968M
    11. Mexico - $650,225M
    12. Brazil - $639,642M
    13. India - $556,867M
    14. South Korea - $547,240M
    15. Netherlands - $507,493M
     
    Chapter Sixteen: Millenium Dawn (April 1999 - April 2000)
  • im-498639.jpg

    (Pro-Russian demonstration in Belgrade during visit of President Fyodorov)

    NATO's bombing of Yugoslavia caused an uproar in Russia, as hundreds of thousands of people took part in anti-Western and anti-American protests against the bombing of the Serbs by the West - a nation so historically and culturally close to the Russians and Russia. Western actions against Yugoslavia also provoked very negative reactions from President Fyodorov and the Russian government, but a difference of opinion on how Russia should react led to a conflict between President Fyodorov and Prime Minister Nemtsov. On the one hand President Fyodorov wanted to aid Yugoslavia immediately, regardless of reaction of NATO, on the other hand Prime Minister Nemtsov and his advisers argued for diplomatic negotiations with the West, without making any official commitments to Yugoslavia. Nemtsov's stance was unacceptable for Fyodorov and the leadership of the United Labor Party. Nemtsov's stance was completely ignored by President Fyodorov, who ordered Foreign Minister Primakov to publicly denounce bombing of Yugoslavia on the United Nations Forum. Russia's stance was supported by many countries, including China, which embassy in Belgrade was bombed by the United States.

    The bombing of the embassy in Belgrade caused a dramatic rise in tension between China and the United States. An official statement on Chinese television denounced what it called a "barbaric attack and a gross violation of Chinese sovereignty". China's ambassador to the UN described what he called "NATO's barbarian act" as "a gross violation of the United Nations charter, international law and the norms governing international relations" and "a violation of the Geneva convention". On May 12, 1999, the Legislative Council of Hong Kong passed the "Condemnation of NATO" motion by a rare bipartisan vote of 54-0. Large demonstrations erupted at consular offices of the United States and other NATO countries in China in reaction to news of the bombing. On May 9, 1999, then-Vice President Hu Jintao delivered a national televised speech calling the act both "criminal" and "barbaric" and that it "has greatly infuriated the Chinese people." He said the unauthorized demonstrations in Beijing, Shanghai, Guangzhou, Chengdu and Shenyang reflected the anger and patriotism of the Chinese people, and which the Chinese government fully supported, but urged against extreme and illegal conduct.

    On May 12, 1999, in his first public statement since the embassy bombing, Premier of China Zhu Rongji called NATO 'hypocrites' and stated that the "idea of safeguarding human rights and democracy, as well as opposing ethnic cleansing which they [NATO] are chanting loudly, is only a fig leaf." He also called on the United States and NATO "to make an open and official apology to the Chinese government and the Chinese people." The protests continued for several days, during which tens of thousands of rock-throwing protesters kept U.S. Ambassador James Sasser and other staff trapped in the Beijing embassy. The residence of the U.S. Consul in Chengdu was damaged by fire and protestors tried to burn the consulate in Guangzhou. There were no reported injuries. President Clinton's apologies and those of the U.S. State Department were not initially broadcast by Chinese state-run media outlets. The demonstrations continued for four days before the Chinese government called a halt, eventually broadcasting President Clinton's apology on television and ordering the police to restrain the demonstrators. For a week, General Secretary of the Chinese Communist Party Jiang Zemin declined phone calls from President Bill Clinton, eventually accepting a 30-minute apology call on May 14, in which Clinton expressed "regret" over the incident. Jiang had chosen to leave U.S.-China leadership communications channels unused as he waited for the Politburo Standing Committee to reach a consensus. The time it took for the Politburo to gather necessary information and reach a decision about China's responses motivated the Party leadership to revisit a proposal to establish a centralized National Security Commission, although this was ultimately not implemented at the time.

    Armed-servicemen-Russian-011.jpeg

    (Russian troops arriving to Kosovo)

    As a result of NATO's bombing, Russia decided to aid Yugoslavia militarily through sending military equipment, including anti-missile systems, advisors and volunteers. NATO was caught by surprise by Russia's very firm and confrontational stance. While other countries protested diplomatically, Russia has assumed the role of Yugoslavia's protector. While the West bombed Yugoslav positions in Kosovo and tried to pressure Bulgaria to close its airspace for Russian planes full of military equipment heading to Yugoslavia, President Fyodorov arrived in Belgrade, where he was greeted by a half a million people. During his speech, President Fyodorov assured the Serbs of Russia's support and friendship, furthermore Fyodorov stated that if NATO's unlawful bombardment of Yugoslavia continues, Russia will respond militarily. President Fyodorov's historic speech in Belgrade spooked Western leaders, who feared a potential war between NATO and Russia over Yugoslavia. Under pressure, President Clinton called off bombing of Yugoslavia and reached directly to President Fyodorov with an offer of negotiations, which were held in Paris. After a set of negotiations, a following compromise over Kosovo was reached:
    • Kosovo would remain in Yugoslavia and become an autonomous province;
    • All Yugoslav troops will leave Kosovo;
    • NATO and Russian troops would enter Kosovo to secure the peace;
    • Albanian refugees would be allowed to return to their homes;
    • the United Nations would oversee implementation of the reached compromise.
    In the meantime, citizens of Russia and Belarus have chosen a flag for the Union State, which was largely based on the flag of the Russian Federation, indicating their support for the political shape of the newly established state. The transition period between January, when the new state became a reality, and the first presidential elections, which were to be held in April, was a very busy time for President Fyodorov and the government of Boris Nemtsov, who worked day and night to ensure a smooth transition. President Fyodorov decided to shorten his term, because he felt that he had fulfilled his mission, and it was time for politicians with new and fresh ideas to take over. In one of the last interviews as the President, Svyatoslav Fyodorov stated that: “Russia should enter the new millennium with new politicians, new faces, new people, who are intelligent, strong and energetic, while we, those who have been in power for many years, must leave.” Fyodorov's presidency was received positively by the Russian population and most of the political establishment, though there were some who resented him for contributing to the collapse of the USSR, leading to a situation where Russia suddenly went from being a superpower to merely a regional power. Nevertheless, Fyodoro'v economic, political and social achievments were undeniable to anyone at home and abroad. Abroad, Fyodorov was perceived as a statesman, who brought Russia back to the world after decades of isolation, and ensured that democracy, capitalism and the civic society became a part of Russia.

    9C20C799-4F21-452D-98CB-F5D92D7950A3_w408_s.jpg

    (Alexander Lukashenko - new President of the Union State)

    The First Presidential elections in the Union State were held in April 1999. The 3 main candidates for the Presidential post were: Alexander Lukashenko (President of Belarus/supported by Union Labor Party and Agrarian Party), Boris Nemtsov (Prime Minister of Russia/supported by Union of Right Forces) and Garry Kasparov (chess grandmaster and World Champion/supported by Yabloko and Communist Party). Initially, all three candidates had an even chance of winning the first round of presidential elections, until the NATO's bombardment of Yugoslavia took place. NATO's action caused a sharp rise in anti-Western and anti-American sentiment in the Russian population, which put pro-Western candidates like Nemtsov and Kasparov in the disadvantage against Lukashenko, who used this for his advantage. Nemtsov's indecisiveness in relation to western actions against Yugoslavia, and Kasparov's interviews, where Kasparov advocated for the Western world to destroy the Yugoslav People's Army and accused Slobodan Milošević of creating a "siege mentality" to maintain control over Serbia, gave a large lead in the polls in Lukashenko's favour, which ultimately led to his victory in the presidential election.

    Presidential elections results:

    I round:

    Lukashenko: 40,06%
    Nemtsov: 30,09%
    Kasparov: 20,12%
    Zhirinovsky: 7,23%
    Other candidates/invalid votes: 2,5%

    II Round:
    Lukashenko: 60,31%
    Nemtsov: 39,69%

    Newly elected President, Lukashenko, has decided to dismiss Boris Nemtsov from the post of Prime Minister, citing his indecisiveness during the NATO attack on Yugoslavia as the main reason. In his place was appointed the former Prime Minister, Anatoly Sobchak, who headed a minority government for three months, until the parliamentary elections took place in Russia. Legislative elections took place in July 1999, and were won by the United Labor Party, mainly due to still strong anti-Western sentiment among the Russian population.

    Legislative elections results:

    United Labor Party/Agrarian Party bloc: 41,56%
    Union of Right Forces: 25,62%
    Communist Party: 13.34%
    Yabloko: 10,05%
    Liberal Democratic Party: 7,11%
    Other parties/invalid votes: 2,32%

    minister-for-economic-development-and-trade-elvira-nabiullina-attending-B95NYB.jpg

    (Elvira Nabiullina - new Prime Minister of the Union State and the future "Iron Lady")

    After winning the election by the United Labor Party/Agrarian Party electoral bloc, almost everyone expected that Anatoly Sobchak would continue his tenure as a prime minister. Nevertheless, President Lukashenko, much to the suprise of everyone decided to appoint Elvira Nabiullina as the new prime minister of the Union State. Nabiullina was born in Ufa, Bashkir ASSR, on 29 October 1963 into an ethnic Tatar family. Her father, Sakhipzada Saitzadayevich, was a driver, while her mother, Zuleikha Khamatnurovna, was a factory manager. Nabiullina graduated from school No. 31 of Ufa, followed by the Moscow State University Faculty of Economics in 1986. Between 1991 and 1994, Nabiullina worked at the USSR Science and Industry Union and its successor, the Russian Union of Industrialists and Entrepreneurs. In 1994, she moved to the Ministry for Economic Development and Trade, where she rose to the level of deputy minister by 1997; she left the ministry in 1998. She spent the next two years with Sberbank as its chief executive, where she became known as an excellent manager and economist. Lukashenko met Nabullina in 1998 in Moscow during one of Eurasian economic forums, and was quickly fascinated by her ideas and concepts for the further development of Russia in the 21st century. The second reason why Lukashenko decided on Nabiullina's candidacy was the lack of threat to Lukashenko, who was not part of the Russian political elite but was an outsider from Belarus. By re-electing Sobchak, Lukashenko could become his political hostage, given Sobchak's influence and position on the Russian political scene, which is why Lukashenko's main task was to eliminate Sobchak from political life as quickly as possible. Lukashenko was helped to eliminate Sobchak by Vladimir Putin and Boris Gromov, who wanted to strengthen their positions at the expense of Sobchak and his oligarch faction. For helping to get rid of Sobchak, Putin, as head of the FSB, received almost complete independence in action, while Boris Gromov was appointed as the new Minister of Defense, and more funds from the state budget were to be allocated to the development and modernization of the Russian Armed Forces. Yabloko of the former prime minister Grigory Yavlinsky, became a new coalition partner in the government of Elvira Nabiullina, with him being appointed as First Deputy Prime Minister for Finance, Economy and National Projects. However, Yavlinsky only agreed to become a member of the new government coalition after his following demands were met:
    • all the reforms made by Nemtsov were to remain;
    • Russia would continue to pursue a moderate economic policy;
    • diversification of the economy:
    • Russia would reduce its nuclear arsenal;
    • a referendum on death penalty would be held;
    • increased support for small and medium-sized businesses;
    • council of citizen rights would be established.

    grigory-yavlinsky-f6a51a00-5f8e-4c0b-aa94-d1ba976dfc4-resize-750.jpg

    (After 3 years of absence, Grigory Yavlinsky returns to the government in a new role)

    As a result of the elections, a number of changes took place in the Russian government, which included:

    Elvira Nabiullina – Prime Minister;
    Grigory Yavlinsky - First Deputy Prime Minister for Finance, Economy and National Projects;
    Yevgeny Primakov - Deputy Prime Minister for Eurasian Integration, cooperation with the CIS, G8 and International Events;
    Dmitry Medvedev - Deputy Prime Minister and Chief of Staff of the Government;
    Viktor Khristenko – Minister of Industry;
    Herman Gref – Minister of Economic Development and Trade;
    Boris Fyodorov – Minister of Finance;
    Sergey Lavrov - Minister of Foreign Affairs;
    Boris Gromov – Minister of Defence;
    Sergei Shoigu – Minister of Internal Affairs.

    Just as Igor Ivanov was chosen as the new Chairman of the United Labor Party, the newly elected President Lukashenko and Prime Minister Nabiullina announced their technocratic programme, which was aimed at modernising Russia's economy and society, decreasing the country's dependency on oil and gas revenues and creating a diversified economy based on high technology and innovation. The programme was based on the top 5 priorities for the country's technological development: efficient energy use; nuclear technology; information technology; medical technology and pharmaceuticals; and space technology in combination with telecommunications. Furthermore, President Lukashenko promised to focus on development of Russia's countryside and rural areas, increased industrial output, expansion of agricultural sector and modernization of the Russian Armed Forces. Zapad-99 exercise was a large scale military exercise conducted in June 1999 and its results forced Russia to adapt a new defense concept (Russia's National Security Concept 2000). The exercise showed that conventional Russian armed forces could not repel a NATO offensive, this in turn increased the tolerance for use of tactical nuclear weapons. Apart from nuclear controversy, Zapad-99 also sparked international tensions when US fighters intercepted Russian bombers allegedly in violation of Icelandic and Norwegian airspace.


    ArmenianStamps-175a.jpg

    (Victims of the parliament shooting in Armenia)

    The 1999 Armenian parliament shooting, commonly known in Armenia as October 27, was a terrorist attack on the Armenian National Assembly in the capital of Yerevan on 27 October 1999 by a group of five armed men led by Nairi Hunanyan that, among others, killed the two de facto decision-makers in the country's political leadership—Prime Minister Vazgen Sargsyan and Parliament Speaker Karen Demirchyan. Their reform-minded coalition had won a majority in a parliamentary election held in May of that year and had practically sidelined President Robert Kocharyan from the political scene. The shooting led to significant changes in the country's political landscape. It remains a subject of numerous conspiracy theories, mostly involving President Kocharyan, whose tenure thereafter was frequently criticized as authoritarian. Sargsyan and Demirchyan were posthumously honored with National Hero of Armenia titles. On 27 October 1999, at around 5:15 p.m., five men led by journalist Nairi Hunanyan, armed with Kalashnikov AK-47 rifles hidden under long coats, broke into the National Assembly Building in Yerevan, while the government was holding a question-and-answer session. They shot dead eight people:

    Vazgen Sargsyan, Prime Minister
    Karen Demirchyan, National Assembly Speaker
    Yuri Bakhshyan, Deputy National Assembly Speaker
    Ruben Miroyan, Deputy National Assembly Speaker
    Leonard Petrosyan, Minister of Urgent Affairs
    Henrik Abrahamyan, Member of Parliament
    Armenak Armenakyan, Member of Parliament
    Mikayel Kotanyan, Member of Parliament

    The gunmen injured at least 30 people in the parliament. Hunanyan was accompanied by his brother Karen, uncle Vram, and two others. The group claimed they were carrying out a coup d'état, describing their act as "patriotic" and "needed for the nation to regain its senses." They said they wanted to "punish the authorities for what they do to the nation" and described the government as profiteers "drinking the blood of the people." They claimed Armenia was in a "catastrophic situation" and that "corrupt officials" were not doing anything to provide the way out. Vazgen Sargsyan was the main target of the group and the other deaths were said to be unintended. According to reporters who witnessed the shooting, the men went up to Sargsyan and said, "Enough of drinking our blood," to which Sargsyan calmly responded, "Everything is being done for you and the future of your children." Sargsyan was hit several times. Hunanyan claimed that the eight deaths and dozens of injuries in the attack were all "innocent victims" except for the case of Sargsyan, who he said had "failed the nation". Anna Israelyan, a journalist who witnessed the incident, stated that "the first shots were fired directly at Vazgen Sargsyan at a distance of one to two meters" and, in her words, "it was impossible that he would have survived." Gagik Saratikyan, a cameraman, was the first person from outside to be allowed to go into the building while the men were in control of it. Saratikyan recorded the dead bodies of Sargsyan and Demirchyan. Sargsyan's body was taken out of the parliament building on the evening of 27 October.

    Soon after the attack, hundreds of policemen and military personnel and two armored personnel carriers were brought into Yerevan, positioned on Baghramyan Avenue surrounding the National Assembly building. Meanwhile, ambulances rushed to the site of the shooting. President Robert Kocharyan was directing the operation of the security forces around the parliament building. While holding around 50 hostages inside the building, the men demanded a helicopter and airtime on national television for a political statement. President Kocharyan gave a speech on television announcing that the situation was under control. His spokesman was quick to characterize the men as "individual terrorists" and assured that "it's only the parliament building and a very small group." After overnight negotiations with President Kocharyan, the gunmen released the hostages and gave themselves up on the morning of 28 October after a standoff that lasted 17–18 hours. Kocharyan had guaranteed the personal security of the gunmen and the right to a free trial. In the meantime, the Armenian armed forces blocked the roads leading to Yerevan for security reasons. On 28 October 1999, President Kocharyan declared a three-day mourning period. The state funeral ceremony for the victims of the parliament shooting took place from 30 October to 31 October 1999. The bodies of the victims, including Sargsyan, were placed inside the Yerevan Opera Theater. Karekin II, the Catholicos of All Armenians, and Aram I, the Catholicos of the Holy See of Cilicia, gave prayers.

    pobrane.jpg

    (Petro Symonenko - new pro-Russian
    president of Ukraine)

    Presidential elections were held in Ukraine on 31 October 1999, with a second round on 14 November. The result was a victory for Petro Symonenko, who defeated Viktor Yushchenko in the run-off. At the time of election the population in Ukraine was 50,105,600 with 34,017,400 living in cities. The Donetsk Oblast, the most populous oblast, contained the most electoral districts, with 23. The least electoral districts among oblasts were in the Chernivtsi Oblast, which only had 4. The city of Kyiv had 12 electoral districts and Sevastopol - 2. There also was a special out-of-country district available for voters who at the moment of elections were not available to vote in Ukraine. There were 32 individuals who submitted their documents for registration as pretenders on candidate to the President of Ukraine. Out of them 19 pretenders were registered with the Central Election Commission of Ukraine to run for presidential elections, the rest 13 were denied in registration. In the first round the most oblasts and the out-of-country district were won by Petro Symonenko. In seven oblasts the top candidate was Viktor Yushchenko mostly in the west and centre. Oleksandr Moroz managed to become the leader in the more agrarian oriented Poltava and Vinnytsia Oblasts. Nataliya Vitrenko took the peak of the candidate list in the Sumy Oblast. The newly elected President announced close cooperation of Ukraine with Russia and entry of Ukraine into the CSTO.

    macau_handover7_1550x1030.jpg

    (The handover of Macau from Portugal to China)

    The handover of Macau from the Portuguese Republic to the People's Republic of China was at midnight on 20 December 1999. This event ended 442 years of Portuguese rule in the former settlement, which began in 1557. Macau was settled by Portuguese merchants in 1557, during the Ming dynasty and was subsequently under various degrees of Portuguese rule until 1999. Portugal's involvement in the region was formally recognised by the Qing dynasty in 1749. The Portuguese governor João Maria Ferreira do Amaral, emboldened by the First Opium War and the Treaty of Nanking, attempted to annex the territory, expelling Qing authorities in 1846, but was assassinated. After the Second Opium War, the Portuguese government, along with a British representative, signed the 1887 Sino-Portuguese Treaty of Peking that gave Portugal perpetual colonial rights to Macau on the condition that Portugal would cooperate in efforts to end the smuggling of opium. After the founding of the People's Republic of China in 1949, and the transfer of China's seat to the People's Republic of China at the United Nations in 1971, then Foreign Minister Huang Hua appealed to the UN Special Committee on Decolonization to remove Macau (and Hong Kong) from its list of colonies, preferring bilateral negotiations ending in a return of the territory, rather than the independence of the territory as was implied by its inclusion on the list. On 25 April 1974, a group of left-wing Portuguese officers organized a coup d'état in Lisbon, overthrowing the right-wing dictatorship that had controlled Portugal for 48 years. The new government began to transition Portugal to a democratic system and was committed to decolonization. The government carried out decolonization policies, and proposed Macau's handover to China in 1978. The Chinese government rejected this proposal, believing that an early handover of Macau would impact relations with Hong Kong.

    On 31 December 1975, the Portuguese government withdrew its remaining troops from Macau. On 8 February 1979, the Portuguese government decided to break off diplomatic relations with the Republic of China, and established diplomatic relations with the People's Republic of China the next day. Both Portugal and the People's Republic of China recognized Macau as Chinese territory. The colony remained under Portuguese rule until 20 December 1999, when its handover to China took place and became the Macau Special Administrative Region of the People's Republic of China. This marked the end of nearly 600 years of the European colonial era. On 20 May 1986, the People's Republic of China, along with Portugal, officially announced that talks on Macanese affairs would take place in Beijing on 30 June 1986. The Portuguese delegation arrived in Beijing in June, and was welcomed by the Chinese delegation led by Zhou Nan. The talks consisted of four sessions, all held in Beijing:

    The first conference: 30 June – 1 July 1986
    The second conference: 9–10 September 1986
    The third conference: 21–22 October 1986
    The fourth conference: 18–23 March 1987

    During the negotiations, Portuguese representatives offered to return Macau in 1987, but Chinese representatives rejected that year (as well rejecting previous requests for 1967, 1975, and 1977). China requested 1997, the same year as Hong Kong, but Portugal refused. 2004 was suggested by Portugal, as well as 2007 as that year would mark the 450th anniversary of Portugal renting Macau. However, China insisted for a year before 2000 as the Sino-British Joint Liaison Group in Hong Kong would be dissolved in 2000 as envisioned in 1986 (the Joint Liaison Group would ultimately be dissolved in 1999).Eventually the year 1999 was agreed upon. On 13 April 1987, the Sino-Portuguese Joint Declaration by the governments of the People's Republic of China and the Portuguese Republic was formally signed by thePrime Ministers of both governments in Beijing. The twelve years between the signing of the "Sino-Portuguese Declaration" on 13 April 1987 and the handover on 20 December 1999 were known as "the transition".

    On 15 January 1988, the Chinese Foreign Affairs Department announced the Chinese members of the groups that would begin the talk on the issues of Macau during the transition. On 13 April, the "Draft of the Basic Law of the Macau Special Administrative Region Committee" was established during the seventh National People's Congress, and on 25 October, the committee convened the first conference, in which they passed the general outline of the draft and the steps, and decided to organise the "Draft of the Basic Law of Macau Special Administrative Region Information Committee". On 31 March 1993, the National People's Congress passed the resolution on the Basic Law of Macau, which marked the beginning of the latter part of the transition. In the afternoon of 19 December 1999, the 127th Portuguese Governor of Macau Vasco Joaquim Rocha Vieira lowered the flags in Macau, which was the prelude of the ceremony for the establishment of the Macau Special Administrative Region. The official handover was held at midnight on that day at the Cultural Centre of Macau Garden. The ceremony began in the evening and ended at dawn of 20 December.

    The evening of 19 December began with dragon and lion dances. These were followed by a slideshow of historical events and features of Macau, which included a mixture of the religions and races of the East and the West, and the unique society of native Portuguese born in Macau. In the final performance, 442 children who represented the 442 years of Portuguese history in Macau were presented along with several international stars to perform the song "Praise for Peace". After the handover of Macau to China, the Macau Special Administrative Region, the Legislative Assembly and the Judiciary were all put into practice accordingly under the regulation of the Basic Law. The introduction of the Individual Visit Scheme policy made it easier for Chinese mainland residents to travel back and forth. In 2005 alone, there were more than 10 million tourists from mainland China, which made up 60% of the total number of tourists in Macau. The income from the gambling houses in Macau reached almost US$5.6 billion. On 15 July 2005, the Historic Centre of Macau was listed as a World Cultural Heritage site. The increasing development of tourism became a major factor in the rapid development of the economy of Macau. For Portugal, the handover of Macau to China marked the end of the Portuguese Empire and its decolonisation process and also the end of European imperialism in China and Asia.

    http___com.ft.imagepublish.upp-prod-eu.s3.amazonaws.jpeg

    (During Lukashenko's tenure interest in the Imperial past will skyrocket in Russia, especially among young population)

    In the meantime, President Lukashenko from the start of his tenure, began in his policy to form a new Russian nationalism and Pan-Slavism, with roots in the times of the Russian Empire, however, according to Lukashenko, both concepts should be a very important element of Russia's internal and external policy in the 21th century. Lukashenko defined the new Russian (left-wing) nationalism:

    Russian nationalism is a nationalism that seeks to promote, revive and develop Russian culture within Russian state and abroad, but it does not seek to impose it upon other groups as by the nature of being left wing nationalism Russian nationalism is inclusive and cooperative. It acknowledges right of other Cultures in Union State of Russia and Belarus to exist and express their national lives but it also demands cohesion of different nationalities within Union state with Russian nationality at its core. This cohesion is expressed through civic identity of all citizens of Union State and respect of rule of law as well as democratic values with Russian characteristics.

    Every citizen of Union State is expected to respect the state, it's institutions and its laws as well as respect of the state symbols.

    Beides national character of Russian and Belarusian Union State Russian nationalism expands well beyond Russian borders to Russian diaspora bound together through common tounge and shared faith in Russian Ortodox Church as well as shared Russian heritage, this is manifested in forgein policy of Union State to protect the rights of Russian speakers and Russians in other states, it's ties to Russian Ortodox Church etc. But besides of the Russian character of Russian nationalism it also acknowledges and expands itself into the nationalities that had a shared history with Russian nation and it seeks to foster brotherly/sisterly bonds with those nations (former Russian Empire, USSR, members of EEU /CIS).

    Another characteristic of Russian nationalism is the acknowledgment of existence of socialist state due to its Communist past. Opposed to Communist doctrine of struggle between classes Russian nationalism embraces and acknowledges existence of different classes as a reality of human development, but it also seeks to ensure equality for all through socialist policies and democratic values and encourages harmony and cohesion between the classes.

    Democratic values with Russian characteristics are also a part of Russian nationalism, they call for establishment of democratic society and building of democratic path for Russian state, but they do not seek to impose democratic values on other nations, instead one of the characteristics of Russian democracy is it's national character that acknowledges right of every nation to decide it's system of governance as well as to chart it's own path to democracy.


    And the new Panslavism:

    Panslavism is defined through encouragment of good relations and cultural exchange between Slavic nations as well as Promotion of Slavic culture through the World. It calls for establishment of common platforms for official cooperation between Slavic state's.

    Within Slavic World itself Russia acknowledges divide between Slavs based on religious identity and it sees itself as historic protector and backer of all Ortodox Slavs and it seeks to form closer relations with these state's in fields of economic, military and technological cooperation.

    But that's not to say that Russia will backtrack on non Ortodox slavs, on countrary other Slavic groups are welcome to engage with Russia and participate in cultural exchanges with Russia as well as establish friendly cultural and economic ties. It's just that Russia acknowledges the divide within Slavic World and current differences in historic view of these Slavic groups as well as their current orientations and is acting accordingly.


    The largest enlargement of the European Union (EU), in terms of number of states and population, took place on 1 April 2000. The simultaneous accessions concerned the following countries (sometimes referred to as the "A10" countries): Cyprus, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Poland, Slovakia, and Slovenia. Seven of these were part of the former Eastern Bloc (of which three were from the former Soviet Union and four were and still are member states of the Central European alliance Visegrád Group). Slovenia was a non-aligned country prior to the independence, and it was one of the former republics of Yugoslavia (together sometimes referred to as the "A8" countries), and the remaining two were Mediterranean island countries, both member states of Commonwealth of Nations.

    gettyimages-527003312-594x594.jpg

    (Former President Fyodorov enjoying his well-deserved retirement from politics)
     
    Last edited:
    Player initiatives and original characters
  • Dear readers, to make the game more interactive I've decided to give it a try and I want to include player's initiatives and original characters created by the readers in this game (obviously if someone will be interested). Nevertheless, I won't require and include character points and roll, as it would be too much for me - description of your character would be enough for me. So, if anyone is willing to make a original character, you are more than welcome - we will see how I will handle it though.

    Character does not have to be Russian, foreigners are also welcomed.
     
    Last edited:
    Population TTL vs OTL
  • By the way, would be someone willing to calculate Union State exact population?
    Alright I'm going to give it a crack, focusing first on Russia. Note this will be very rough. The sources I have used: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6

    I'll first try to crack the migration numbers into and out of Russia. We had significant numbers of people leaving coupled with an even greater number of Russians coming in from various post-Soviet states. The first assumption I make here is the number of immigrants has remained the same, but due to alternate policies we adopted which ensured the rights of Russians living in many of the breakaway states this immigrant mix has a lot more non-Russians present. Source 2 speaks upon the ratios of the populations which immigrated to Russia and since it was published in 2002 is a great insight into the '91-'00 period. By OTL 2002, out of the 25.3 million Russians who were living outside Russia, 22 million remained outside. I will assume that even with solid economic growth, due to the efforts of our government to keep Russians in the countries they were living in - instead of 3.3 million Russians entering, it was closer to 1.5 million. Source 3 highlights 6.9 million immigrants moved in - approximately half to two thirds were Russians (again a bit of a discrepancy within sources, but that is unavoidable), but this means there is a greater mix of Ukrainians, folk from Central Asia and folk from the Caucasus. Source 1, page 14 has a very simple and easy to understand table where the authors estimate that 4.1 million people emigrated compared to the official number of 2.97 million which makes perfect sense to me due to often the very illegal nature of emigration (such as trafficking). I'm going to be bold here and assume that 2.8 million out of that 4.1 million do not leave, and if they do leave they end up returning due to disillusionment with the lifestyle in the west. This reduction also includes 2/3rds of the 500-700k women who were trafficked which is a major positive for our nation (and pro-natal policies). So net gain compared to OTL at this point: +2.8 million.

    Next, looking at death rates, I will assume that more hope and availability of work coupled with our policies hitting Russian drinking culture has had some impact. Source 4 in very stark terms lets us know that of the 12 million premature deaths in the 15-69 age group between 1992-2001 (8.3 million men and 3.7 million women), had mortality rates remained the same as 1991, 2.8 million (2.14 million men, 0.63 million women) less people would have died. Additionally, had mortality decreased at the same rate as it did in the Czech Republic - a further 1.26 million (0.86 million men and 0.4 million women) less deaths would have occurred. Source 5 shows the corresponding economic growth of the Czech Republic during this time - something that can be compared to our Russia very easily and so I will use this as a basis (because not only was there comparable economic growth, but we went further and clamped down on the ridiculous alcoholism). Our efforts on the alcohol front likely had an impact because of the availability of employment, investment and general feeling of hope due to this as well as a stable political environment because without these things our efforts to curb alcoholism would have yielded nada. Not to mention we have created small scale business opportunities for local alcohol producers which ironically forces them to be more sober to sell their product well lol. So reduction in deaths/net gain compared to OTL on this front (it can be argued even more people than this survived due to significantly better conditions when compared to OTL but I don't want to completely get carried away): +4.0 million .

    Now the big one - birth rates. In '92 the TFR was 1.547 and number of births: 1.59 million for a population of 148.53 million. In '93 the TFR was 1.369 and number of births: 1.38 million. I've argued the TFR to stabilise at 1.45 by '93 before reaching 1.55 by '00. So alternate number of births in ATL '93: 1.45 million. But from here it gets really tricky. Consider that '92 had a TFR of 1.547 and '09 a TFR of 1.542 in OTL. But the number of births in '92 was 1.59 million whereas it was 1.76 million in '09 while the population had decreased to 142 million! Looking at the demographic pyramid, it's because there were basically more people in the 20-30 age range in '09 compared to '92. But I am going to assume here, this will be a period (ATL '92-'00) where women between 31-40 in OTL who didn't have children or had less children will have more here. Additionally, we'll have more couples having children in Russia who would not have existed OTL because they either died or emigrated (taking these into account for alternate birth rates is a major challenge however).

    Below is the table of alternate birth numbers and TFR with OTL counterparts from source 6.

    YearATL TFRATL Births (mn)OTL TFROTL Births (mn)
    19921.5471.5871.5471.587
    19931.451.461.3691.378
    19941.461.4751.3941.408
    19951.471.499 (1.502)1.3371.363
    19961.481.52 (1.53)1.2701.304
    19971.491.54 (1.55)1.2181.259
    19981.511.573 (1.59)1.2321.283
    19991.531.605 (1.625)1.1571.214
    20001.551.642 (1.665)1.1951.266
    Total Births13.98412.062

    To calculate ATL births, I took the ratio of (OTL Births/OTL TFR) which I then multiplied by ATL TFR to obtain ATL Birth numbers. The numbers in brackets in ATL Births are the number of births I think that would have occurred taking into account the additional couples that were not present in OTL (so in 1995 for example I've presumed the additional births to be 30k which grows to 200k by 1999). For total birth calculation I use the numbers in the brackets which I think would be a truer representation of birthrates (so I used 1.625 instead of 1.605 for 1999 for example). So increase in babies born compared to OTL: +1.982 million.

    Combining all this gives us a population increase of 8.78 million compared to OTL Russia in 2000, whose population was 146.89 million. Therefore population of ATL Russia, 2000: 155.67 million.

    For Belarus, I'm feeling a bit lazy lol. So I'm going to do:
    % change of Russian population compared to OTL: +5.98% (8.78*100/146.89)
    Increase in Belarusian population with same rate: 0.597 million (9.98*0.0598)

    Therefore population of ATL Belarus, 2000: 10.58 million.

    All in all, population of Union State, 2000: 166.25 million.

    (Phew, that took a while lol).
     
    Last edited:
    Population ranking (2000)
  • 1. China - 1,242,000,000
    2. India - 1,040,000,000
    3. United States - 281,500,000
    4. Indonesia - 206,264,595
    5. Brazil - 170,000,000
    6. Union State - 166,250,000
    7. Pakistan - 140,000,000
    8. Bangladesh - 130,000,000
    9. Japan - 127,000,000
    10. Nigeria - 119,000,000
    11. Mexico - 100,500,000
    12. Germany - 82,500,000
    13. Vietnam - 78,758,000
    14. Ethiopia - 77,431,000
    15. Philippines - 76,506,928
    16. Egypt - 74,033,000
    17. Turkey - 73,193,000
    18. Iran - 69,515,000
    19. Thailand - 64,233,000
    20. France - 58,921,000
    21. United Kingdom - 58,459,000
    22. Italy - 57,620,000
    23. Congo - 57,549,000
    24. Myanmar - 50,519,000
    25. Ukraine - 50,429,000
     
    Eurasian civilization
  • Historical Roots of Euroasian Civilization is a book written by Dimitri Lebedev. It outlines the proof of existence of Euroasian civilization beyond Russian civilization and advocates its continuity. According to Dimitri Euroasian civilization had existed beyond Russian civilization, a novel thought in contrast to the established historical narrative advocates the concept of Russian world, or stand alone Russian civilization.

    According to Lebedev Euroasian Civilization and European Civilization are sister civilizations that have the same roots in Hellenistic Greece, later Greco-Roman civilization all the way until the fall of Western Roman Empire in 476 AD which saw many barbaric tribes setting up their own Kingdoms that would later come to become Western Europen states that would define European civilization. But for Lebedev true roots of Euroasian Civilization lie in East and Eastern Roman that would following Arab conquests of Sassanid Empire and much of Roman Africa and Levant signal end of antiquity and beginnings of Greek dominated Euroasian Civilization centered in Asia Minor and the Balkans. This civilization would be defined by Ortodox faith and Greek alphabet , these would later find its way into various Slavic tribe's with Cyrillic alphabet being based on Greek alphabet and with conversion of Slavic tribe's, most importantly Kievan Rus under Vladimir the Great to Ortodox faith.

    This religious and cultural uniqueness is what differentiate Euroasian Civilization from Europen civilization, besides geographic position of Euroasian civilization on the edges of European Continent and this difference would be a basis for conflict between these two civilizations as they competed for influence and resources against European civilization and against each others. Another point for Euroasian Civilization was its conquest by Mongols for Kievan Rus and Ottomans for Eastern Roman Empire. This would result in Orthodox part of Euroasian civilization to be cut away from European civilization and while it would mean prolonged period of decline it would also help these society's to develop independently. This would also result in cultural exchange between conquered and the conquerors that would later form basis for Euroasination of various Turkic people's as according to Lebedev Central Asian steppes had a touch with both European and Asian civilizations making them into a periphery of Euroasian Civilization.

    Mongol conquest of Kievan Rus would also be a finalization of shift of Eastern Slavic centre of civilization from South ( Kiev ) to Novograd and later Moscow forming unique Russian identity down the line.

    This would brings us into the Russian epoch of Euroasian Civilization which would take the centre of Euroasian civilization away from Constantinople Balkans and Asia Minor into the Eastern Europe. Russia would later in its later incarnations define Euroasian culture and spread it across much of Northern Euroasia and bring the southern periphery of Central Asia firmly into the Euroasian sphere through conquests, this predominantly Russian, Pan Slavic form of Euroasian Civilization would remain all until Bolshevik revolution of 1917 and it can be sumerized in three periods. Muscovy period where Euroasian Civilization was freely practiced by the elites , this period would last all the way until ascension of Peter the Great where we would enter Imperial, or Western period with attempt of Russia to Westernize by following in footsteps of European Civilization and denying its Euroasian heritage, but it would still hold on its Euroasian character regardless. Following Crimean War and Berlin Congress we would see awakening of Euroasian thought in Russian and beginnings of early Euroasian philosophical though, something which would end with coming of Communists to power.

    Communist Period would give a new chapter to Euroasian civilization which would result in a partial shift away from Ortodox , Pan Slavic and Russian centric Euroasianism and result in partial revival of other Euroasian cultures within the borders of Soviet Union (this period would also be significant for birth of identity of Central Asian states and spread of Cyrillic alphabet to these state's). But this period would also be defined by religious and cultural suppression where Communism would seek to become a unifying force for various Euroasian cultures as well as period of attempted Sovietization of Euroasian culture with occasional reversals that would result in partial revival of national freedoms, this would ultimately end with fall of Soviet Union after which newly reborn Russian State would once again become centre of Euroasian civilization.

    Well here's promised outline of Euroasian Civilization and my attempt to compress over thousand years of history into one coherent whole @panpiotr
     
    Last edited:
    From Vladivostok with Love part 1
  • From Vladivostok with Love part 1

    As Russian economic power grew so did its demand for global entertainment which lead to a major rise of piracy across the nation as demand exceeded supply as licensing was limited to a few companies and even then official products were mostly expensive to purchase let alone translate. It was withing this environment that the Love Japan group was formed during 1993, a group of about a dozen enthusiasts and nerds located in Moscow who would illegally translate and distribute manga and fansubs around friends and other enthusiasts at first but would increasingly sell their work to the general public. Wishing to expand their operations Love Japan would move to Vladivostok where they would move to become official distributors with such works as Nadia: The Secret of Blue Water, Ranma ½, Urusei Yatsura, Mobile Suit Gundam, and Sailor Moon and Neon Genesis Evangelion along with many others.

    In fact it was the publishing and success of Sailor Moon and Neon Genesis Evangelion in 1995 that truly changed things as anime/manga as a whole gained a major popularity boost across Russia leading to an increase in demand for anime/manga and the major rise of the anime/manga fandom which lead to the creation of fanworks and cosplay. This would lead Love Japan to create their own convention in the city of Vladivostok with Vladi-Con 1995 being announced. The convention would be held and quickly become a major success as prior to the convention the Cool Vladivostok advertisement campaign was held across Japan which promoted the convention and Vladivostok as a whole with the cheap prices being a major emphasis in marketing.

    The convention would quickly have over 20,000 people attending with many of the local hotels being booked and most cases packed with many people transforming their homes and properties as temporary hotels with many business taking advantage to sell as much food and anime/manga inspired merch as they could. While Vladi-Con 1995 would eventually end the entire region would continue to promote itself as a major area for the Anime/Manga market/consumers as the city wished to keep the success from Vladi-Con going.

    To say this was a surprise in Moscow as an understatement with most politicians having no real clue what Anime/manga was and why people even cared to actually watch and spend absurd amounts of money for it. This was especially notable with official relations between Moscow and Tokyo being frosty with current land disputes still being a major issue. Either way some concessions were made as President Fyodorov wished to transform Vladivostok into a major economic zone. This would lead him to create the Vladivostok Economic Development Treaty which gave Vladivostok some economic freedoms to entice Japanese tourism although any major national investment between Russia/Japan would be limited as only personal investment would be taken which would matter little as Vladivostok managed to develop from the civilian/entertainment investment and revenue alone.

    Major personal investment from the Japanese was acquired as hotels, restaurants, and shops would open up across the city, while the new Vladivostok International Airport was constructed, with the entire thing being covered in Anime styling as just about every business had someone cosplaying as the most popular anime/manga character at that point. This lead to the cities population to explode the Japanese Boom occurred which was mostly a major rise in Japanese migration to the city as many took advantage of the cheap housing prices, differences between the Yen and Ruble, and the major push by the city to accommodate Japanese tourists to migrate and stay full time. With Vladi-Con continuing the Otaku would become one of the more noticeable demographic in the city as they were targeted as a major consumer demographic due to their willingness to expend large sums of money while visiting or living there further transforming the city into a place for Japanese/East Asian entertainment.

    Since then the city has become known as the major area for entertainment as thousands moved in to take advantage of the growth and rising market with East Asia as a whole with Vladivostok going from a city of about 600,000 to over 1.5 million by 2000 with it becoming the one of the largest Japanese Diaspora population outside of Japan/Brazil with the further growth projected in the future especially as R-Pop and the fashion/surgery scene grows along with the city.


    I hope this does not conflict with previous turns, as I will change things if they do conflict.
     
    Last edited:
    State of Union Automotive Industry in the 2000s
  • State of Union Automotive Industry in the 2000s

    At the Dawn of new Millennium Russian, later Union Automotive industry was booming. Following the Collapse of USSR and subsequent reforms production increased from 1.8 mil in RSFSR to little over 2 mil by the end of the 1990s.

    This trend would continue well into first decade of 2000s, main driver being the fact that Macroeconomic trends were strong and growing incomes of the population led to a surging demand, other reason being Russian metal companies, having achieved significant profits on foreign markets, sought to invest in Russia's automotive sector, same going for other commodity oriented companies. By the 2000s the Union car market was booming, with domestic manufacturers keeping lion share of the the domestic market of 77% while other 23% were forgein manufacturers, on second hand by the end of the decade forgein branded cars managed to capture 50% of Unions domestic market with domestic brands holding other 50% . Similar percentages were reflected in EEU, CIS economic space with Russian brands remaining competitive with outside competitors within EEU and CIS economic space, increased demand being driven by steady rise in living standards across member state's. Besides Domestic market, EEU/CIS market EU also appeared as a significant market for Union products. Main driver behind home manufacturing were cheap energy prices together with supportive government policies like establishment of SEZ over the territory of the Union.

    Its important to note that not all production was done in Union State itself, in fact due to Ukraines membership in EEU and CIS economic space which resulted with less restrictions placed within said the economic space opposed to restrictions placed for outside states, paired with already existing manufacturing capacities from Soviet period of 200k units of all types, cheaper labor and good knowledge of Russian language significant number of companies belonging to Union Automotive industry decided to output some of their production to Ukraine so that by the end of the decade some 281,668 units were produced in Ukraine from which 78,455 were exported to Union State. In fact Russian brands accounted for around 2/3rds of the units produced in Ukraine.

    Back to the Union states and some significant companies there. Major companies in the Union State are big three car makers which are AvtoVAZ (Lada), AZLK (Moskvitch) and GAZ (Volga) which make a bulk of Automotive industry within Union state, EEU/CIS and are main exporters of said industry.

    These are some of the following new brands that were launched by above mentioned companies.

    Lada Kalina launched in 2000

    Lada_Kalina_in_Geneva_2005.jpg


    Lada Priora

    Lada_2170_Priora.jpg


    Volga Siber

    Volga_Siber_front_Moscow_autoshow_2008_26_08.jpg


    Then following governments push for electric cars and subsequent financial help we also saw a push to produce electric cars like LADA Ellada

    El_Lada_wagon_on_MIAS_2012.JPG


    Which is seeing growing popularity in Union Market.

    Besides Union big three we also have Ural Automotor Factory , or in short UAMZ. In May 2004, UAMZ and India's Tata Motors entered into a contract to build TATA trucks at the factory. Together, they co-produced two models of Tata 407 and Tata LPT 613 branded as UAMZ-4346. The partners went on ti signa 3-year contract, with the release of up to 5,000 trucks per year. In 2007, UMAZ drafted plans to establishing a joint production with China's Geely Automobile, to produce models of Geely CK and the Chinese company Great Wall Motors for the production of SUVs ZXAuto Landmark; production trials began in May 2007.

    By the end of the decade Union State has almost doubled its production and went from producing 2,055,600 units at the end of the 90s to producing 4,023,837 units of all kinds in 2010 rising from 10th place at the beginning of the millennium to 6th place being behind China, USA, Japan, Germany and S.Korea respectively.


    So @panpiotr here's coming overview of automotive industry for coming 10 years that takes into the account economic boom that will happen. It should be okay short of us messing things massively (if that happens ill edit the update). I also added a little bit on Ukraine and as we can see they are doing fine for themselves managing to double their capacities from Soviet times to 420k with our brands holding 2/3rd of the production.
     
    Last edited:
    Chapter Seventeen: A new status quo in Europe (May 2000 - March 2001)
  • Following the first national referendum to be held in the Union State, death penalty has been abolished, though it was not the first time in Russia's history when it was done. The Soviet government confirmed the abolition almost immediately after the October Revolution, but restored it soon after. Most notably, Socialist-Revolutionary Fanny Kaplan was executed on 4 September 1918 for her attempt to assassinate Lenin six days earlier. Hangings and shootings very extensively employed by the Bolsheviks as part of their Red Terror. Over the next several decades, the death penalty was alternately permitted and prohibited, sometimes in very quick succession. The list of capital crimes likewise underwent several changes. Under the rule of Joseph Stalin, many were executed during the Great Purge in the 1930s. Many of the death sentences were pronounced by a specially appointed three-person commission of officials, the NKVD troika. The exact number of executions is debated, with archival research suggesting it to be between 700,000 and 800,000, whereas an official report to Nikita Khrushchev from 1954 cites 642,980 death penalties, another report in 1956 688,503, of which 681,692 were carried out during the years of 1937-1938. The verdict of capital punishment in the Soviet Union was called the "Supreme Measure of Punishment" (Vysshaya Mera Nakazaniya, VMN). Verdicts under Article 58 (counter-revolutionary activity) often ended with a sentence that was abbreviated as VMN, and usually followed by executions through shooting, though other frequent verdicts were 10 years and 25 years (dubbed "Сталинский четвертак" Stalinskiy chetvertak, "Stalin's Quarter") sentences. The death penalty was again abolished on 26 May 1947, the strictest sentence becoming 25 years' imprisonment, before it was restored on 12 May 1950 first for treason and espionage, and then for aggravated murder. According to Western estimates, in the early 1980s Soviet courts passed around 2,000 death sentences every year, of which two-thirds were commuted to prison terms. According to the GARF archives database, between 1978 and 1985 there were 3,058 sentences to death that had been appealed to the Supreme Soviet of the RSFSR. At least one woman was executed during this time, Antonina Makarova, on 11 August 1978. After the fall of the Soviet Union, the Russian Federation carried out the death penalty intermittently, with up to 10 or so officially a year.

    The new government of Elvira Nabiullina shortly after being sworn in, began working to dealing with Russia's overdependence on export of fossil fuels, underdevelopment of rural regions, falling fertility rate and aging population. To diversify the Union's economy, the government implemented a series of following initiatives:
    • implementation of tax cuts and subsidies to manufacturing, clean energy, R&D of semiconductors, pharmaceutical industry, chemical industry and auto industry;
    • conducting a review to verify which economic sector has the greatest importance depending on the region;
    • a discouragement of the majority of investments from ending up in a few focused points, causing them to be developed to the detriment of many other areas;
    • an encouragement of specialization in two or more industries per region in the Union State.

    derevnia-lodki-kimzha-arkhangelskaia-oblast-rassvet-reka-min-1.jpg

    (Investments made in the Russian contryside by goverment of Elvira Nabiullina would bring very positive results in the future)

    Secondly, the Union's government focused on the development of the countryside and rural regions by:
    • investments in transport and communication infrastructure;
    • a promotion of a rural industry, by granting to the products of recognized quality Certificates of Denomination of Origin;
    • promoting a protection of rural brands and goods;
    • investments into a public places like parks and other places for recreational purposes;
      investing in modernization of schools and hospitals in rural regions;
    • tax cuts for places like Caffès, or night Clubs, where young people could spend time together;
    • encouragement of tourism in countryside, including state sponsored excursions to countryside from schools, paid vacations to countryside from companies;
    • promotion of development of rural middle-class of farmers and workers;
    • expansion and modernization of farms across Russia.

    ph_14787_70850.jpg

    (As a result of Nabullina's actions, Russia in coming decades, contrary to many European and Asian states would
    experience a growth of population)

    Nevertheless, the biggest challenge for the government of Elvira Nabiullina was addressing the ongoing demographic changes in Russia. To tackle the issue, the Union government introduced a number of laws and undertook a series of initiatives, including:
    • tax breaks for families
    • campaign against alcohol, nicotine and other stimulants
    • increased investments into healthcare system
    • introduction of programs focused on helping elderly population
    • increased maternity and paternity leaves
    • increased financial aid to families
    • allowing tax deductions per child
    • increased number of daycare centers
    • reduction of consumption taxes on children's products
    • a change of the retirement age for parents depending on number of children
    • increased pensions for parents
    • increased bonuses from the state to salary based on number of children
    • founding of a state bank that would provide families with cheap housing loans
    • introduction of the Bill for Family Empowerment, which would include:
    Financial Aid - Family with two children or more. It should be fixed according to financial status of each family.
    Parental Leave - Extend and encourage the parental leave from work so that each parent can be with their children during their early childhood.
    Childcare - New daycare and childcare facilities with trained workers to provide a balanced work-life for parents.
    Housing - Provide new family reduction in acquiring a new home and also a reduction for rent.
    Education - Each parent can attend a parental education program to improve their knowledge and skills.

    • Increased efforts to promote child-safe activities and sports
    • increased funds to sports development for children
    • renting assistance to families
    • increased education funding
    • increased taxes on childless adults
    The formation of the Union State in 1999 was met with a very mixed result in Europe and the United States. On the one hand, government in Western Europe (especially in Germany, France and Italy) welcomed the developments, seeing increased economic and business potential in Russia. Additionally, France and Germany wanted to use a newly resurgent Russia to counterbalance the American hegemony in Europe. On the other hand, governments in Eastern and Central Europe were concerned about the Moscow's growing economic, political and military potential. Some political figures in the region argued that the Union State, after the Russian Empire and the Soviet Union, is another Russian imperial project focused on dominating its neighbors. This forced the government of the Baltic States to apply for NATO membership, which was calculated for avoiding Russian domination of the Baltic Area. In the meantime, the policymakers in Washington were also concerned with increasing Russian assertiveness on the international stage. The latest developments in Yugoslavia confirmed only the fact that Washington and Moscow were not allies, but rather strategic rivals. Nevertheless, by year 2001, after a series of secret negotiations between Moscow and Washington, a new status quo was created on the European continent was established, as both powers expanded their sphere of influence, following expansions of both NATO and CSTO. The following countries became members of NATO: Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovenia, Croatia, Albania, while at the same time the following countries joined CSTO: Georgia, Bulgaria, Yugoslavia, Ukraine. Nonetheless, Ukraine's President Petro Symomenko, to avoid unnecessary tensions with the Nationalists in Western and Central Ukraine, has decided to appoint a liberal-nationalist Yulia Tymoshenko to the position of Prime Minister of Ukraine. These international developments marked Russia's rise from regional power to the status of a great power, as now Moscow had an influence not only in the post-Soviet region.

    unnamed.jpg

    (The canonization of the Russian Imperial family)

    The canonization of the Romanovs (also called "glorification" in the Russian Orthodox Church) was the elevation to sainthood of the last Imperial Family of Russia – Tsar Nicholas II, his wife Tsarina Alexandra, and their five children Olga, Tatiana, Maria, Anastasia, and Alexei – by the Russian Orthodox Church. The family was killed by the Bolsheviks on 17 July 1918 at the Ipatiev House in Yekaterinburg. The house was later demolished. The Church on Blood was built on this site, and the altar stands over the execution site. On 1 November 1981, Grand Duke Michael Alexandrovich of Russia (the younger brother of Nicholas II) and his secretary, Nicholas Johnson, were canonized by the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia. The two men were both murdered at Perm on 13 June 1918. On 15 August 2000, the Russian Orthodox Church announced the canonization of Nicholas II and his immediate family for their "'humbleness, patience and meekness'" during their imprisonment and execution by the Bolsheviks. The canonizations were controversial for both branches of the Russian Orthodox Church. In 1981, opponents noted Nicholas II's perceived weaknesses as a ruler and said that his actions had led to the Bolshevik Revolution, which caused so much damage for Russia and its people. One priest of the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad noted that martyrdom in the Russian Orthodox Church has nothing to do with the martyr's personal actions but was instead related to why he or she was killed. Other critics noted that the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad appeared to be blaming Jewish revolutionaries for the deaths and equating the political assassination with a ritual murder. Others rejected the family's being classified as new martyrs because they were not killed because of their religious faith. There was no proof that the execution was a ritual murder. Religious leaders in both churches also had objections to canonizing the Tsar's family because they perceived him to have been a weak emperor whose incompetence led to the revolution, and the suffering of his people. They said he was at least partially responsible for his own murder and the murders of his wife and children. For these opponents, the fact that the Tsar was said to be, in private life, a kind man and a good husband and father did not override his poor governance of Russia. Despite their official designation as "passion-bearers" by the August 2000 Council, the family are referred to as "martyrs" in Church publications, icons, and in popular veneration by the people. Since the late 20th century, believers have attributed healing from illnesses or conversion to the Orthodox Church to their prayers to Maria and Alexei, as well as to the rest of the family.

    43208152355_497331b1e2_b.jpg

    (The Millenium Summit which was held in New York)

    The Millennium Summit was a meeting among many world leaders, lasting three days from 6 to 8 September 2000, held at the United Nations headquarters in New York City. Its purpose was to discuss the role of the United Nations at the turn of the 21st century. At the meeting, world leaders ratified the United Nations Millennium Declaration. This meeting was the largest gathering of world leaders in history as of 2000. It was followed five years later by the World Summit, which took place from 14 to 16 September 2005. The General Assembly Resolution that decided upon this summit stated that it attempted to seize "a unique and symbolically compelling moment to articulate and affirm an animating vision for the United Nations". In this summit, 189 member states of the United Nations agreed to help citizens in the world's poorest countries to achieve a better life by 2015. The framework for this progress is outlined in the Millennium Development Goals. Also known as the MDGs, these goals were derived from the Millennium Declaration. This summit was focused on various global issues, such as poverty, AIDS, and how to share the benefits of globalisation more fairly. On 5 September 2000, delegates around the world began to travel to the United States for the Millennium Summit. American airline officials inspected the delegation of North Korea at Frankfurt International Airport during a stop in Germany. American Airlines personnel demanded that the members of the delegation and their belongings be searched. In response to these demands, the North Korean government withdrew its delegation from the summit. As diplomats, the officials should not have been subject to search.

    Over 150 world leaders participated in the discussion, including 100 heads of state, 47 heads of government, three crown princes, five vice presidents, three deputy prime ministers, and 8,000 other delegates. The Group of 77 was also present to discuss the changes the United Nations faced at the turn of the 21st century. The president of Finland, Tarja Halonen, and the president of Namibia, Sam Nujoma, co-chaired the Millennium Summit. This was due to the presidency over the General Assembly of Theo-Ben Gurirab in the fifty-fourth session and that of Harri Holkeri in the fifty-fifth session. Therefore, the heads of state of Finland and Namibia were chosen to preside over the summit. Kofi Annan, the secretary-general of the United Nations, opened the Millennium Summit on 6 September 2000. Before moving into the summit, Annan called for a minute's silence for four United Nations workers who were killed in West Timor by pro-Indonesian militiamen. U.S. President Bill Clinton and Union State's President Alexander Lukashenko delivered a plea for world peace and cooperation. Sixty-three other speakers spoke for five minutes each. In the duration of the summit, Bill Clinton held separate meetings with Israel's prime minister, Ehud Barak, and Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat, calling on them to reach a peace agreement between the two nations, although no actual progress was made in doing so. Both sides were still committed to reaching such an agreement, however. On 7 September, various heads of state discussed peacekeeping issues. They discussed these issues at a round-table meeting of the United Nations Security Council. Seventy speakers were scheduled for this day during the summit, including Chinese President Jiang Zemin, South African President Thabo Mbeki, Sri Lankan President Chandrika Kumaratunga, Japanese Prime Minister Yoshiro Mori, and President of Sierra Leone Ahmad Kabbah. The final day of the Millennium Summit, 8 September, ended after 60 world leaders each gave their five-minute speech. The speakers included Indonesian President Abdurrahman Wahid, Zimbabwean President Robert Mugabe, Nigerian President Olusegun Obasanjo, and Indian Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee.

    The world leaders who attended the Millennium Summit adopted the Millennium Declaration, striving to "free all men, women, and children from the abject and dehumanizing conditions of extreme poverty". By the end of the summit, the Millennium Declaration's eight chapters were drafted, from which the Millennium Development Goals, originally developed by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), were particularly promoted in the years following the summit. The delegates at this summit agreed on the following eight chapters:

    Values and Principles
    Peace, Security and Disarmament
    Development and Poverty Eradication
    Protecting Our Common Environment
    Human Rights, Democracy and Good Governance
    Protecting the Vulnerable
    Meeting the Special Needs of Africa
    Strengthening the United Nations.

    USS_Cole_(DDG-67)_Departs.jpg

    (Bombing of the USS Cole was another attack mate by al-Qaeda made on the orders made by Osama Bin-Laden)

    The USS Cole bombing was a suicide attack by al-Qaeda against USS Cole, a guided missile destroyer of the United States Navy, on 12 October 2000, while she was being refueled in Yemen's Aden harbor. Seventeen U.S. Navy sailors were killed and thirty-seven injured in the deadliest attack against a United States naval vessel since the USS Stark incident in 1987. Al-Qaeda claimed responsibility for the attack against the United States. A U.S. judge has held Sudan liable for the attack, while another has released over $13 million in Sudanese frozen assets to the relatives of those killed. The United States Navy has reconsidered its rules of engagement in response to this attack. On 30 October 2020, Sudan and the United States signed a bilateral claims agreement to compensate families of the sailors who died in the bombing. The agreement entered into force in February 2021. On the morning of Thursday, 12 October 2000, Cole, under the command of Commander Kirk Lippold, docked in Aden harbor for a routine fuel stop. Cole completed mooring at 9:30 and began refueling at 10:30. Around 11:18 local time (08:18 UTC), a small fiberglass boat carrying C4 explosives and two suicide bombers approached the port side of the destroyer and exploded, creating a 40-by-60-foot (12 by 18 m) gash in the ship's port side, according to the memorial plate to those who lost their lives. Former CIA intelligence officer Robert Finke said the blast appeared to be caused by C4 explosives molded into a shaped charge against the hull of the boat. More than 1,000 pounds (450 kg) of explosive were used. Much of the blast entered a mechanical space below the ship's galley, violently pushing up the deck, thereby killing crew members who were lining up for lunch. The crew fought flooding in the engineering spaces and had the damage under control after three days. Divers inspected the hull and determined that the keel had not been damaged.

    The sailors injured in the explosion were taken to the United States Army's Landstuhl Regional Medical Center near Ramstein, Germany, before being sent to the United States. The attack was the deadliest against a U.S. naval vessel since the Iraqi attack on USS Stark on 17 May 1987. The asymmetric warfare attack was organized and directed by the terrorist organization al-Qaeda. In June 2001, an al-Qaeda recruitment video featuring Osama bin Laden boasted about the attack and encouraged similar attacks. Al-Qaeda had previously attempted a similar but less publicized attack on the U.S. Navy destroyer USS The Sullivans while in port at Aden on 3 January 2000, as a part of the 2000 millennium attack plots. The plan was to load a boat full of explosives and detonate them near The Sullivans. However, the boat was so overladen that it sank, forcing the attack to be abandoned. Planning for the October attack was discussed at the Kuala Lumpur al-Qaeda Summit from 5 to 8 January, shortly after the failed attempt. Along with other plotters, the summit was attended by future 11 September hijacker Khalid al-Mihdhar, who then traveled to San Diego, California. On 10 June 2000, Mihdhar left San Diego to visit his wife in Yemen at a house also used as a communications hub for al-Qaeda.After the bombing, Yemeni Prime Minister Abdul Karim al-Iryani reported that Mihdhar had been one of the key planners of the attack and had been in the country at the time of the attacks. He later returned to the United States to participate in the 9/11 hijacking of American Airlines Flight 77, which flew into the Pentagon, killing 184 people.


    islamic_emirate_of_afghanistan__1996_2001___2021___by_alejandrogmj_ddxdgr9-fullview.jpg


    The Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan, also referred to as the First Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan, was a totalitarian Islamic state led by the Taliban that ruled most of Afghanistan from 1996 to 2001. At its peak, the Taliban government controlled approximately 90% of the country, while remaining regions in the northeast were held by the Northern Alliance, which maintained broad international recognition as a continuation of the Islamic State of Afghanistan. After the September 11 attacks and subsequent declaration of a "War on Terror" by the United States, international opposition to the regime drastically increased, with diplomatic recognition from the United Arab Emirates and Pakistan being rescinded. The Islamic Emirate ceased to exist on 7 December 2001 after being overthrown by the Northern Alliance, which had been bolstered by the ISAF coalition established after a U.S.-led invasion of the country two months prior. The Taliban continued to refer to itself as the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan in official communications when it was out of power from 2001. The Taliban and its rule arose from the chaos after the Soviet–Afghan War. It began as an Islamic and Pashtun politico-religious movement composed of madrasa students in southern Afghanistan. Overwhelmingly ethnic Pashtuns, the Taliban blended Pashtunwali tribal code with elements of Salafist teaching to form an anti-Western and anti-modern Islamist ideology with which it ruled. It began to receive support from neighbouring Pakistan as well as from Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates. A small Taliban militia first emerged near Kandahar in the spring and summer of 1994, committing vigilante acts against minor warlords, with a fund of 250,000 USD from local businessmen. They soon began to receive backing from local Durrani Pashtun leaders.

    The first major military activity of the Taliban was in October–November 1994 when they marched from Maiwand in southern Afghanistan to capture Kandahar City and the surrounding provinces, losing only a few dozen men. Starting with the capture of a border crossing and a huge ammunition dump from warlord Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, a few weeks later they freed "a convoy trying to open a trade route from Pakistan to Central Asia" from another group of warlords attempting to extort money. In the next three months this hitherto "unknown force" took control of twelve of Afghanistan's 34 provinces, with Mujahideen warlords often surrendering to them without a fight and the "heavily armed population" giving up their weapons. The Taliban initially enjoyed enormous good will from Afghans weary of the corruption, brutality, and the incessant fighting of Mujahideen warlords. However, reactions and resistance would vary and increase among non-Pashtun people. The Taliban considered many of Afghanistan's other ethnic communities as foreign. Pashtun people are the largest ethnic group in Afghanistan and comprised the vast majority of the Taliban movement. As the Taliban expanded from their southern and south-eastern strongholds, they encountered more resistance; their brand of Deobandism, incorporated with the Pashtunwali tribal code, was viewed as foreign by the other ethnic groups of Afghanistan. The Battles of Mazar-i-Sharif illustrated this ethnic tension.

    Spreading from Kandahar, the Taliban eventually captured Kabul in 1996. By the end of 2000, the Taliban controlled 90% of the country, aside from the opposition (Northern Alliance) strongholds found primarily in the northeast corner of Badakhshan Province. Areas under the Taliban's direct control were mainly Afghanistan's major cities and highways. Tribal khans and warlords had de facto direct control over various small towns, villages, and rural areas. The Taliban sought to establish law and order and to impose a strict interpretation of Islamic Sharia law, along with the religious edicts of Mullah Mohammed Omar, upon the entire country of Afghanistan. During the five-year history of the Islamic Emirate, the Taliban regime interpreted the Sharia in accordance with the Hanafi school of Islamic jurisprudence and the religious edicts of Mullah Omar. The Taliban forbade pork and alcohol, many types of consumer technology such as most music, television, and film, as well as most forms of art such as paintings or photography, male and female participation in sport, including football and chess; recreational activities such as kite-flying and keeping pigeons or other pets were also forbidden, and the birds were killed according to the Taliban's ruling. Movie theaters were closed and repurposed as mosques. Celebration of the Western and Iranian New Year was forbidden. Taking photographs and displaying pictures or portraits was forbidden, as it was considered by the Taliban as a form of idolatry. Women were banned from working, girls were forbidden to attend schools or universities, were requested to observe purdah (physical separation of the sexes) and awrah (concealing the body with clothing), and to be accompanied outside their households by male relatives; those who violated these restrictions were punished. Men were forbidden to shave their beards and required to let them grow and keep them long according to the Taliban's liking, and to wear turbans outside their households. Communists were systematically executed. Prayer was made compulsory and those who did not respect the religious obligation after the azaan were arrested. Gambling was banned, and thieves were punished by amputating their hands or feet. In 2000, the Taliban leader Mullah Omar officially banned opium cultivation and drug trafficking in Afghanistan; the Taliban succeeded in nearly eradicating the majority of the opium production (99%) by 2001. Under the Taliban governance of Afghanistan, both drug users and dealers were severely prosecuted. The Afghan custom of bacha bazi, a form of pederastic sexual slavery and pedophilia traditionally practiced in various provinces of Afghanistan, was also forbidden under the six-year reign of the Taliban regime.

    ss-180430-afghanistan-shah-marai-mn-12.jpg

    (Women in Afghanistan under the Taliban would be deprived of all basic rights)

    Cabinet ministers and deputies were mullahs with a "madrasah education". Several of them, such as the Minister of Health and Governor of the State bank, were primarily military commanders who were ready to leave their administrative posts to fight when needed. Military reverses that trapped them behind lines or led to their deaths increased the chaos in the national administration. At the national level, "all senior Tajik, Uzbek and Hazara bureaucrats" were replaced "with Pashtuns, whether qualified or not". Consequently, the ministries "by and large ceased to function". Rashid described the Taliban government as "a secret society run by Kandaharis ... mysterious, secretive, and dictatorial". They did not hold elections, as their spokesman explained:

    The Sharia does not allow politics or political parties. That is why we give no salaries to officials or soldiers, just food, clothes, shoes, and weapons. We want to live a life like the Prophet lived 1400 years ago, and jihad is our right. We want to recreate the time of the Prophet, and we are only carrying out what the Afghan people have wanted for the past 14 years.

    They modeled their decision-making process on the Pashtun tribal council (jirga), together with what they believed to be the early Islamic model. Discussion was followed by a building of a consensus by the "believers". Before capturing Kabul, there was talk of stepping aside once a government of "good Muslims" took power, and law and order were restored. As the Taliban's power grew, decisions were made by Mullah Omar without consulting the jirga and without consulting other parts of the country. One such instance is the rejection of Loya Jirga decision about expulsion of Osama bin Laden. Mullah Omar visited the capital, Kabul, only twice while in power. Instead of an election, their leader's legitimacy came from an oath of allegiance ("Bay'ah"), in imitation of the Prophet and the first four Caliphs. On 4 April 1996, Mullah Omar had "the Cloak of Muhammad" taken from its shrine, Kirka Sharif, for the first time in 60 years. Wrapping himself in the relic, he appeared on the roof of a building in the center of Kandahar while hundreds of Pashtun mullahs below shouted "Amir al-Mu'minin!" (Commander of the Faithful), in a pledge of support. Taliban spokesman Mullah Wakil explained:

    Decisions are based on the advice of the Amir-ul Momineen. For us consultation is not necessary. We believe that this is in line with the Sharia. We abide by the Amir's view even if he alone takes this view. There will not be a head of state. Instead there will be an Amir al-Mu'minin. Mullah Omar will be the highest authority, and the government will not be able to implement any decision to which he does not agree. General elections are incompatible with Sharia and therefore we reject them.

    The Taliban were very reluctant to share power, and since their ranks were overwhelmingly Pashtun they ruled as overlords over the 60% of Afghans from other ethnic groups. In local government, such as Kabul city council or Herat, Taliban loyalists, not locals, dominated, even when the Pashto-speaking Taliban could not communicate with the roughly half of the population who spoke Dari or other non-Pashtun tongues. Critics complained that this "lack of local representation in urban administration made the Taliban appear as an occupying force". Regarding its relations with the rest of the world, the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan held a policy of isolationism: "The Taliban believe in non-interference in the affairs of other countries and similarly desire no outside interference in their country's internal affairs". Despite these isolationist policies, the Taliban entered in a deal for oil, electricity, and gas with Turkmenistan as part of the Turkmenistan–Afghanistan–Pakistan–India Pipeline. While initially maintaining a friendly relationship, relations between the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan and Iran deteriorated in 1998 after Taliban forces seized the Iranian consulate in Mazar-i-Sharif and executed Iranian diplomats. Following this incident, Iran threatened to invade Afghanistan by massing up military forces near the Afghan border but intervention by the United Nations Security Council and the United States prevented the war. Turkmenistan adopted a position of "positive neutrality" and limited cooperation with the Taliban. China first initiated contact with the Taliban in 1998. In November 2000, China's then-ambassador to Pakistan, Lu Shulin, became the first senior representative of a non-Muslim country to meet with Mullah Omar.

    Between 1996 and 2001, only three widely recognized countries; Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) declared the Islamic Emirate to be the rightful government of Afghanistan. The Taliban government additionally received support from Turkmenistan, though the country did not provide the Emirate with formal recognition. The Taliban government was not recognized by the United Nations, which instead continued to recognize the Islamic State of Afghanistan as being the legitimate government of Afghanistan. Following the declaration of a "War on Terror" by the United States after the September 11 attacks by al-Qaeda in 2001, international opposition to the Taliban regime running the Islamic Emirate drastically increased, and the only remaining diplomatic recognition by Pakistan and the United Arab Emirates was rescinded under growing pressure.

    _115368850_gettyimages-1318325.jpg


    The 2000 United States presidential election was the 54th quadrennial presidential election, held on Tuesday, November 7, 2000. Republican candidate George W. Bush, the incumbent governor of Texas and eldest son of the 41st president, George H. W. Bush, won the election, defeating incumbent Vice President Al Gore. It was the fourth of five American presidential elections, and the first since 1888, in which the winning candidate lost the popular vote, and is considered one of the closest U.S. presidential elections, with long-standing controversy about the result. Gore conceded the election on December 13. Incumbent President Bill Clinton was ineligible to run for a third term due to presidential term limits, and Gore, the most recent incumbent vice president to run for president, secured the Democratic nomination with relative ease, defeating former U.S. Senator Bill Bradley in the primaries. Bush was seen as the early favorite for the Republican nomination, and after a contentious primary battle with U.S. Senator John McCain and others, secured the nomination by Super Tuesday. Bush chose former Secretary of Defense Dick Cheney as his running mate, while Gore chose U.S. Senator Joe Lieberman. Both major-party candidates focused primarily on domestic issues, such as the budget, tax relief, and reforms for federal social insurance programs, although foreign policy was not ignored. Due to President Bill Clinton's sex scandal with Monica Lewinsky and subsequent impeachment, Gore avoided campaigning with Clinton. Republicans denounced Clinton's indiscretions, while Gore criticized Bush's lack of experience. Nevertheless, relations with Russia were one of the major topics of the US presidential campaign. On the one hand, Al Gore advocated the continuation of Bill Clinton's policy toward Russia, while on the other, George W. Bush and the Republicans advocated a decidedly tougher policy toward Moscow, arguing that Clinton's misguided policy allowed Moscow to rebuild its potential and once again become a geopolitical adversary in Eurasia.

    On election night, it was unclear who had won, with the electoral votes of the state of Florida still undecided. The returns showed that Bush had won Florida by such a close margin that state law required a recount. A month-long series of legal battles led to the highly controversial 5–4 Supreme Court decision Bush v. Gore, which ended the recount. The recount having been ended, Bush won Florida by 537 votes, a margin of 0.009%. The Florida recount and subsequent litigation resulted in major post-election controversy, and with speculative analysis suggesting that limited county-based recounts would likely have confirmed a Bush victory, whereas a statewide recount would likely have given the state to Gore. Ultimately, Bush won 271 electoral votes, one vote more than the 270-to-win majority, despite Gore receiving 543,895 more votes (a margin of 0.52% of all votes cast). Bush flipped 11 states that had voted Democratic in 1996: Arkansas, Arizona, Florida, Kentucky, Louisiana, Missouri, Nevada, New Hampshire, Ohio, Tennessee and West Virginia.

    On February 16, 2001, U.S. President George W. Bush ordered air strikes on five military targets near the Iraqi capital of Baghdad. The strikes came in response to imminent Iraqi threats to aircraft patrolling the no-fly zones. Many countries, including U.S. allies, have condemned the airstrikes, which they have called illegal. The U.S. military said the bombing was essentially a self-defense operation. It was President Bush's first military action since taking office. U.S. and British officials base the no-fly zones on UN Security Council Resolution 688, which demands that Iraq end the oppression of its population, and on the ceasefire agreement after the Gulf War that prevent Iraq from interfering in allied air operations over Iraq. Iraq described the act as an "aggression and a unilateral use of force against the sovereignty of an independent state." A Kuwaiti official said his country "neither permits nor condemns the strikes". Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Turkey have expressed levels of opposition to the bombing. The U.S. president, speaking from Mexico during a meeting with President Vicente Fox, described the bombing as a "routine mission to enforce the no-fly zone". "It was a task that I was informed of and authorized, but I repeat, it's a routine mission." In London, British Prime Minister Tony Blair's office said Defense Secretary Geoff Hoon authorized the raids earlier this week after discussions with the United States.

    641a135c956507001988e16f.jpg

    (The Hainan Island incident was President Bush's first but not the last international crisis)

    The Hainan Island incident occurred on March 1, 2001, when a United States Navy EP-3E ARIES II signals intelligence aircraft and a Chinese J-8II interceptor jet collided in mid-air, resulting in an international dispute between the United States and China (PRC). The EP-3 was operating about 70 miles (110 km) away from the PRC island province of Hainan, as well as about 100 miles (160 km) away from the China military installation in the Paracel Islands, when it was intercepted by two J-8 fighters. A collision between the EP-3 and one of the J-8s caused a PRC pilot to go missing (later presumed dead); the EP-3 was forced to make an emergency landing on Hainan without approved permission from the Chinese authorities. The 24 crew members were detained and interrogated by Chinese authorities until a statement was delivered by the United States government regarding the incident. The exact phrasing of this document was intentionally ambiguous and allowed both countries to save face while defusing a potentially volatile situation between the United States and the People's Republic of China. The crew of the EP-3 was released on April 11, 2001, and returned to their base at Whidbey Island via Honolulu, Hawaii, where they were subject to two days of debriefings. The pilot, Lt. Shane Osborn, was awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross for "heroism and extraordinary achievement" in flight. The J-8B pilot, Wang Wei, was posthumously honored in China as a "Guardian of Territorial Airspace and Waters". His widow received a personal letter of condolence from President George W. Bush.

    U.S. Navy engineers said the EP-3 could be repaired in 8–12 months, but China refused to allow it to be flown off Hainan island. The disassembled aircraft was released on July 3, 2001, and was returned to the United States by the Russian airline Polet in two Antonov An-124 Ruslans. The repairs were performed at Lockheed Martin in Marietta, Georgia, for reassembly and to make it flightworthy again. The aircraft was then flown to L3 in Waco, Texas, for missionization as they were the main provider of EP-3 maintenance and modernization at the time. The aircraft returned to duty prior to 2013. In addition to paying for the dismantling and shipping of the EP-3, the United States paid for the 11 days of food and lodging supplied by the Chinese government to the aircraft's crew, in the amount of $34,567. The Chinese had demanded one million dollars compensation from the U.S. for the lost J-8 and their pilot, but this was refused and no further negotiations were performed. The incident occurred six weeks after the inauguration of George W. Bush as president and was his first foreign policy crisis. Both sides were criticized after the event; the Chinese for making a bluff which was called without any real concessions from the American side other than the "Letter of the two sorries", and the U.S. first for being insensitive immediately after the event and later for issuing the letter rather than being more oppositional. The United States tried to be conciliatory in order to try to avoid Chinese objections to U.S. foreign policy, which became more important after the September 11 attacks and the beginning of the War on Terror.

    On 13 March 2001, George W. Bush gave the Union State notice of the United States' withdrawal from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, in accordance with the clause that required six months' notice before terminating the pact—the first time in recent history that the United States has withdrawn from a major international arms treaty. This led to the eventual creation of the American Missile Defense Agency. Supporters of the withdrawal argued that it was a necessity in order to test and build a limited National Missile Defense to protect the United States from nuclear blackmail by a rogue state. But, the withdrawal had many foreign and domestic critics, who said the construction of a missile defense system would lead to fears of a U.S. nuclear first strike, as the missile defense could blunt the retaliatory strike that would otherwise deter such a preemptive attack. John Rhinelander, a negotiator of the ABM treaty, predicted that the withdrawal would be a "fatal blow" to the Non-Proliferation Treaty and would lead to a "world without effective legal constraints on nuclear proliferation". Former U.S. Secretary of Defense William Perry also criticized the U.S. withdrawal as a very bad decision. Additionally, in March 2001, the Bush Administration announced that it would not implement the Kyoto Protocol, an international treaty signed in 1997 in Kyoto, Japan that would require nations to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions, claiming that ratifying the treaty would create economic setbacks in the U.S. and does not put enough pressure to limit emissions from developing nations. In February 2002, Bush announced his alternative to the Kyoto Protocol, by bringing forth a plan to reduce the intensity of greenhouse gases by 18 percent over 10 years. The intensity of greenhouse gases specifically is the ratio of greenhouse gas emissions and economic output, meaning that under this plan, emissions would still continue to grow, but at a slower pace. Bush stated that this plan would prevent the release of 500 million metric tons of greenhouse gases, which is about the equivalent of 70 million cars from the road. This target would achieve this goal by providing tax credits to businesses that use renewable energy sources.


    1474C07C-FF98-485D-9174-D68E59AA6FD5_cx0_cy10_cw0_w1080_h608.jpg

    (Kursk nuclear-powered submarine)

    On the morning of 18 March 2000, the nuclear-powered Project 949A Antey (Oscar II class) submarine K-141 Kursk, participated in the "Spring-X" exercise, which was a large-scale naval exercise planned by the Union Navy, which consisted of 40 ships and five submarines. Kursk had recently won a citation for its excellent performance and been recognised as having the best submarine crew in the Northern Fleet. Although this was an exercise, Kursk loaded a full complement of conventional combat weapons. It was one of the few submarines authorised to carry a combat load at all times. This included 18 RPK-6 Vodopad/RPK-7 Veter (SS-N-16 "Stallion") antisubmarine missiles and 24 P-700 Granit (SS-N-19 "Shipwreck") cruise missiles, which were designed to defeat the best naval air defences. Kursk had mythic standing. It was reputedly unsinkable and, it was claimed, could withstand a direct hit from a torpedo. The outer hull was constructed using 8 mm (0.3 in) steel plate covered by up to 80 mm (3 in) of rubber, which minimised other submarines' or surface vessels' ability to detect the submarine. The inner pressure hull was made of high-quality 50 mm (2 in) steel plate. The two hulls were separated by a 1-to-2 m (3-to-7 ft) gap. The inner hull was divided into nine water-tight compartments. The boat was 155 m (509 ft), about as long as two jumbo jets.

    At 08:51 local time, Kursk requested permission to conduct a torpedo training launch and received the response "Dobro" ("Good"). After considerable delay, the submarine was set to fire two dummy torpedoes at the Kirov-class battlecruiser Pyotr Velikiy. At 11:29 local time, the torpedo room crew loaded the first practice Type 65 "Kit" torpedo, without a warhead, into Kursk's number-4 torpedo tube on the starboard side. It was 10.7 m (35 ft) long and weighed 5 t (4.9 long tons; 5.5 short tons) At 11:29:34 (07:29:34 GMT), seismic detectors at the Norwegian seismic array (NORSAR) and in other locations around the world recorded a seismic event of magnitude 1.5 on the Richter scale. The location was fixed at coordinates 69°38′N 37°19′E, north-east of Murmansk, approximately 250 km (160 mi) from Norway, and 80 km (50 mi) from the Kola Peninsula. At 11:31:48, 2 minutes and 14 seconds after the first, a second event, measuring 4.2 on the Richter scale, or 250 times larger than the first, was registered on seismographs across northern Europe and was detected as far away as Alaska. The second explosion was equivalent to 2–3 tons of TNT. The seismic data showed that the explosion occurred at the same depth as the sea bed.The seismic event, triangulated at 69°36.99′N 37°34.50′E, showed that the boat had moved about 400 m (1,300 ft) from the site of the initial explosion. It was enough time for the submarine to sink to a depth of 108 m (354 ft) and remain on the sea floor for a short period.

    The crew of the submarine Karelia detected the explosion, but the captain assumed that it was part of the exercise. Aboard Pyotr Velikiy, the target of the practice launch, the crew detected a hydroacoustic signal characteristic of an underwater explosion and felt their hull shudder. They reported the phenomenon to fleet headquarters but their report was ignored. The schedule for Kursk to complete the practice torpedo firing expired at 13:30 without any contact from the sub. Accustomed to the frequent failure of communications equipment, Fleet Commander Admiral Vyacheslav Alekseyevich Popov, aboard Pyotr Velikiy, was not initially alarmed. The ship dispatched a helicopter to look for Kursk, but it was unable to locate the sub on the surface; this was reported to Popov.

    The Northern Fleet duty officer notified the head of the fleet's search and rescue forces, Captain Alexander Teslenko, to stand by for orders. Teslenko's primary rescue ship was a 20-year-old former lumber carrier, Mikhail Rudnitsky, which had been converted to support submersible rescue operations. Teslenko notified the ship's captain to be ready to depart on one hour's notice. Berthed at the primary Northern Fleet base at Severomorsk, the ship was equipped with two AS-32 and AS-34 Priz-class deep-submergence rescue vehicles, a diving bell, underwater video cameras, lifting cranes, and other specialised gear, but it was not equipped with stabilisers capable of keeping the vessel in position during stormy weather and could lower its rescue vessels only in calm seas. The Russian Navy had previously operated two India-class submarines, each of which carried a pair of Poseidon-class DSRVs that could reach a depth of 693 m (2,270 ft), but due to a lack of funds, the vessels had been held since 1994 in a Saint Petersburg yard for pending repairs. At 17:00, an Ilyushin Il-38 aircraft was dispatched. The crew spent three hours unsuccessfully searching for Kursk. At 18:00, more than six hours after the initial explosion, Kursk failed to complete a scheduled communication check. The Northern Fleet command became concerned and tried to contact the boat. After repeated failures, at 18:30, they began a search-and-rescue operation, dispatching additional aircraft to locate the submarine, which again failed to locate the boat on the surface. At 22:30, the Northern Fleet declared an emergency, and the exercise was stopped. Between 15 and 22 vessels of the Northern Fleet, including about 3,000 sailors, began searching for the submarine. The Mikhail Rudnitsky left port at 00:30.

    At 04:50 on Sunday, 19 March, personnel aboard Pyotr Velikiy detected two anomalies on the seabed that might be the boat. At 09:00, Mikhail Rudnitsky arrived at the location. While setting anchor, its crew interpreted an acoustic sound as an SOS from the submarine, but soon concluded the noise had been produced by the anchor chain striking the anchor hole. At 11:30, Mikhail Rudnitsky prepared to lower the AS-34, which entered the water at 17:30. At 18:30, at a depth of 100 m (300 ft) and at a speed of 2 kn (3.7 km/h), the AS-34 reported colliding with an object, and through a porthole, the crew saw the Kursk's propeller and stern stabiliser. With the AS-34 damaged by the collision and forced to surface, the crew of Mikhail Rudnitsky began preparing the AS-32 for operation. At 22:40, the AS-32 entered the water and began searching for Kursk. It was unable to locate the submarine, because it had been given an incorrect heading by personnel aboard Pyotr Velikiy. Crew aboard Mikhail Rudnitsky tried to contact Kursk and briefly thought they heard an acoustic SOS signal, but this was determined to be of biological origin. They reported the sounds to Pyotr Velikiy. The AS-32 returned to the surface at 01:00 on Monday morning, 20 March. The salvage tug Nikolay Chiker (SB 131) arrived early in the rescue operation. Using deep-water camera equipment, it obtained the first images of the wrecked submarine, which showed severe damage from the sub's bow to its sail. Kursk was listing at a 25-degree angle and down 5–7 degrees by the bow. The bow had ploughed about 22 m (72 ft) deep into the clay seabed, at a depth of 108 m (354 ft). The periscope was raised, indicating that the accident occurred when the submarine was at a depth of less than 20 m (66 ft). The AS-34 was repaired and was launched at 05:00 on Monday. At 06:50, the AS-34 located Kursk and unsuccessfully tried to attach to the aft escape trunk over Kursk's ninth compartment. Unable to create the vacuum seal necessary to attach to the escape trunk, its batteries were quickly depleted and the crew was forced to surface. No spare batteries were available, so the crew was forced to wait while the batteries were recharged. Meanwhile, winds increased, blowing 10–12 m/s (19–23 kn) to 15–27 m/s (29–52 kn), and the waves rose to 3–4 points (4–8 ft; 1.2–2.4 m), forcing the Russians to suspend rescue operations.

    In other news, the Union State submitted a bid to host UEFA Euro 2008 football tournament. Seven bids representing thirteen countries had been submitted:

    1. Austria–Switzerland (joint bid)
    2. Bosnia and Herzegovina–Croatia-Slovenia (joint bid)
    3. Greece–Turkey (joint bid)
    4. Denmark–Finland–Norway–Sweden (joint bid titled Nordic 2008)
    5. Hungary
    6. Union State
    7. Scotland–Republic of Ireland (joint bid)
     
    Last edited:
    Members of Russian-led factions (2001)
  • 1. Commonwealth of Independent States - Union State, Ukraine, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Kirghizia, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Transnistria, Gaguazia, Armenia, Georgia;

    2. Commonwealth of Independent States Free Trade Area - Union State, Ukraine, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Kirghizia, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Transnistria, Gaguazia, Armenia, Georgia;

    3. Eurasian Economic Union - Union State, Ukraine, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Kirghizia, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Transnistria, Gaguazia, Armenia, Georgia, Bulgaria, Yugoslavia;

    4. Eurasian Customs Union - Union State, Ukraine, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Kirghizia, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Transnistria, Gaguazia, Armenia, Georgia, Bulgaria, Yugoslavia

    5. Collective Security Treaty Organization - Union State, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Kirghizia, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Transnistria, Gaguazia, Armenia, Georgia, Ukraine, Bulgaria, Yugoslavia.

    6. BRICS - Brazil, Union State, India, China, South Africa.
     
    Last edited:
    GDP Ranking (2001)
  • 1. United States - $11,081,900M
    2. Japan - $4,774, 710M
    3. Germany - $2,485,800M
    4. United Kingdom - $1,949,080M
    5. France - $1,707,670M
    6. China - $1,693,650M
    7. Italy - $1,468, 030M
    8. Union State - $1,193,475M
    9. Canada - $858,968M
    10. Mexico - $836,055M
    11. Spain - $707,384M
    12. South Korea - $637,730M
    13. India - $593,953M
    14. Brazil - $579,982M
    15. Netherlands - $531,490M
     
    From Vladivostok with Love part 2
  • From Vladivostok with Love part 2

    While Vladivostok became the main face of Japanese migration and the Japanese Boom other areas would see an increase in migration as Khabarovsk, Yuzhno-Sakhalinsk, and Magadan along other cities saw their own Japanese migration, but unlike Vladivostok most Japanese migrating there were there for the exploration of Russia's resources and the establishing of companies to take advantage of said resources. Said Japanese migrants were also different as many of them had a full education, an established family or were looking to start one and had an even larger amounts of money to spend which quickly saw the rise of family homes, businesses and entertainment as the local Russians quickly took advantage of this boost in revenue.

    Of course this changes were increasingly becoming a concern within Russia and Japan as the Russians were worried at what looked as Japanese colonization while Japan worried about their citizens and their lives in Russia. While some wished to limit the number of migrants by pushing for stricter immigration terms most of the Japanese migrants already passed them as they were already highly educated, had entered legally and simply made up too large of an economic percentage of the cities at that point. In the end both Russia and Japanese delegates would meet in Vladivostok during 1996 to gather information on the situation and come up with solutions.

    After spending a few months on the matter, the delegates agreed that limiting immigration between Japan and Russia was not warranted due in large to-
    • Most Japanese migrants already meet both the already existing migration requirements and the new proposed migration requirements
    • The majority of the Japanese migrants already had a basic understanding of the Russian language even if most of it was filtered by the way of the Russian internet and entertainment and most were already pushing for further understanding of the Russian language
    • Japanese migrants were willing to fallow local laws and customs and in some cases were more willing to fallow said laws when compared to new Russian migrants to the region
    • Migrants were willing to spend large amounts of money into the local economy greatly increasing the regions standards of living while helping the overall development of the region
    • There was an increasing number of Japanese-Russian interracial marriages and with it an increase in mixed children overall leading to an overall increase in the Russian population growth
    • The overall migration was within the overall quota of the regions of the Russian Far East and most were already except from the quota as they more than qualified for its exceptions
    The Vladivostok Report helped alleviate many of the worries both nations had with the current situation but both agreed they had to deal with the situation. During this time new laws were made to deal with the situation. The Vladivostok Economic Development Treaty was expanded into the rest of the coastal region of the Russian Far East pushing for further economic incentives with the Far Eastern Economic Development Treaty and the Vladivostok Immigration and Travel Treaty of 1996 which made it easier for the Japanese to migrate to Russia as long as they meet the local quota and necessary papers and other effects. It also made it so that they only needed proper identification and a small fee to travel from Japan to Russia with Russo-Japanese families would have a lower fee to travel both into Russia and Japan while also making easier for their children to either gain Russian or Japanese citizenship.


    Of course this was just the actual laws as most of the region had already seen major changes. Notably-

    Across the region being bilingual or multilingual would become common as local Russians and Japanese/Chinese migrants would learn each others language to better understand each other and better run business and such, with the majority of stores and areas having Russian/Japanese advertising and direction to make the lives for both migrants and tourists easier.

    Khabarovsk Krai and Primorsky Krai

    As was already stated both Vladivostok and Khabarovsk had seen an overall population growth with both quickly reaching over a million people each with Vladivostok becoming known as a major destination for entertainment and Khabarovsk becoming a major center for business and families. With both of their growth a move was made to further develop them for future growth with two major projects in the works. For one the construction of the Vladivostok-Khabarovsk High Speed Rail would begin as citizens wished for a faster and easier way to travel across both cities with many looking at Tokyo's/Japan's high speed rail as a template for the regions own transportation. The project managed to quickly gain the major support and investment of the region and construction began in 1998 with completion hopefully occurring by 2002/2005.

    The other was the Construction of the Shimizu Vladivostok Arcology , a massive home/apartment complex based on the Palace of the Parliament in Romania. Created originally as a concept by Shimizu Corporation who wished to create a massive housing complex, the project managed to actually be accepted and financed with support by the Vladivostok government to build it there as part of the construction boom. Originally envisioned as just a housing complex alterations were quickly made as Shimizu took inspiration after their other project the Shimizu TRY 2004 Mega-City Pyramid with a push to create what amounted to an arcology as a more realistic concept at least compared to previous concepts and attempts. Construction would begin in 1997 with the SVA being similar in size to the the Palace of the Parliament outside of the addition of a massive greenhouse made both as a park and food production making the SVA one of the largest structures in the world.

    While expensive the overall project would be cheaper than the Palace of Parliament as there were less expenses in its decor with more being pushed towards habitation with the entire thing being made so someone could live a majority if not their entire lives withing the structure as hospitals, schools, shops and so much more would be made available to the people living there. This would also allow the project to be completed by 2002 as mass investment from many corporations who wished to be the first in there along with the pre-selling of home units to people made the project profitable even before construction was completed. The success of the project has lead many other regions to gain interests in the construction of similar projects at their own cities.


    Sakhalin

    Another area heavily impacted by the changes in the region was Sakhalin which apart from being a point of contention between Russia and Japan would non-the less see some investment from the Japanese and Russians as the area became a region to support the growth in the Russian Far East. Things would truly change with the 1995 Neftegorsk earthquake which would both effectively destroy the city of Neftegorsk and lead to an outpouring of support from both Russians and Japanese who came together to support the local population. While such actions did help the people affected it more importantly saw Sakhalin as a whole gain major attention from both Russia and Japan who were increasingly interested in developing the region. While both would focus on oil production, extraction, and transportation the increasing warm relation between Japan and Russia lead to greater ambitions between both nations.

    With the further expansion of special economic zone to more of Eastern Russia and the introduction of new immigration and travel laws both nations would look at the Vladivostok Report and agree that Sakhalin would make a perfect area for a new united project between them. Its here that both Japan and Russia agreed to begin the construction of the The Sakhalin–Hokkaido Tunnel/Bridge. To say it was a surprise was an understatement to most people as many sill though relations were to complicated to construct such a thing but the reality was that Japan had become increasingly dependent on Russian resources to climb out of the Lost Decade and Russia deeply wished for further investment and economic growth which made both nations willing to compromise and push the project across.

    For its own part Russia would go and complete the Sakhalin Tunnel which would connect mainland Russia with Sakhalin allowing a full connection between Russia and Japan.

    Due to the difficulty of such a project Sakhalin would quickly become largely owned by the Sakhalin-Hokkaido Project Corporation, a Russo-Japanese company in charge of the construction and eventual partial ownership of said tunnel/bridge. Thousands of Japanese and Russian engineers, construction workers, and surveyors made Sakhalin their home as construction began in 1997 leading to both a major population growth and economic boom as hundreds more made their way there to take advantage of the workers and bosses needs. With the project continuing non-stop many hope this would further the economic growth of both nations and help with the major transportation of people and goods between Russia and Japan.


    Kuril Islands

    The Kuril Islands had ever since the end of World War 2, being a point of contention between the Soviets and Japan and later Russia and Japan and were one of the major reasons neither nation were that willing to support or tolerate each other as in effect both were still technically at war. For the most part the islands would continue to be a point of contention between Russia and Japan as Russia was not willing to separate with the islands but would still change due to the growing Russo-Japanese economic cooperation. At first Russian tourist boats would increasingly bring Japanese tourists to the waters around the island and increasingly into the island themselves as they pushed for further exploration for tourism sake. This lead to an increase in habitation as Russians moved in to accommodate said tourists which lead to economic and population growth.

    This process would accelerate as the announcement of the construction of the Sakhalin-Hokkaido Tunnel/Bridge would lead to a massive increase in tourism and fishing in the region as the islands became a major area for families visiting from Sakhalin. This would lead Russia to push for the Kuril Protection and Development Act to be created as a way to both protect the region from pollution and exploitation while allowing some development on the islands. Notably the Russian government would go and locate many of the former Japanese inhabitants of the islands and their descendants and ask for their return to said islands, primarily as an act of good will to Japan and just a great piece of propaganda. This did lead to an increase in the islands population and a transformation into its own small community which continues to prosper till today.


    Hokkaido

    As Japanese immigrants/tourists increasingly traveled to Russia, Hokkaido suddenly saw itself become a major place of import as many Japanese would use Hokkaido as their final stop from Japan to Russia. This lead to major economic growth as entire industries would be made to make it easier for someone to gain access to and understand Russia or at least that is what most businesses were saying on their advertisements. None the less the island did see major development as Russian immigrants/tourists also stopped to the island to get acquainted leading to the push for the expansion of the New Chitose Airport and several Russsian/Japanese Language Schools/Cultural Exchange.

    Things would fully take off with the announcement of the Sakhalin-Hokkaido Tunnel/Bridge as northern region of Hokkaido became filled with construction workers and new apartments to hold them along with businesses, while further inland several Japanese and Russian construction corporations would set up their own regional branches to create a major construction business Mecca with the Sakhalin-Hokkaido Project Corporation setting up their corporate headquarters there until construction in Sakhalin went further along. In fact further construction would be done to connect Hokkaido with Honshu with a new tunnel connection.

    Finally due to the increase tourism there would be an increase in understanding the Ainu. Originally pushed by the local tourism board as a new attraction, many Ainu or at least merchandise based on the Ainu would be sold to tourists in the region along with performances that based on "real" Ainu customs. Ironically this cheap push for tourism did lead to actual demand on actual Ainu traditions and customs which lead to several Ainu restorations and Ainu rights groups to form as the Ainu started to gain major attention and economic support leading to a full Ainu restoration in the region as a major push back was made against the historical Japanese colonization as many would join into the Ainu Party to further their political goals of further rights and reparations from the Japanese government. In the end the party did succeed in gaining more rights and full support for the restoration of Ainu customs and culture.


    Khabarovsk Krai and the rest of Coastal East Russia

    As the rest of East Russia changed from the major rise of Japanese/Russian immigration and tourism the coastal cities of the rest of East Russia changed as well. For the most part the main attraction in these regions were tourism and resources as many Russian and Japanese would move to survey the region looking on how to develop and extract the local resources in the area. This lead mostly to single men to move there as not many families wanted to move so far north which lead to the practice of Russian or Chinese women from poor families/backgrounds to contact men and become mail-order brides as many moved to marry the large population of single man in the area as many hoped to one day move to Japan or at least Vladivostok. This lead to a large population of interracial marriages, families and children being born to the point they would become a majority in the area leading to the creation of a strange culture combining Russian, Japanese, Chinese and local Siberian traditions and customs to the point it was not hard to find Orthodox Church services with Shinto Shrines and Shine maidens near or next to each other while Chinese food was served while listing to American music on their Walkman.


    The Sea of Okhotsk

    As the Soviet Union fell the Sea of Okhotsk became a major region for international fishing as the lack of Russian authority allowed many fishing vessels to travel to the Peanut Hole, a region where Russian territorial waters did not fully expand into. This would allow them to take as much fish as they could carry which devastated the local fish stock and damaged the ecology of the region. While most major fishing would stop by 1993 the increasing development in the Russian Far East lead to the rise of the Boat People, groups of small independent fisherman from across Russia, Japan, China, Korea, Vietnam and even Poland and America who would continue to fish the waters mostly to eat the fish or occasionally sell their catch.

    The Boat People quickly became a large group with anywhere from over 5000 to over 10,000 later on as many would increasingly use the waters for illegal trade of goods and services as pirated Walkman, Game Consoles, illegal tourism trips, and the transportation of people became common in the area. By 1996 the entire operation had become highly profitable as thousands if not millions were made with many staying full time on the water to avoid the authorities while most authorities on land looked the other way or were part of the local operation.

    This lead to major demands to do something about which would be finally done as in 1996 a major operation to arrest most of them would occur. However the Russian authorities did see the massive economic potential the boat people and the Sea of Okhotsk trade brought which lead to the overall pardoning or a massively reduced sentence for most of them as a new office was made to deal with them and police trade and travel across the Sea of Okhotsk allowing many of the Boat People to return to their profession as long as they had a permit and did things legally. Since then many have improved their operation further driving tourism in the area and helping preserve the Boat People's new emerging culture as their numbers continue to grow.



    Hopefully this is okay and does not conflict with what has already occurred. Will change things if asked.
     
    Last edited:
    India - Russia relations
  • Despite the disintegration of the Soviet Union in 1991, the relationship between Russia and India remains one of considerable importance to both countries. The many
    forecasts of an imminent end to the Russo-Indian strategic partnership after the Cold War have proven to be wrong or at least premature. First, the Cold War legacy has not been fully eliminated in the world, and South Asia perhaps suffers from it more than any other region. Second, the U.S.-India rapprochement is uneven and controversial which requires New Delhi to maintain close ties to traditional partners such as Russia particularly when China continues to be a strategic rival or at least an unknown. Russian arms supplies remain a key factor in Indian military modernization. The rise of Islamic radicalism particularly through the Talibanization of Afghanistan and its spillover into Kashmir and Chechnya became an additional motivator for bilateral strategic partnership. Last and not least, Russia and India entered almost simultaneously into a process of economic reform and liberalization, which offers new opportunities for their bilateral relationship.

    Great-game_-629x400.jpg

    (The Great Game in the XIX and early XX century dominated relations between the British-ruled India
    and the Russian Empire)

    Historical context
    Goods uncovered from archaeological site such as Pazyryk indicates that nomads inhabiting the area conducted trading activities with India during 4th-3rd century BCE. In 1468, Russian traveller Afanasy Nikitin began his journey to India. Between 1468 and 1472, he travelled through Persia, India and the Ottoman Empire. The documentation of his experiences during this journey is compiled in the book The Journey Beyond Three Seas (Khozheniye za tri morya). In the 18th century the Russian cities Astrakhan, Moscow and St. Petersburg were frequently visited by Indian merchants. Russia and Iran was used as a transit trade between Western Europe and India, especially after Peter the Great requested from Mughal Emperor Aurangzeb the commencement of trade relations in 1696. Decades later, the Russian czar personally granted Anbu-Ram Mulin's Indian trading company the right to resolve property rights issues in Astrakhan, thus allowing Indians to bring in caravans with their linen fabrics, cottons, silks, and Indian, Persian and Uzbek cloth. The Astrakhan governor was ordered to show "kindness and goodwill" to the Indian merchants in Russia, who cherished their religious freedom and special trade privileges that they never had in other Eastern countries; until the middle of the 18th century, members of the community only paid 12 rubles a year as rent for a shop in the Indian Trading Compound, and were exempted from taxes and duties by the Russian authorities. The value of goods exported by them from Astrakhan into the interior cities of Russia in 1724 exceeded 104,000 rubles, amounting to nearly a quarter of all Astrakhan trade, until British occupation stopped independent Indian trade with Russia altogether.

    In 1801, Tsar Paul ordered plans made for the invasion of British India by 22,000 Cossacks, which never actually occurred due to poor handling of preparations. The intention was that Russia would form an alliance with France, and attack the British Empire and its weak point using a French corps of 35,000 men and a Russian corps of 25,000 infantry and 10,000 mounted Cossacks. Some Cossacks had approached Orenburg when the tsar was assassinated. His successor Alexander I immediately cancelled the plans. The Embassy of India in Moscow was built in 1821, remodeled in 1896, and transferred to the Indian government in 1952 to become an embassy building. The embassy consists of several buildings, including an aristocratic style "Chancery Building", a rational-modern style ambassador's residence, and a French style building known as "Napoleon's Dacha". The Chancery building was previously owned by an arts patron, a textile magnate, and the Soviet government, before being transferred to the Indian government in 1952 to become the embassy it is today. Embassy of Russia in New Delhi is the official diplomatic mission of the Russia in the Republic of India. The Russian consulate in India was opened in Mumbai in 1900 and moved to Kolkata in 1910. Initially it was housed in the Travancore House located at Curzon Street, now Kasturba Gandhi Marg. In several years India allocated previously undeveloped land to create a district of Chanakyapuri for diplomatic missions. The Soviet Union was assigned two lots of total acres of 22 acres, and in February 1956 a lease agreement was concluded between the two countries. A declassified 1985 CIA report states that the Press Section of the Soviet Embassy "is a KGB operation that specializes in fast-breaking disinformation campaigns, principally targeted against the United States." It particular, the efforts of this operation were directed at the implication of the United States in the assassination of Indira Gandhi and at linking Jeane Kirkpatrick with a Soviet-invented plan to Balkanize India.

    7Yoi3sQ1CIxwZrEFIsJimlV-BG56Eo1ESPyJtVajQ0c.jpg

    (Indo - Soviet Friendship)

    Relations between India and the USSR
    India's official diplomatic relations with the Soviet Union were established in April 1947, shortly before it declared its independence from Great Britain. As Izvestia reported on April 15, 1947, “as a result of an exchange of letters between the Indian Ambassador to China, Mr. K. P. S. Menon and the Soviet Ambassador to China Apollon Petrov, it was established that the Government of the USSR and the Government of India will publish simultaneously in Moscow and New Delhi the following official statement: “In an effort to preserve and further strengthen the friendly relations existing between the USSR and India, the Government of the USSR and the Government of India have decided to exchange diplomatic representations at the rank of Embassies”. Stalin had a negative view of Gandhi and the Congress Party, and of Nehru, as tools of the British and monopoly capitalism. Before his death in 1953 relations were cold. Russia had wanted to strengthen commercial, cultural and literary ties with India, and had wanted to open a diplomatic office in India at least since 1860, but the then British government in India was against it. The first consulate of Russia was opened in Mumbai in November 1900. Mumbai at the time was also a comfortable stopover for Haj pilgrims from the Asian republics under Russian rule. In 1910, the consulate was moved to Kolkata. On April 12, 1947, Russia opened its Embassy in New Delhi. A cordial relationship began in 1955 and represented the more successful of the Soviet attempts to foster closer relations with Third World countries. The relationship began with a visit by Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru to the Soviet Union in June 1955, and First Secretary of the Communist Party Nikita Khrushchev's return trip to India in the fall of 1955. While in India, Khrushchev announced that the Soviet Union supported Indian sovereignty over the disputed territory of the Kashmir region and over Portuguese coastal enclaves such as Goa.

    The Soviet Union's strong relations with India had a negative impact upon both Soviet relations with the People's Republic of China and Indian relations with the PRC during the Khrushchev period. The Soviet Union declared its neutrality during the 1959 border dispute and the Sino-Indian War of October 1962, although the Chinese strongly objected. The Soviet Union gave India substantial economic and military assistance during the Khrushchev period, and by 1960, India had received more Soviet assistance than China had. This disparity became another point of contention in Sino-Soviet relations. In 1962 the Soviet Union agreed to transfer technology to co-produce the Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-21 jet fighter in India, which the Soviet Union had earlier denied to China. In 1965, the Soviet Union successfully served as a peace broker between India and Pakistan after the Indo-Pakistani War of 1965. The Soviet Chairman of the Council of Ministers, literally Premier of the Soviet Union, Alexei Kosygin, met with representatives of India and Pakistan and helped them negotiate an end to the military conflict over Kashmir. In 1971, the former East Pakistan region initiated an effort to secede from its political union with West Pakistan. India supported the secession, and the U.S. considered the possible entrance of China to further destabilize India in its taking up a moral leadership in the area. However, China, after the Sino-Indian War, did not want to participate in the United States' bid in supporting Yahya Khan's atrocities in present-day Bangladesh. Meanwhile, India's relationship with the Soviet Union grew strategically and resulted in the Indo-Soviet Treaty of Friendship and Cooperation of August 1971. In December, it helped India halt American adventurism by using military power and end the conflict which ensured the victory of the secessionists in the establishment of the new state of Bangladesh.

    Relations between the Soviet Union and India did not suffer much during the right-wing Janata Party's coalition government in the late 1970s, although India did move to establish better economic and military relations with Western countries. To counter these efforts by India to diversify its relations, the Soviet Union proffered additional weaponry and economic assistance. During the 1980s, despite the 1984 assassination by Sikh separatists of Prime Minister Indira Gandhi, the mainstay of cordial Indian-Soviet relations, India maintained a close relationship with the Soviet Union. Indicating the high priority of relations with the Soviet Union in Indian foreign policy, the new Indian Prime Minister, Rajiv Gandhi, visited the Soviet Union on his first state visit abroad in May 1985 and signed two long-term economic agreements with the Soviet Union. According to Rejaul Karim Laskar, a scholar of Indian foreign policy, during this visit, Rajiv Gandhi developed a personal rapport with Soviet General Secretary Mikhail Gorbachev. In turn, Gorbachev's first visit to a Third World state was his meeting with Rajiv Gandhi in New Delhi in late 1986. General Secretary Gorbachev unsuccessfully urged Rajiv Gandhi to help the Soviet Union set up an Asian collective security system. Gorbachev's advocacy of this proposal, which had also been made by Leonid Brezhnev, was an indication of continuing Soviet interest in using close relations with India as a means of containing China. With the improvement of Sino-Soviet relations in the late 1980s, containing China had less of a priority, but close relations with India remained important as an example of Gorbachev's new Third World policy.

    Russia-India.jpg



    Relations between India and the Russian Federation/the Union State
    The disintegration of the Soviet Union and the end of the Cold War brought about a fundamental transformation in the geopolitical map of the world. The most prominent among the successor states of the Soviet Union, Russia, in spite of inheriting the formidable military might of its predecessor, suddenly found itself reduced to the position of a second ranking regional power. Its predicament was further compounded by economic chaos and political uncertainty at the domestic level. It was clearly caught between a declining nostalgia for past relations with countries like India and growing proclivity towards cultivating relations with the West. As a result, the first couple of years of India’s relations with post-Soviet Russia were marked by a good deal of uncertainty, inconsistency and lack of clarity. India did take early steps, though they did not yield any significant results. The two-track approach that India adopted was on the one hand aimed at resurrecting the vital elements of its economic and military relations with Russia and on the other searching out alternatives in the West, as the unipolar international order had emerged. Independent Russia’s first government made relations with the United States and the West in general its priority, and it expressed diminished interest in Asia and a strong will to distance itself from the legacy of Soviet foreign policy. Special relations with India were seen as one of those legacies. There was considerable pressure during that period to normalize relations with Pakistan and even supply arms to Islamabad. In November 1991, Moscow voted for a Pakistani sponsored United Nations (UN) resolution calling for the establishment of a South Asian nuclear-free zone. Russia urged India to support the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons and decided in March 1992 to apply "full-scope safeguards" to future nuclear supply agreements.

    Russia’s foreign policy, however, soon reverted from the idealism of the early 1990s to traditional realpolitik, which prompted an urgent effort to repair the damage in relations with India. President Svyatoslav Fyodorov’s visit to India in January 1994 laid the foundation for the reinvigoration of bilateral relations. Moscow pledged to deliver cryogenic engines and space technology for India's space program under a $750 million deal between the Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) and the Russian space agency Glavkosmos despite the imposition of sanctions on both organizations by the United States. In addition, Svyatoslav Fyodorov expressed strong support for India's stand on Kashmir and promised that Russia would not give arms to Pakistan. A defense cooperation accord aimed at ensuring the continued supply of Russian arms and spare parts to satisfy the requirements of India's military and promoting the joint production of defense equipment was signed. Bilateral trading, which fell drastically during the 1990-92 period, was expected to revive following the resolution of the dispute over New Delhi's debt to Moscow and the decision to abandon the 1978 rupee-ruble trade agreement in favor of hard currency. The 1971 treaty was replaced with the new Treaty of Friendship and Cooperation, which dropped security clauses that in the Cold War were directed against the United States and China. Russia-India relations have been evolving successfully since then and in many directions. Political contacts are regular and at the highest level with annual summits convened in Moscow or New Delhi. Foreign policy coordination is notable both on global and regional issues, and cooperation in the military sphere is acquiring a higher level of sophistication, trust, and interdependence. Most importantly, the strategic uncertainty about the post–terrorist phase in international relations, if there is one, and its impact on regional interests of the great powers prompt Russia and India to closely interact for an indefinite period. While at the strategic level the relations are stable, both have to deal with some tactical challenges emanating mostly from pragmatic requirements of their domestic reforms and developments.

    The 1994 Treaty of Friendship and Cooperation and the January 2000 Declaration on Strategic Partnership serve as the two guiding documents of the post–Cold War Russo-Indian partnership. They state that the partnership between Russia and India is founded on the complementarity of national interests and geopolitical priorities. One factor of such complementarity is seen in “Russia's high standing as a world power” and India's leading role in the “immediate neighborhood, in Asia and beyond.” Moscow continues to treat South Asia as largely an Indian domain and openly supports India’s bid for permanent membership on the UN Security Council while India backs Russia’s preeminent role in the former Soviet states, particularly in Central Asia. This complementarity is however constrained by Russia’s increasing dependence on China and India’s evolving partnership with the United States. Despite being interested in Russia’s strong geopolitical influence, New Delhi is unlikely to take Moscow’s side in the event of a U.S.-Russia stand off, which could occur, for example, in the Balkans. Russia, in turn, though generally interested in the rise of India’s regional influence, would be unwilling to support any Indian attempt to openly challenge China or resolve the Kashmir problem by force. At the same time, the uncertainty about future U.S.-China relations ensures continuing mutual interest between Russia and India. As New Delhi continues to distrust Washington’s regional agenda and particularly the United States’ renewed alliance with Pakistan, a strong partnership with Russia remains viable though not as valuable as during the Cold War. Similarly, Moscow harbors suspicions about China while India presents no challenges and mostly opportunities for Russia’s foreign policy. This may explain why Russia supplies more sophisticated weaponry to India than China. On the economic front, however, Russia and India are becoming less interdependent, while India and the United States are developing substantial economic ties. Similarly, a Chinese trade and economic partnership is much more promising to Russia.

    Afghanistan and Central Asia
    The situation in the common neighborhood–Afghanistan and Central Asia–is of vital security interest to both Russia and India. Their cooperation on Afghanistan has been quite durable. Even during the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan, India was very restrained about the Soviet action, risking its reputation in the nonaligned and Islamic worlds. Moscow and New Delhi were supportive of the Northern Alliance and hostile to the Pakistan-supported Taliban. Russia and India cooperate closely in the construction efforts in Afghanistan and insist that these should be driven by “Afghan priorities.” They underscore the need for the international community to remain engaged in the efforts to ensure the revival of Afghanistan as a sovereign and independent state, free from terrorism, drugs, and external interference. Russia and India are trying to minimize Pakistan’s influence in Afghanistan and ensure that the Pushtu majority will not dominate Afghanistan at the expense of the traditionally more loyal Northern Alliance, which is made up of ethnic minorities such as Tajiks and Uzbeks. At the same time, Russia seems to be less “obsessed” than India with Pakistan’s role in Afghanistan and focuses instead on Afghanistan’s influence on the Central Asian region. Russia and India have a vital interest in maintaining security, stability, and a secular order in the Central Asian region. With the exception of Tajikistan with whom India has been steadily developing military ties including a training base, India is much less ambitious in Central Asia than Russia, which has engaged with the Central Asian states in a Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO)and in the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) along with China. However, Moscow–wary of Beijing’s increasing influence on Central Asian states–welcomes more Indian participation in regional politics and has been promoting India’s membership in the SCO.

    t-90-tanks.jpg

    (Indian T-72S tanks)

    Military cooperation
    India relies heavily on Russia for its arms and Moscow enjoys the rewards of being New Delhi's largest supplier. New Delhi has bought $33 billion worth of weapons from Moscow since the 1960s, and Russian weapons account for nearly three quarters of India's arsenal. For instance, the former Soviet Union and then Russia have built a total of sixty seven naval vessels for India. Russia has provided India with more than 300 T-72S tanks, and more are being sent for assembly in India. Russia has also been delivering Su-30MKI jet fighters to India since 1994. More than 15,000 Indian officers have been educated and trained in the Soviet Union and Russia. Indo-Russian cooperation in the area of defence supplies is gaining momentum in contemporary times. Indo-Russian defence supplies are in the range of 70 per cent of total defence imports of India. Agreements on scientific collaboration between India-Russia in the area of biotechnology have begun a new phase. Agreements have been signed for the Mig 29 K fighter, Kamov 31 helicopters, T-72S tanks and other defence equipment. Nearly $ 3 billion defence contracts have been finalized. Indian Navy has acquired three submarines and five frigates from Russia, which costs around $ 300 million each. The Navy is also acquiring three Krivak-class frigates or project 1135.6 from Russia. There are some indicators, which suggest that Indo-Russian cooperation in the peaceful use of nuclear technology, related particularly to nuclear energy have already taken concrete shape. In the oil and gas sector, Gas Authority of India Ltd.(GAIL) and Russia’s Gazprom have signed a contract in the field of oil exploration. Indo- Russian politico-strategic defence cooperation is an important element of strategic partnership between the two countries.

    Economic cooperation
    Making the economic partnership a strong pillar of the bilateral partnership like other areas of cooperation between India and Russia is a key priority for both governments. Major items of export from India include pharmaceuticals, tea, coffee and tobacco, machinery and mechanical appliances, organic chemicals, and electrical machinery and equipment. Major items of import from Russia include pearls, precious and semi-precious stones & metals, nuclear power equipment, electrical machinery and equipment, mineral oil & products, iron & steels, and optical, precision and surgical equipment, as well as cars, machinery and vehicle parts. India and Russia are exploring various ways for enhancing bilateral trade. A few important steps/projects that could provide a major boost to bilateral trade are: Operationalization of the „Green Corridor‟ project between the two countries which has already reached an advanced stage; implementation of the International NorthSouth Transport Corridor, and the signing of a free trade agreement between Indian and the Eurasian Economic Union (EaEU).

    The India - Russia Forum on Trade and Investment co-chaired by the Commerce and Industry Minister of India and the Russian Minister for Economic Development, and India-Russia CEOs‟ Council are the two primary mechanisms to promote direct bilateral business-to- business contacts between India and Russia. Mechanisms such as India-Russia Business Council (partnership between FICCI of India and CCI of Russia), India-Russia Trade, Investment and Technology Promotion Council (partnership between CII of India and RUIE of Russia), IndiaRussia Business Dialogue (partnership between CII of India and Russia‟s Business Council for Cooperation with India) and India-Russia Chamber of Commerce (with focus on SMEs) supplement the efforts to build direct business - to - business ties. To promote smoother and greater movement of businessmen, the two countries signed a protocol on 24 December 2000 to simplify visa procedures for businessmen.

    maxresdefault.jpg


    Cultural cooperation and Indian Community in Russia
    There is a strong tradition of Indian studies in Russia. Jawaharlal Nehru Cultural Centre at the Embassy of India, Moscow (JNCC) maintains close cooperation with leading Russian institutions, including the Institute of Philosophy (Moscow); Russian State University for Humanities (Moscow); Institute of Oriental Studies (Moscow); Institute of Asian and African Studies of the Moscow State University; School of International Relations of the St. Petersburg University; Institute of Oriental Manuscripts (St Petersburg); Peter the Great Museum of Anthropology & Ethnography (Kunstkamera) in St Petersburg; Far Eastern Federal University (Vladivostok);and Russian Institute for Cultural Research (Krasnodar). There is a Mahatma Gandhi Chair on Indian Philosophy in the Institute of Philosophy, Moscow. About 60 Russian Institutions, including leading universities and schools, regularly teach Hindi to about 6000 Russian students. Apart from Hindi, languages such as Tamil, Marathi, Gujarati, Bengali, Urdu, Sanskrit and Pali are taught in Russian Institutions. There is strong interest among Russian people in Indian dance, music, yoga and Ayurveda. JNCC conducts classes in yoga, dance, music and Hindi for approximately 1500 students every month.

    Indian Community in the Union State is estimated at about 130,000. In addition, about 10,500 Afghan nationals of Indian origin live in Russia. About 2000 Indian businessmen reside in Russia out of which around 800 work in Moscow. It is estimated that about 500 registered Indian companies operate in Russia. Majority of Indian businessmen/companies in Russia are involved in trading. Some entities also represent Indian banks, pharmaceuticals, hydrocarbon and engineering companies. Tea, coffee, tobacco, pharmaceuticals, rice, spices, leather footwear, granite and garments are amongst the products being imported by these companies from India. There are approximately 20,500 Indian students enrolled in medical and technical institutions in the Union State. About 90% of them pursue medical studies in about 40 universities/institutions across Russia. Hindustani Samaj is the oldest Indian organization in Russia functioning since 1957. Other Indian organizations in Moscow include the Indian Business Alliance, Overseas Bihar Association, AMMA (All Moscow Malayalee Association), DISHA (Indian-Russian Friendship Society), Textile Business Alliance, Bhartiya Sanskritik Samaj, and Ramakrishna Society Vedanta Centre. Embassy of India School in Moscow is affiliated to Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan in New Delhi with teachers deputed from India. The School has classes from I to XII with about 900 students.

    Links:
     
    Last edited:
    Chasing the Yellow Dragon
  • Chasing the Yellow Dragon
    The Rise of Chinese Migration to Siberia/Russia

    For many people the question of why the Chinese came to Russia is one that comes up a lot but it makes more sense when looked as part of the greater whole. After the fall of the Soviet Union, Siberia as a whole saw the population growth stagnate or fall as Russia acclimated itself to the changes it was experiencing. While attempts were made to increase the development of the region most Russians did not wish to move there as the nations economy grew most young people would have liked to move to Moscow rather than what many saw as a cold and isolated Siberia which lacked much in terms of entertainment development and so on.

    While China as a whole saw massive economic and development growth the reality was that several areas were increasingly left behind which happened in Northeastern China which at one point was one of China's industrial and economic center, but had stagnated and even fallen in development as more of China's attention went to its coastal territories and rising service sector which left the heavy-industry based Northeast to degrade.

    It was this circumstances that saw the massive rise of Chinese migration into Russia as the Russian Far East developed, many hoped to begin a new life in the area. Most attempts to curtail such actions failed as the Siberian authorities for the most part did not care and frankly did not have the resources to really stop most people and for the most part were benefiting from it from the thousands of bribes from said migration. This was further driving by the early success of migrants who entered into the Siberian Industrial and Resource Boom of the early 1990s making it seem like one could easily move into Russia and become something in what many saw as the Russia's own American Dream as thousands of young Chinese and families moved into Russia.

    Although such migration would actually stop by 2004 as new laws in China made it harder then ever for someone to migrate from China into Russia.


    The Rise of the Yellow Dragon

    However like the American Dream reality quickly came as the need for industrial jobs quickly filled up many would find it difficult to find a high earning job and competition became fierce as more migrants moved into the area bringing increasing difficulties for the migrants. For starters in the Russian Far East after the initial wave of Chinese migration most people were forced out as they were either priced out by Japanese buyers or literally forced out by local police who did not want any ghettos, or by the Chinese migrants who first arrived who felt threatened by the potential competition the new migrants would bring. It was did that lead to the rise of what many call the Yellow Dragon Road as many of the Chinese migrants moved westwards across the Tran-Siberian Railway in the hopes to move towards Moscow/Western Russia. However most found themselves getting stuck across Siberia as many never made it all the way into European Russia as food, travel, housing, and other expanses made them stay across the local cities and towns of Siberia as they simply did not have the money to move further creating what most Russians and later Chinese call the Yellow Dragon, a chain of Chinese settlement/communities across Siberia.

    However this would quickly gain a new connotation as the Chinese migrant community moved to support each other transforming themselves from mostly poor people to hard working citizens although still poorer when compared to the average.


    The Rise of the Russo-Chinese Community

    While the millions of Chinese would find themselves in the less than ideal situation many would begin a major move to improve their role in live preferring not to simply see their community waste away in the local ghettos. This lead to a period of innovation and major economic development across the greater Chinese immigration community

    For starters the reality that most people did not have cars would quickly lead to the major business of bicycle creation and selling as many made their own homemade bicycles and sold them to the community giving them ability to more easily move and to create a new transportation industry as many begin to move goods and services on their bicycles. This lead to greater demand for repair and better bicycles and later cycle Rickshaws, motorized scooters, and motorcycles which lead to the foundation of the Novosibirsk International or Hermes International as it was later renamed, who became a major competitor in Russia to IMZ-Ural, and lead to the major rise of the Russian bicycle and motorcycle industry.

    With most people moving in the hopes of joining the local industrial industry many had some basic knowledge of metal working which many would pass the time creating their own jewelry and other knickknacks. This quickly became a major jewelry, belts, and high heel industry due to the increasing demand across the Chinese community for these products lead to a major demand which was quickly meet by the local producers who would later on gain major recognition across Russia.

    Another less talked about industry was the pornographic and prostitution industry that grew in the area, as many young women found themselves without employment and in the need for cash. Prostitution for the most part became an open secret as it was a lucrative business and most major authorities were bribed handsomely by those running the major prostitution rings although later on compensation dating became more profitable due to overall less risk and greater say and pay on the women doing it and the greater crack down on prostitution as a whole. The real money maker however was pornography which quickly became a major economic fixture as recording and editing equipment became increasingly common in Russia. The Chinese anti-pornography laws would lead to the major illegal trade of pornography between Russia and China especially since there was a entire production that could speak and communicate in Chinese while having connections to China allowing for a strong penetration of the Chinese market and due to the massive population size meant that massive amounts of money could be made overall.

    Said pornography industry and trade quickly lead to the rise of the digital industry as demand for easily attainable porn lead to the further use of porn websites and the growth of the digital infrastructure to support the demand. That same infrastructure was used to massively grow the digital piracy economy which became an major industry across Russia and mostly in Siberia where several worldwide digital piracy and sharing sites would be set up mostly run by the local Chinese community, many who would make their business selling across East Asia and the massive population of China, India, Korea, and Japan.


    The Rise of the Yellow Dragon

    While originally the Yellow Dragon meant the Chinese migrant community across Siberia the name would become associated with the Yellow Dragon Community Management which was born in 1996. The YDCM was mostly made as a way to further the interests of the Chinese immigrant community and allow them to develop in the hopes of clawing their way out of their poverty. From supporting the Novosibirsk International/Hermes International , to their major investment into the local digital infrastructure, to supporting the protecting Chinese workers the YDCM would make major strives in bringing development towards the community and with said development they would move towards their biggest development goal yet. The Yellow Road Initiative would invest massive amount of resources towards the refurbishing and building of the Chinatown's across the nation transforming them from dilapidated ghettos and into theme-park towns/cities based on the stereotypical perception of China/the East.

    While such work might seem strange the plan mostly worked both creating new and better homes but creating a major advertisement platform for the region increasing the tourism in the area and allowing businesses to flourish as food, services and other goods attracted thousands to the Chinatowns. Of course this project came with a few caveats as every building had to comply with the general Chinese/East Asian theme and so did most of the locals clothes to further give the illusion of entering a separate region which helped the YDCM effectively hold a monopoly in textile and clothing industry in the Chinatown's as most people living there had to wear appropriate themed Chinese/East Asian clothing or face harassment or expulsion.

    Overall the Yellow Dragon Community Management would be successful in expanding the locals interests but would also be seen in part as a controlling and monopolizing force as they held a significant amount of influence in the community and could make your life hell if you pissed them off to the point the Triads were largely forced out by them and the YDCM's militia.


    Chinese Immigrant Community and its Relationship with China

    While one may look at the major achievements of the Chinese Russian immigration community and see the major growth of influence of Chinese power in the nation this could would be far from the truth. The reality was that the Chinese Yellow Dragon community did not hold their homeland in high regard and most had a negative opinion finding the freedom and opportunity that Russia provided as better than anything the CCP could provide. Not helping was that the circumstances that they were at made them have few connections with China as a whole as they would mostly see themselves as part of the Yellow Dragon Road culture rather than being part of a greater Chinese community/culture.

    This would only grow stronger as China tried to gain influence with said community with the Novosibirsk Russo-Chinese Heritage Celebration of 2001 quickly becoming a shit show as major protests would occur due to said celebration being largely influenced by the Chinese authorities rather than any real representation from the local community. The event would end after the protests continued and after the major parade was attacked with paint.

    This would just be one of the showings of the divide between China and the Yellow Dragon community as in 2004 migration from China to Russia became incredibly more difficult separating many families from their family in China, major arrests of those dealing with the YDC in China and the major targeting of pornographic and digital piracy belonging to the YDC occurred. All of this plus the growing fear in China by the CCP that saw them as a fifth column targeting China would only widen the gap creating a community that for the most part hated China more than most Russians did.


    Russia and the Yellow Dragon Community

    For the most part the Russian authorities dealing with the growth of the Yellow Dragon community and Chinese immigration was one based on apathy as for most of the 1990s Russia's attention was mostly on Europe and European Russia as a whole. While Russia did move to improve its relationship with China the people in charge largely did not know the greater changes in the area and mostly tried to decrease migration of Chinese into Russia with little success. However the rise of the YDCM a greater amount of attention was giving with many hoping to access the situation in a similar way to how it deal with the Japanese migration.

    The Yellow Dragon Community Report would figure out some of the overall situation leading to an increase in anti-discrimination laws primarily aimed as local law enforcement along with a greater move to open and renovate local schools to deal with the demand and to further the assimilation of the population into Russia, although several Russian language private schools had already appeared as the demand to understand the Russian language was high across the community.

    The increasing divide between the Chinese migration community and China itself has worried them though as their hopes of improving the overall cultural relationship between them had taken a major road block which was not helped by China's increasing targeting of said community.


    Hopefully this is up to par and does not contradict anything.
     
    Chapter Eighteen: The Day the Earth Stood Still (April - 11 September 2001) Part I
  • 65117333_605.jpg

    (By locating headquarters of the New Development Bank in Shangai, the Chinese government wanted to increase its role on world markets)

    After much deliberation and consideration, the Kremlin agreed to a foreign assistance in order to rescue the crew of the sunken submarine. Nevertheless, keeping a top secret military technology from the American hands was still a priority for Moscow. Therefore, the Russian government agreed to a joint rescue action by Navies of the two most pro-Russian governments in Europe – Germany and Italy. Nevertheless, to obtain approval for such plan from Berlin and Rome, Russia in an agreement reached behind closed doors, agreed to pay several billion dollars for Italian-German aid. At the end, the Italo-German rescue mission was successful as all sailors were rescued, which led to a significant improvement in the image of Germany and Italy in Russia, which in the longer term translated into economic and political benefits for Berlin and Rome. On the other hand, the American government was furious at Berlin and Rome and their cooperation with Russia, without consulting with Washington, which led to President Bush denouncing both Italy and Germany of breaking unity in NATO. In the meantime, under the pressure of pro-monarchist marches across the country, the Russian government agreed to issue a formal apology to the Romanov family for all the Soviet crimes committed against their family, though no monetary compensation from the government was made. Additionally, the Russians in a national referendum have decided that the Soviet patriotic song Wide is My Motherland would become a new anthem of the Union State, though with a changed lyric to better fit the current situation in Russia.

    Leaders of Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa after a round of negotiations agreed to meet in Saint Petersburg with a goal of establishing BRICS as an intergovernmental organization focused on serving as an economic forum, enhancing economic and industrial cooperation, as well as a platform for solving diplomatic issues between the members states. Additionally, BRICS leaders agreed to establishment of the New Development Bank, which would support public or private projects in the member states through loans, guarantees, equity participation and other financial instruments. The bank is headquartered in Shanghai, China. The first regional office of the NDB is in Johannesburg, South Africa. The second regional office was established in 2003 in São Paulo, Brazil, followed by GIFT City, India and Moscow, Russia. Moreover, the Russian government decided to pursue stronger economic, industrial, military and cultural relations with India. During President Lukashenko's visit to New Delhi, a number of contracts were signed between both states, including an agreement for building by Russia new 6 nuclear reactors or a student-exchange program. Besides, during his visit, President Lukashenko confirmed Russia's support for India in gaining a seat at United Nations Security Council and Kashmir's belonging to India, which was negatively received in Pakistan and China, though officials in Beijing abstained from voicing their displeasure, fearing that it may cause negative reaction from Moscow.

    A new gun control law was introduced by the government of Elvira Nabiullia, which included the following points:

    1. A 3-day waiting period.
    2. A background check.
    3. Firearm safety training.
    4. Permit required to own/purchase a firearm.
    5. Citizens convicted of felony level crime could not purchase a firearm. Parolees convicted of lesser crimes would be forced by the law to complete their sentence before having purchasing ability restored.
    6. Red flag law.
    7. Citizens may not purchase military grade firearms.
    8. A law should be created detailing proper storage.
    9. No Concealed Carry.
    10. Firearms forbidden in public places.

    Following the increased number of migrants arriving in Russia, the government decided to introduce a reform of the immigration policy to handle the situation better. The new law included the following point:
    • imposing immigration quotas;
    • a priority given to qualified and skilled migrants;
    • a priority given to migrants with countries close culturally, like Yugoslavia, Ukraine and Bulgaria;
    • introduction of background checks;
    • incentivizing immigration to Siberia and the Far East;
    • very limited access to social benefits to newly-arrived migrants;
    • to gain a Russian citizenship, the migrants would have to: EEU/ECU applicants will be eligible to apply for citizenship 5 years after staying in Russia, with all other applicants needing 5 years to gain Permanent Resident status and an additional 5 years before becoming eligible for applying for citizenship;
    • No region in the Union State can have more than 25% of its people being immigrants or 1st generation naturalized citizens.

    z28076343Q,Gerhard-Schroeder.jpg

    (Unwillingly or not, German Chancellor Schröder became an agent of Russian interests in the European Union)

    Finally, President Alexander Lukashenko and FSB Director Vladimir Putin have decided to begin an anti-atom campaign in the West, to force Europe and America into a dependence on import of Russian gas, oil and coal by sponsoring various pro-environmental anti-atom nongovernment groups, like Greenpeace, “Green” political parties, distribution of anti-atom propaganda in the West, influencing the public opinion through mass media, promotion of alternative to nuclear energy sources (which mainly happened to be exported by Moscow Russian gas). Furthermore, the Russian government began offering very generous bribes to Western politicians and other benefits in exchange for their support of the campaign against nuclear power and lobbying for gas imports from Russia. The campaign would result in a success, as during the tenure of Angela Merkel, Germany would decide for the Energiewende (German for 'energy turnaround'), which would be a transition by Germany to a low carbon, environmentally sound, reliable, and affordable energy supply. The new system intends to rely heavily on renewable energy (particularly wind, photovoltaics, and hydroelectricity), energy efficiency, and energy demand management. In theory, it sounded very good, but in practice the German government would fail in the energy transition, which will push Germany into total dependence on Russian gas supplies. Using this dependence, Moscow will force Berlin to act as a representative of Russian interests in the European Union, that is, Germany, using its dominant position in the European Union, will try to combat nuclear energy in other member countries through EU regulations, which will work entirely to Russia's economic and political advantage.

    Soyuz TM-32 was a crewed Soyuz spaceflight which was launched on April 28, 2001, and docked with the International Space Station two days later. It launched the crew of the visiting mission ISS EP-1, which included the first paying space tourist Dennis Tito, as well as two Russian cosmonauts. The Soyuz TM-32 remained docked to the station until October; during this time it served as the lifeboat for the crew of Expedition 2 and later for the crew of Expedition 3. In October, it landed the crew of ISS EP-2, who had been launched by Soyuz TM-33. TM-32 carried a three-man crew (two Russians and one American, the latter not a professional astronaut) to the International Space Station, ISS. It docked automatically with the ISS at 07:57 UT on April 30, 2001, just a few hours after the space shuttle Endeavour on mission STS-100 undocked. The launched crew stayed for a week and returned in Soyuz TM-31, which had been docked to (or nearby) the station since November 2000 functioning as "lifeboat" for the onboard crew (Expedition 1 and 2). As the new lifeboat for Expedition 2 and later Expedition 3, TM-32 stayed docked at the station for six months (except for a brief move between docking ports) and finally, on October 31, brought home two cosmonauts and an ESA astronaut who had arrived a week earlier in Soyuz TM-33.

    Junichiro_Koizumi_20010426.jpg

    (Junichiro Koizumi - a stateman who revived the Japanese economy)

    On 26 April 2001, Junichiro Koizumi was appointed to the postion as Prime Minister of Japan and elected president of the Liberal Democratic Party. Within Japan, Koizumi pushed for new ways to revitalise the moribund economy, aiming to act against bad debts with commercial banks, privatize the postal savings system, and reorganize the factional structure of the LDP. He spoke of the need for a period of painful restructuring in order to improve the future. To design policy initiatives in 2001 he used the new Council on Economic and Fiscal Policy (Keizai Zaisei Seisaku Tanto Daijin) or CEFP. It issued an annual planning document, "Basic Policies for Economic and Fiscal Management and Reform". It planned a major reorganization of the central government, and shaped economic policy in cooperation with key cabinet members. To meet the challenge of economic stagnation CEFP took an integrated approach, a worldwide economic view, and, promoted greater transparency; its philosophy was neoliberal. In the fall of 2002, Koizumi appointed Keio University economist and frequent television commentator Heizō Takenaka as Minister of State for Financial Services and head of the Financial Services Agency (FSA) to fix the country's banking crisis. Bad debts of banks were dramatically cut with the NPL ratio of major banks approaching half the level of 2001. The Japanese economy has been through a slow but steady recovery, and the stock market has dramatically rebounded. The GDP growth for 2004 was one of the highest among G7 nations, according to the International Monetary Fund and Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. Takenaka was appointed as a Postal Reform Minister in 2004 for the privatization of Japan Post, operator of the country's Postal Savings system.

    Koizumi moved the LDP away from its traditional rural agrarian base toward a more urban, neoliberal core, as Japan's population grew in major cities and declined in less populated areas, although under current purely geographical districting, rural votes in Japan are still many times more powerful than urban ones. In addition to the privatization of Japan Post (which many rural residents fear will reduce their access to basic services such as banking), Koizumi also slowed down the LDP's heavy subsidies for infrastructure and industrial development in rural areas. These tensions made Koizumi a controversial but popular figure within his own party and among the Japanese electorate. Considering both his neoliberal policies and his appeal to populist ideas, Koizumi's political ideology has been characterized "as a populist version of neoliberalism (or as a variant of the populist right) rather than neoliberal populism." Although Koizumi's foreign policy was focused on closer relations with the United States and UN-centered diplomacy, which were adopted by all of his predecessors, he went further, supporting the US policies in the War on Terrorism. He decided to deploy the Japan Self-Defense Forces to Iraq, which was the first military mission in active foreign war zones since the end of the World War II. Many Japanese commentators indicated that the favorable US-Japan relation was based on the Koizumi's personal friendship with the US President George W. Bush. White House officials described the first meeting between Koizumi and Bush at Camp David as "incredibly warm", with the two men playing catch with a baseball. Since leaving office, he has defended his decision to send Japanese troops to Iraq. In the North Korean abductions and nuclear development issues, Koizumi took more assertive attitudes than his predecessors. Although Koizumi did not initially campaign on the issue of defense reform, he approved the expansion of the Japan Self-Defense Forces (JSDF) and in October 2001 they were given greater scope to operate outside of the country. Some of these troops were dispatched to Iraq. Koizumi's government also introduced a bill to upgrade the Defense Agency to ministry status; finally, the Defense Agency became the Japanese Ministry of Defense on 9 January 2007.

    Yasukuni.jpg


    Koizumi has often been noted for his controversial visits to the Yasukuni Shrine, starting on 13 August 2001. He visited the shrine six times as prime minister. Because the shrine honors Japan's war dead, which also include many convicted Japanese war criminals and 14 executed Class A war criminals, these visits drew strong condemnation and protests from both Japan's neighbours, mainly China and South Korea, and many Japanese citizens. China and South Korea's people hold bitter memories of Japanese invasion and occupation during the first half of the 20th century. China and South Korea refused to have their representatives meet Koizumi in Japan and their countries. There were no mutual visits between Chinese and Japanese leaders from October 2001, and between South Korean and Japanese leaders from June 2005. The standstill ended when the next prime minister Abe visited China and South Korea in October 2006. In China, the visits led to massive anti-Japanese riots. The president, ruling and opposition parties, and much of the media of South Korea openly condemned Koizumi's pilgrimages. Many Koreans applauded the president's speeches criticizing Japan, despite the South Korean President's low popularity. When asked about the reaction, Koizumi said the speeches were "for the domestic (audience)". Although Koizumi signed the shrine's visitor book as "Junichiro Koizumi, the Prime Minister of Japan", he claimed that his visits were as a private citizen and not an endorsement of any political stance. China and Korea considered this excuse insufficient. Several journals and news reports in Japan, such as one published by Kyodo News Agency on 15 August 2006, questioned Koizumi's statement of private purpose, as he recorded his position on the shrine's guestbook as prime minister. He visited the shrine annually in fulfillment of a campaign pledge. Koizumi's last visit as prime minister was on 15 August 2006, fulfilling a campaign pledge to visit on the anniversary of Japan's surrender in World War II.

    Eleven months after his resignation as prime minister, Koizumi revisited the shrine on 15 August 2007, to mark the 62nd anniversary of Japan's surrender in World War II. His 2007 visit attracted less attention from the media than his prior visits while he was in office. Koizumi was at certain points in his tenure an extremely popular leader. Most people know him very well due to his trademark wavy grey hair. His outspoken nature and colourful past contributed to that; his nicknames included "Lionheart", due to his hair style and fierce spirit, and "Maverick". During his tenure in office, the Japanese public referred to him as Jun-chan (the suffix "chan" in the Japanese language is used as a term of familiarity, typically between children, "Jun" is a contraction of Junichiro). In June 2001, he enjoyed an approval rating of 80 percent. In January 2002, Koizumi fired his popular Foreign Minister Makiko Tanaka, replacing her with Yoriko Kawaguchi. A few days before the sacking of Tanaka, when she was filmed crying after a dispute with government officials, Koizumi generated controversy with his statement "tears are women's ultimate weapons". Following an economic slump and a series of LDP scandals that claimed the career of YKK member Koichi Kato, by April Koizumi's popularity rating had fallen 30 percentage points since his nomination as prime minister. Koizumi was re-elected in 2003 and his popularity surged as the economy recovered. His proposal to cut pension benefits as a move to fiscal reform turned out to be highly unpopular. Two visits to North Korea to solve the issue of abducted Japanese nationals only somewhat raised his popularity, as he could not secure several abductees' returns to Japan. In the House of Councilors elections in 2004, the LDP performed only marginally better than the opposition Democratic Party of Japan (DPJ), winning 32 more seats than the latter obtained.

    In 2005, the House of Councilors rejected the contentious postal privatization bills. Koizumi previously made it clear that he would dissolve the lower house if the bill failed to pass. The Democratic Party, while expressing support for the privatization, made a tactical vote against the bill. Fifty-one LDP members also either voted against the bills or abstained. On 8 August 2005, Koizumi, as promised, dissolved the House of Representatives and called for snap elections. He expelled rebel LDP members for not supporting the bill. The LDP's chances for success were initially uncertain; the secretary general of New Komeito (a junior coalition partner with Koizumi's Liberal Democratic Party) said that his party would entertain forming a coalition government with the Democratic Party of Japan if the DPJ took a majority in the House of Representatives. Koizumi's popularity rose almost twenty points after he dissolved the House and expelled rebel LDP members. Opinion polls ranked the government's approval ratings between 58 and 65 percent. The electorate saw the election in terms of a vote for or against reform of the postal service, which the Democratic Party and rebel LDP members were seen as being against. The September 2005 elections were the LDP's largest victory since 1986, giving the party a large majority in the House of Representatives and nullifying opposing voices in the House of Councilors. In the following Diet session, the last to be held under Koizumi's government, the LDP passed 82 of its 91 proposed bills, including postal privatization. A number of Koizumi-supported candidates known as "Koizumi Children" joined the Diet in this election and supported successive LDP governments until the 2009 elections, when most were defeated.


    main-qimg-c00533ef321e6fc83c848192fbab942e-lq.jpg

    (The Agra Summit - a lost chance for lasting peace between India and Pakistan)

    The Agra summit was a historic two-day summit meeting between India and Pakistan which lasted from 14–16 July 2001. It was organized with the aim of resolving long-standing issues between India and Pakistan. At this meeting, a proposal was made to drastically reduce nuclear arsenals, and other issues involving the Kashmir dispute, and cross-border terrorism. However, the negotiations broke down and the process was collapsed so the Agra treaty was never signed. Earlier in 1999, during Indian PM Atal Bihari Vajpayee's visit to Pakistan, both countries had acceded and successfully ratified the Lahore Declaration and pledged to make joint efforts for peace and stability in South Asia. The Kargil war was a major blow to the Lahore treaty and it stalled the treaty as the relations between two countries suffered a serious setback. General Musharraf is widely believed to be a strategic mastermind and brain behind the Kargil war. On 11 March 2001, the UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan called upon both India and Pakistan to retain the spirit of the Lahore Declaration, saying that it would require restraint, wisdom, and constructive steps from both sides. Finally, the framework for negotiations of the Agra treaty began with talks in New Delhi between President Pervez Musharraf and Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee in July 2001.

    After much diplomatic efforts, the Agra summit started amid high hopes of resolving various disputes between the two countries including the five decades old Kashmir issue. Both sides started the summit with hopefulness and in a spirit of good will; especially President Musharraf who used the phrases "cautious optimism", "flexibility" and "open mind" to describe his views for the summit. The Indian President, K. R. Narayanan, also promised to take "bold and innovative" measures and to discuss the "core issue" between the two countries. Various rounds of one-to-one talks were held between President Musharraf and Prime Minister Vajpayee. On the first day, a 90-minute one-on-one session was held and the two leaders discussed the Kashmir issue, cross-border terrorism, nuclear risk reduction, release of prisoners of war, and commercial ties. There were high hopes in Pakistan that both the leaders would arrive at an agreement and a joint statement or declaration would be made at the end of the summit as the two leaders plunged into serious talks. Despite reservations from the Indian Government, President Musharraf also held face-to-face meetings with the top Kashmiri leadership represented by the All Parties Hurriyat Conference. The most important agenda of Prime Minister, Atal Bihari Vajpayee, in the Indo-Pak summit was to stress upon the economic betterment of the people of Kashmir, for which he invited a dialogue with the All Parties Hurriyat Conference.

    Quote:
    "Pakistan has been seeking a solution to J&K in accordance with the wishes of the "Kashmiri people". I am certain that the primary wish of every single Kashmiri, whether from the Kashmir valley or Jammu, Ladakh, Pakistan occupied Kashmir, the Northern areas or the Shaksgam Valley, is to live in peace, security and freedom, so that he can make economic progress. We should constantly strive to provide him with this fundamental right. Most of the Kashmiris have their elected representatives, through whom they express their legitimate aspirations. We are also willing to listen to all other streams of Kashmiri opinion, however small the minority they represent, as long as they abjure violence. It is in this spirit that we had offered to talk to the representatives of the All Parties’ Hurriyat Conference."

    The talks and peace process, however, collapsed and no signatures were attained for the Agra treaty. The talks faced a number of obstacles.According to the Indian scholar, Gaurav Kampani, there were three major reasons for the Indian government's reluctance in accepting Pakistan's assurances at face value. First, the Vajpayee government did not trust President Pervez Musharraf and the establishment that he represents in Delhi. In India alone, it was widely felt that it was Musharraf who sabotaged joint peace efforts of Pakistan Prime minister Navaz Sharif and Indian Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee at the Lahore Summit in 1999. Second, India was not satisfied with Pakistan's pledge to halt cross-border infiltrations; thirdly the Indian government had plans for holding regional elections in Indian Kashmir in October 2002. Similarly, Indian leadership considered Musharraf's refusal to give up support to the cross-border insurgency in Kashmir as the reason behind the failure of the Agra Summit in June 2001. Despite the failure of the talks, General Pervez Musharraf joined Vajpayee to call on the two countries to bury their past. He also invited the Indian Prime Minister to visit Pakistan as he felt that the issues between Pakistan and India were much more complicated and could not be resolved in a short time. Following the August 2001 Agra summit, India reiterated the necessity of implementing the Simla Agreement and the Lahore Declaration. It said that India would support the Simla Agreement, the Lahore Declaration, and the issue of cross-border terrorism. On 6 July 2015, A. S. Dulat, former chief of the Research and Analysis Wing, India's external intelligence agency, revealed that L.K. Advani played a role in the collapse of the Agra Summit.


    gettyimages-115223830-612x612.jpg


    The 27th G8 summit was held in Genoa, Italy, on 20–22 July 2001 and is remembered as a highpoint of the worldwide anti-globalization movement as well as for human rights violations against demonstrators. The Group of Seven (G7) was an unofficial forum which brought together the heads of the richest industrialized countries: France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom, the United States, and Canada starting in 1976. The G8, meeting for the first time in 1995, was formed with the addition of Russia. In addition, the President of the European Commission has been formally included in summits since 1981. The summits were not meant to be linked formally with wider international institutions; and in fact, a mild rebellion against the stiff formality of other international meetings was a part of the genesis of cooperation between France's president Valéry Giscard d'Estaing and West Germany's chancellor Helmut Schmidt as they conceived the initial summit of the Group of Six (G6) in 1975. The G8 summits during the 21st-century have inspired widespread debates, protests and demonstrations; and the two-or three-day event becomes more than the sum of its parts, elevating the participants, the issues, and the venue as focal points for activist pressure. The 27th G8 summit was the first summit for Japanese Prime Minister Junichirō Koizumi and US President George W. Bush.

    The summit was intended as a venue for resolving differences among its members. As a practical matter, the summit was also conceived as an opportunity for its members to give each other mutual encouragement in the face of difficult economic decisions. The overall theme of the summit was ways to reduce poverty. Topics discussed at the meeting included an evaluation of the Enhanced HIPC Initiative which involved debt forgiveness to Heavily Indebted Poor Countries, the Global Health Fund, the global digital divide, the environment, and food security. Although the main summit was from July 20 to the 22nd, the summit was preceded by a meeting of the G8 foreign ministers on the 18th and 19th. The summit was overshadowed by riots in the city after a crackdown by police targeting anti-globalisation groups and the death of 23-year-old Carlo Giuliani, leading some to talk of a deliberately followed strategy of tension. Before the summit, significant controversies and ridicule among local people and media focused on the security plans (such as fences going through streets and inside houses) and image provisions (such as the prohibition to dry up the laundry). The Genoa G8 Summit protest, from July 18 to July 22, 2001, was a dramatic protest, drawing an estimated 200,000 demonstrators. Dozens were hospitalized following clashes with police and night raids by security forces on two schools housing activists and independent journalists. People taken into custody after the raids have alleged severe abuse at the hands of police. Demonstrators accused the police of brutality and denying them their right to non-violent protest. They believe that G8 summits are non-legitimate attempts by eight of the world's most powerful governments to set the rules for the planet at large. Police and many politicians argued that attempting to blockade a meeting is in itself a violent event and an attempt to impede the workings of democratically elected governments.

    The G8 meeting was held inside a "Red Zone" in the center of town that had been declared off-limits for non-residents and surrounded by a barricade, leaving protesters no chance to communicate with summit delegates. Fears of a terrorist attack at the time had also led to an air exclusion zone around the city, as well as the stationing of anti-aircraft missiles. Only one activist, Valérie Vie, secretary of a French branch of ATTAC, managed to publicly breach the Red Zone barrier, but was immediately arrested by police agents. There were also several border riots ahead of the summit, as police attempted to prevent suspected activists from entering Italy. The Italian government suspended freedom of movement entitled by the Schengen Treaty for the duration of the G8 summit, in order to monitor the movement of the many protesters arriving from across the European Union. Many demonstrators were injured and dozens more arrested over the course of the event. Most of those 329 arrested were charged with criminal conspiracy to commit destruction; but they were in most part released shortly thereafter because judges declared the charges invalid. Police continued to raid social centers, media centers, union buildings and legal offices across Italy after the summit as part of ongoing investigations. Over 400 protesters and about 100 among security forces were injured during the clashes. On July 20, a 23-year-old activist Carlo Giuliani of Genoa, was shot dead by Mario Placanica, a Carabiniere, during clashes with police. Images show Giuliani picking up a fire extinguisher from the ground and approaching the carabinieri's vehicle with it before he was shot and then run over twice by the Land Rover. Placanica was acquitted from any wrongdoing, as judges determined he fired in self-defence and to the sky but a flying stone deflected the bullet and killed Giuliani. The idea that the stone killed Giuliani has been however questioned on the basis of a security video and the stone being covered in blood while the balaclava through which it should have wounded Giuliani was intact. Videos and photos show that the stone was dipped in blood and placed beside Giuliani's head minutes after his death suggesting an attempt to conceal the police responsibility. Later tribunals including the European Court of Human Rights confirmed that Giuliani was killed directly by the bullet. Activist Susanne Bendotti was struck by a vehicle and killed while attempting to cross the French-Italian border at Ventimiglia to get to the Genoa demonstration.


    publika.ge-russian-troops-ossetia1-1024x655-1.jpg
    \
    (Russian troops entering Macedonia)

    In the meantime, the changing political landscape in the Eastern and Southern Europe caught the attention of the United States and the Union State. Firstly, after a near decade of political union with Romania, Moldova regained its independence, as a result of a referendum. The reason for the Moldovan' deep discontent was political and economic marginalization on the part of Bucharest, and the Romanian government's inconsistent economic policy toward Moldova. After independence, however, Moldova remained a member of the European Union and NATO. Nevertheless, the attention of the world was focused on the situation surrounding Macedonia, as the United States and Russia were locked in a diplomatic crisis over which side would be responsible for quelling the ongoing Albanian insurgency in Macedonia. On the one hand, the Macedonian President requested NATO support in dealing with insurgents, and as a result NATO troops arrived in Macedonia from Albania and Greece. At the same time, the Macedonian government, ignoring the president's decision, made a similar request to Moscow, which also met with the approval of the Russian government. The Russian government, being aware of NATO's entry into Macedonia, quickly deployed troops to Macedonia, which were stationed in Bulgaria and Yugoslavia. Confusion at the top of the Macedonian government led to a diplomatic crisis, as NATO and Russian forces claimed to be in Macedonia legally and the other side did not. The whole situation was not helped by the fact that Macedonia was virtually occupied by NATO and Russian troops and divided - NATO controlled the west and south of the country, while Russia occupied the north and east of Macedonia. Both President Bush and President Lukashenko, in international forums, accused the opposing side of illegal actions and imperialism. On the one hand, President Bush accused Russia of colonialism, while President Lukashenko claimed that the current situation was evidence of American imperialism, and President Bush himself, in his view, was acting like a cowboy.


    UN7533928.jpg


    The 2001 World Conference against Racism (WCAR), also known as Durban I, was held at the Durban International Convention Centre in Durban, South Africa, under UN auspices, from 31 August to 8 September 2001. The conference covered several controversial issues, including redress for transatlantic slavery and the second-class citizenry issue in Palestine-Israel.The language of the final Declaration and Programme of Action produced by the conference was strongly disputed in these areas, both in the preparatory meetings in the months that preceded the conference and during the conference itself. Two delegations, the United States and Israel, withdrew from the conference over objections to a draft document equating Zionism with racism. The final Declaration and Programme of Action did not contain the text that the U.S. and Israel had objected to, that text having been voted out by delegates in the days after the U.S. and Israel withdrew. In parallel to the conference, a separately held NGO Forum also produced a Declaration and Programme of its own, that was not an official Conference document, which contained language relating to Israel that the WCAR had voted to exclude from its Declaration, and which was criticized by then United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Mary Robinson and many others. The NGO Forum ended in discord. Mary Robinson lost the support of the United States in her office of High Commissioner, and many of the potential political aftereffects of the conference were annulled by the September 11, 2001 attacks. The attacks took place just three days after the conference ended, entirely eclipsing it in the news, and significantly affecting international relations and politics. The conference was followed by the 2009 Durban II conference in Geneva, which was boycotted by ten Western countries. A commemorative Durban III conference in September 2011 in New York has also drawn significant criticism and was boycotted by 14 Western countries. During preparatory meetings in Geneva, text that linked Zionism to racism was placed in brackets, with the expectation that it would be replaced by text that referred to violations of the rights of Palestinians. The U.S. had already threatened to boycott the conference should the conference draft documents include text that could be in any way interpreted as linking Zionism to racism. Mary Robinson had also said that regional political conflicts should not be imposed upon the agenda of the conference. The Australian, the Canadian, and some European delegations shared the U.S. view. The Arab position was stated by the Secretary-General of the Arab League, Amr Moussa: "Israel's racist actions against the Palestinian people have to be dealt with in an international conference that aims to eradicate racism. Arab countries are not expecting the Durban conference to be a venue for dealing with the Arab- Israeli peace process, but they certainly expect that the Israeli racist practices against the Palestinian people will not be overlooked." The Arab delegates were not insistent upon language that specifically equated Zionism with racism. It had been suggested that they were trying to revive United Nations General Assembly Resolution 3379 (issued 1975, annulled 1991) which stated that "Zionism is a form of racism.". Their position was that they were, rather, trying to underline that the actions being committed by Israel against Palestinians were racist. This stance was in part influenced by the U.S. threat of boycott, which would have made it impractical to insist upon harsh language condemning Israel or equating the suffering of the Palestinians with that of Holocaust victims. According to one Arab diplomat, no Arab state except for Syria had insisted upon any language linking Israel to racist practices.

    At the start of the Geneva meeting, the text had been presented that comprised six bracketed paragraphs dealing with "Zionist racist practices", including an appeal for Israel "to revise its legislation based on racial or religious discrimination such as the law of return and all the policies of an occupying power which prevent the Palestinian refugees and displaced persons from returning to their homes and properties", and a suggestion for the need "to bring the foreign occupation of Jerusalem by Israel together with all its racist practices to an end". By the end of the meeting, all of this text had either been removed or toned down. One such phrase removed was a mention of "holocausts" suffered by other peoples, which had been seen as an affront to the memory of the Jewish victims of the Nazi holocaust. South African diplomats had already told Arab and Muslim countries that they would have to offer text that could describe the current situation without using such language as "ethnic cleansing practices against Palestinians". Nonetheless, the United States, objecting to the remaining text, decided to send a low-level delegation, headed by Ambassador Michael Southwick, to the Conference, rather than have United States Secretary of State Colin Powell attend himself. German officials criticized this decision, and the United States Congressional Black Caucus urged him to attend. The Anti-Defamation League urged him to stay away. On 3 September 2001, after four days of deadlocked negotiations that did not reach agreement on language, the United States and Israeli delegations withdrew from the conference. Both United States Secretary of State Colin Powell and Foreign Affairs Minister of Israel Shimon Peres stated that this was done with regret. The low-level U.S. delegation had kept a low profile throughout conference proceedings until that point, with delegates working quietly in sub-committee meetings, without (unlike in earlier conferences) giving news briefings or off the record statements to journalists, to change the text of the draft declaration, to make it less forceful and less specific against Israel, and to bring it into line with U.S. foreign policy goals with respect to the International Criminal Court (see United States and the International Criminal Court) by removing language that strengthened the ICC. The draft documents had stated "deep concern" at the "increase of racist practices of Zionism and anti-Semitism" and talked of the emergence of "movements based on racism and discriminatory ideas, in particular the Zionist movement, which is based on racial superiority". Alternative proposals, which the U.S. had supported, from Norway, acting as a mediator, and Canada were rejected by Israel.

    Despite Colin Powell's denunciation of the "hateful language" that "singles out only one country in the world, Israel, for censure and abuse" in the draft text and U.S. delegate Tom Lantos's statement that the conference had been "wrecked by Arab and Islamic extremists", some saw the U.S. delegation's withdrawal as not being entirely related to the language on Israel, but attributed it also, in part, to a reluctance on the part of the U.S. to address the issue of slavery. The withdrawal of the U.S. and Israel was taken as a warning by many delegates that there was a strong possibility of Canada and the E.U. states withdrawing as well if no compromise was reached. Several reports had the Europeans staying on solely in order to help South Africa salvage the Conference. After the withdrawal, senior conference officials became highly involved in the rewriting of the Declaration — something that critics maintained they should have also been doing before that point. In the end, the Conference delegates voted to reject the language that implicitly accused Israel of racism, and the document actually published contained no such language. Several countries were unhappy with the final text's approach to the subject, but all for different reasons. Syria and Iran were unhappy because their demands for the language about racism and Israel had been rejected by the Conference, the latter continuing its insistence that Israel was a racist state. Australia was unhappy with the process, observing that "far too much of the time at the conference [had been] consumed by bitter divisive exchanges on issues which have done nothing to advance the cause of combating racism". Canada was also unhappy. The language of the final text was carefully drafted for balance. The word "diaspora" is used four times, and solely to refer to the African Diaspora. The document is at pains to maintain a cohesive identity for everyone of African heritage as a victim of slavery, even including those who may have more European than African ancestors. The "victim" or "victims" of racism and slavery (the two words occurring 90 times in the document) are defined in only the most general geographic terms. The word "Jewish" is only used once, alongside "Muslim" and "Arab", and "anti-Semitism" is only used twice, once alongside its assumed counterpart of "Islamophobia" and once alongside "anti-Arabism". The difficulty that this generates is that it is politically impossible to act when the 219 calls for action in the Programme are couched in such generalities that only the "countless human beings" that the document explicitly talks of can be identified.
     
    Last edited:
    Top