Will America Accept Its Defeat in Syria? Challenge Russia and China?

Russia introduced China to Syria during the war when the Chinese navy arrived in the Mediterranean and reached the shores of Tartous and Lattakia to send a message to America and its allies that the monolithic dominance of the world was over.

There are thousands of Chinese jihadists who fought with ISIS and al-Qaeda and Beijing was concerned, willing to see all these killed in Syria. Cooperation between the Chinese and the Syrian intelligence services was established. Damascus has a unique and a very rich bank of information about foreign fighters many countries in the world would like to have access to, since over 80 nationalities of foreign fighters were allowed into Syria in a failed attempt to topple the regime and establish an Islamic State.

But Washington is still trying to protect its position, refusing to give up on the crown of world domination it has enjoyed for over a decade and it is ready to fight against the “axis opposing the US” using other means outside Syria. The US establishment and its allies are expelling Russian diplomats and imposing sanctions on China and Iran. The US defeat in Syria is obviously very painful.

What Washington is pretending to ignore is that the world no longer believes in the US’s military muscles and that there are two potential countries, less arrogant and willing to create alliances rather than bullying weaker countries: Russia and China. These are gathering more allies against the US axis.

The US is still living in the era of 1991 when the Soviet Union collapsed. Its strong decline continued until the arrival of President Vladimir Putin to power in 2000. Washington realised there is a new person at the Kremlin in the castle of the Tsars with a determined intention to restore the lost glory. Russia had only nuclear weapons at that time and nothing else but the will was strong for the Russian bear to wakeup from its hibernation.

Putin did not declare war on America but extended his hand and tried to build friendship or at least not enmity. But Washington saw in Moscow the potentiality to recover in a couple of decades and worked on slowing down the process or interrupting it if possible. This is why the US started to pull to its side many countries of the ex-Soviet Union which have declared independence and include these in NATO and in the European Union surrounding Russia.

China, which includes cheap labor and can clone any commercial or military technology, like Russia has perceived America’s fear of its rapid economic development and wealth. Thus, the Chinese-Russian rapprochement was mainly created by the aggressive US policy towards the two countries, and this mainly because the American concentrate exclusively on military muscle when dealing with the World.

Washington has focused its naval control over the South China Sea and the Straits of Malacca, bringing back memories of its military presence during the Second World War with the attempt to tighten its pressure on Beijing. The US is aware of their naval superiority and know that China needs the sea for its commerce and for its supply of energy.

China started to protect itself by setting up the Eurasian political and economic Shanghai Cooperation Organisation in June 2001 with the goal also to focus on economic initiatives, increase military and counter terrorism cooperation with intelligence sharing. This Cooperation includes about half of the World’s total population and the states (including five nuclear states) of China, Russia, Kazakhstan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, Mongolia, Iran, India and Pakistan – and rejected Washington’s and Tokyo’s request to be observers only.

China has gone to the countries affected by US policy to establish a rapprochement. Further, it established the “string of Pearls” of states and islands for marine protection and encircled India, Japan and other American allies. The Indian Ocean sees the passage of 60% of the trade in oil from the Middle East, making the Straits of Malacca indispensable for China to protect. Therefore Beijing established relationships with Malaysia, Singapore, Myanmar, Coco islands, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Pakistan, and a presence in the African coast in Sudan and Kenya.

Moreover, China revived the world’s oldest overland trade route of the Han Dynasty called “the Silk Road”. The modern Chinese Silk Road will provided a link to Beijing with the world for trade expected worth one trillion dollars (for 900 separate projects). The Silk Road reaches 11 cities in Europe and others in Africa by railway and pipeline and is expected to bring together seven Asian countries under the slogan “One Belt, One Way”. It will offer gas and trade to China and will cover 70% of the planet’s population.

China is also part of the BRICS Group, which was established in 2009 and includes Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa, which account for about 40 percent of world production.

And last but not least, in 2013, China presented the Asian World Bank (AIIB) that was set up to strike America at the core and bring together 57 countries – including several European states – but excluding the United States and Japan, its staunch ally.

The Asian International Bank – with $100 billion – aims to get rid of American financial control over the world’s economy. Washington considered this move as provocative, aiming at finding alternatives to its control of the world’s economy and financial that the United States has controlled for decades without any rival.

With its superficial but continuous sanctions, Washington believes it is capable of preventing the Eurasia Union (which begins from the Atlantic Ocean to the Indian Ocean, including six large states containing 3/4 of the world’s energy), to trouble Russia and to bother China.

Moreover, the US was thinking of creating a “Middle Eastern NATO” to counter the “Shiite crescent” and the “Iranian threat”. This idea was destroyed following the Saudi Arabia disastrous war on Yemen  and because Middle Eastern countries are unable to unite politically, economically or militarily.

While the US is fighting and losing in Syria, most countries that rejected American hegemony are gathering together in one way or another. There is cooperation between these countries – as we saw above –  to get rid of Washington’s dominance, arrogance and destructive foreign policy.

The US believes in changing regimes and directly – or through proxies – to occupy or control countries and impose a heavy protection fee to avoid toppling Middle Eastern monarchies (like Saudi Arabia as Donald Trump said himself). The US establishment is also manipulating youth and exploiting it under the title “Freedom activists” to guide them towards failing states, allowing extremists (Libya and both Syria and Iraq) to just get away with it).

America is deploying missiles everywhere where its military bases are deployed all over the world and has never thought of using its energy and power to support the economy and peace. It is only focused  on controlling states and the sources of energy regardless of the consequences, because there is no accountability for its doing.

Failure is everywhere: Washington’s plan failed- as General Wesley Clark, retired 4-star U.S. Army general, Supreme Allied Commander of NATO during the 1999 War on Yugoslavia said – to occupy seven countries (Iran, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia and Sudan), and its failure in Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria because it underestimated the reaction to its foreign policy.

However, it has largely succeeded in planting hate among the Muslim population, turning the objective of al-Qaeda (its goal to target the far enemy, i.e. the US) and replaced it with ISIS (the goal is to target the near enemy, i.e. minorities and other Muslims), reviving an animosity between Muslims that is 1400 years old. Today the majority of the western population believes the war in the Middle East is “between Muslims. Let them kill each other…who cares?”.

While the United States is selling for $110 billions weapons to Saudi Arabia to kill more Yemenis and threaten its neighbours (Qatar, Syria and Iran),  Russia has signed 10 year contracts with China worth 600 billion dollars, and with Iran worth 400 billion dollars. Also, China has signed contracts with Iran worth 400 billion dollars. These contracts are aimed at economic cooperation, energy exchange; they promise an advanced economic future for these countries away from US dominance.

The US believes it can corner Russia, China and Iran: Russia has a 7,000 kilometre border with China, Iran is not Iraq and Syria is not Afghanistan. In Syria, the destiny of a world to be ruled by unilateralism is over. The world is heading toward pluralism.

The question remains: Is Washington prepared to accept its defeat and acknowledge that it has lost control of the world and pull out of Syria?

Elijah J. Magnier is a Senior Political Risk Analyst with over 32 years’ experience covering Europe & the Middle East. Acquiring in-depth experience, robust contacts and political knowledge in Iran, Iraq, Lebanon, Libya, Sudan and Syria. Specialized in political assessments, strategic planning and thorough insight in political networks.

Proof read by: Maurice Brasher

The original source of this article is EJMagnier

Copyright © Elijah J. Magnier, EJMagnier, 2018

From Global Research

Reuters report on agreement on security issues in Baghdad between Russia, Iran, Syria .

Iraq has said its military officials are engaged in intelligence and security cooperation in Baghdad with Russia, Iran and Syria to counter the threat from the Islamic State (IS) militant group, a pact that could raise concerns in Washington.

A statement from the Iraqi military’s joint operations command on Saturday said the cooperation had come “with increased Russian concern about the presence of thousands of terrorists from Russia undertaking criminal acts with Daesh [IS].”

Giving more sway to Russia

The move could give Moscow more sway in the Middle-East. It has stepped up its military involvement in Syria in recent weeks while pressing for Damascus to be included in international efforts to fight the IS, a demand Washington rejects.

Russia’s engagement in Iraq could mean increased competition for Washington from a Cold War rival as long-time enemy Iran increases its influence through Shi’ite militia allies just four years after the withdrawal of U.S. troops.

Coordination centre

Russian news agency Interfax quoted a military diplomatic source in Moscow as saying the Baghdad coordination centre would be led on a rotating basis by officers of the four countries, starting with Iraq.

The source added that a committee might be created in Baghdad to plan military operations and control armed forces units in the fight against the IS. The Russian Defence Ministry declined comment.

By raising the stakes in Syria’s four-year-old civil war, Moscow has prompted Washington to expand diplomatic channels with it.

Kerry to launch new effort

Western officials have said U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry wants to launch a new effort at the U.N. General Assembly this week to try and find a political solution to the Syrian conflict.

Diplomacy has taken on a new urgency in the light of Russia’s military build-up in support of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and a refugee crisis that has spilled into Europe.

Obama asked to be more decisive

Critics have urged U.S. President Barack Obama to be more decisive in the Middle-East, particularly towards the Syrian conflict, and say lack of a clear American policy has given the IS opportunities to expand.

A Russian Foreign Ministry official told Interfax on Friday that Moscow could “theoretically” join the U.S.-led coalition against the IS if Damascus were included in international efforts to combat the dreaded outfit and any international military operation in Syria had a United Nations mandate.

Iraq denies reports

Iraqi officials on Friday had denied reports of a coordination cell in Baghdad set up by Russian, Syrian and Iranian military commanders aimed at working with Iranian-backed Shi’ite militias in Iraq.

The armed groups, some of which have fought alongside troops loyal to Mr. Assad, are seen as a critical weapon in Baghdad’s battle against the radical Sunni militants of the IS.

Iraqi Foreign Minister Ibrahim al-Jaafari said in New York on Friday that his country had not received any Russian military advisers to help its forces but called for the U.S.-led coalition to bomb more IS targets in Iraq.

Collapse of Iraq army

Despite more than $20 billion in U.S. aid and training, Iraq’s army has nearly collapsed twice in the last year in the face of advances by the IS, which controls large swathes of territory in the north and west of the OPEC oil producer.

US Worried about Russian missile Defense System

 

The Washington Free Beacon reports that “Russia’s military has completed work on a new missile defense radar in southern Russia that has some U.S. military officials worried Moscow is building up offensive and defensive strategic forces in destabilizing combination.”
“The large radar station near Armavir, located near the Black Sea and designed to detect missiles launched from Europe and Iran, is nearly complete, said U.S. officials.”
“The radar deployment comes as Russia is seeking legal restrictions on U.S. and NATO missile defenses in Europe that are designed to protect the continent and the United States from long-range Iranian missiles.”
The paper also reports that “U.S. officials said Russia’s military restricted publication of photographs of the controversial Yars-M missile… However, one photo of the new missile’s prohibited view was published last year.”
Topic A

Send arms to Ukraine - House passes resolution to urging Obama

The House of Representatives has overwhelmingly approved a resolution urging President Barack Obama to send lethal weapons to Ukraine to protect its sovereignty in its fight against Russian-backed rebels.

The resolution was approved on Monday 348 to 48.

There is bipartisan support in Congress to provide the arms to Ukrainian forces battling the rebels. Russian President Vladimir Putin denies arming rebels in the war in eastern Ukraine, which began in April after Moscow annexed the Crimean Peninsula.

U.S. State Department officials said Obama administration officials are discussing lethal assistance to Ukraine but are waiting to see whether the agreements that led to February’s ceasefire are implemented. 

AP

Ukrainian air force fired over 150 missiles at Lugansk, bombed admin HQ- onfirmed report from Russia Today

Kiev has admitted showering the eastern Ukrainian city of Lugansk with dozens of missiles from the air, saying that its Air Force helicopters and jets “fired more than 150 missiles” in Monday’s military action.
DEATH TOLL: 181 people killed, 293 injured in Kiev military op
The Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) also confirmed on Tuesday that the deadly explosion at the city’s administrative building was indeed an airstrike. Kiev has so far denied the responsibility for the incident, saying its forces “do not target” civilian areas.

The OSCE Ukrainian mission’s daily report stated that “on June 2, around 15:00 local time missiles hit the building of the regional government administration. According to the observers’ data, the strike was carried out with non-guided missiles launched from an aircraft.”
According to an earlier statement by the Ukrainian Defense Ministry, the intense bombing in Lugansk area was meant to “support the Ukrainian Border Guards,” which the local militia have been trying to take under control.

“All in all, for fulfilling the combat support of the Ukrainian border guards the army aviators fired more than 150 missiles, carried out three jet sorties and five helicopter sorties,” the statement says.

The air support was backed by fighter jets launching decoy flares to prevent the attacking aircraft from being targeted from the ground.

According to the ministry, two self-defense checkpoints were destroyed in the attack.

Not all the Monday fighting was on the outskirts of Lugansk, apparently, as one Ukrainian missile hit the occupied Lugansk administration building, killing at least eight civilians inside and nearby. Some Kiev politicians have laid the blame on the self-defense forces for the “blast,” which has undoubtedly been confirmed as an airstrike by the accounts of witnesses and the CCTV footage from the scene.

Curtsy- Russia Today

Russia can’t support Ukrainian economy forever-----Putin

Russia can’t continue to prop up Ukraine’s faltering economy, and this responsibility should fall on the US and EU, which have recognized the authorities in Kiev but not yet given one dollar to support the economy, President Putin has said.
“The situation is - to put it kindly, strange. It’s known our partners in Europe have recognized the legitimacy of the government in Kiev, yet have done nothing to support Ukraine – not even one dollar or one euro,” Putin said at a meeting with government officials at his residence outside of Moscow.
“The Russian Federation doesn’t recognize the legitimacy of the authorities in Kiev, but it keeps providing economic support and subsidizing the economy of Ukraine with hundreds of millions and billions of dollars. This situation can’t last indefinitely,” Putin said.
In December, Russia provided Ukraine with a $3 billion loan, which was a part of a bigger $15 billion aid package agreed the same month. Russia also offered a 33 percent gas price discount that would have saved more than $7.5 billion.
The head of the International Monetary Fund Christine Lagarde said that Russia’s loan tranche last year was vital for the collapsing Ukraine economy.
In the meantime, the West hasn’t yet effectively provided any money to Ukraine. The International Monetary Fund has agreed to provide Ukraine a bailout package of up to $18 billion, but the details are still being worked out. The US has also promised $1 billion in loan guarantees to help the collapsing Ukraine economy.

Gassing over gas

At the same meeting, Russia’s Ministry of Energy Alexander Novak said that Ukraine’s debt to state monopoly Gazprom stands at $2.238 billion.
Ukraine has not paid for Russian gas since the beginning of 2013, and with all discounts withdrawn it is now charged $485 per 1,000 cubic meters of gas.
This is a price Ukraine says it will not pay, claiming it is much higher than most of the rest of Europe pays for Russian gas.
President Putin also asked Gazprom to refrain from asking advance payments from Ukraine, until further consultations are held.
“This certainly complies with the contract, but given the difficult situation in Ukraine and the incompleteness of our negotiations with the EU, I would ask the Government to hold off on such measures [advance payments - RT] that appear in the contract until additional consultations, if, of course, our partners agree to such consultations.”
“If they don’t agree, we’ll act according to the existing contract,” Putin added.
Ukraine’s reserves of natural gas have dwindled to 6.5 billion cubic meters which is not enough for the coming winter, Gazprom’s Deputy Chairman Vitaly Markelov said at the meeting.
Kiev will need 11.5 billion cubic meters to keep the lights on, Markelov added.
Ukraine’s overall debt to Russia, including the bill for gas, now stands at $16.6 billion Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev said.
"Three billion dollars is Ukraine's debt, the accumulated gas debt stands at $2.2 billion, and what we consider Russia's profit shortfall, at $11.4 billion, in total, $16.6 billion."
Moscow turned off gas transit through Ukraine to Europe in the winter of 2006 and 2009 after Kiev failed to pay its Gazprom bill, leaving parts of Europe without energy during the winter months. Moscow has accused Ukraine of siphoning off supplies intended for Europe during these periods, an accusation Kiev refutes.

Communist candidate tops mayoral poll in Siberia’s biggest city

A Communist Party candidate has won the mayoral elections in the ‘Siberian capital’, Novosibirsk, leaving behind the United Russia candidate in what could be seen as a joint achievement by opposition forces.
Anatoly Lokot has won with about 43.75 percent of votes, the Novosibirsk regional elections commission reported on Monday morning. This is not the official result yet, but the preliminary figure was received after counting over 99 percent of ballots and any drastic deviations are unlikely.
Lokot’s result was about 4 percent higher than the one of Vladimir Znatkov - interim mayor representing parliamentary majority party United Russia. The support of the rest of 11 candidates was negligible – none of them managed to get 4 percent of the vote.
The mayoral poll was closely watched by the mass media because Novosibirsk is Russia’s third-largest city, the administrative and industrial center of Siberia, as well as a major science and technology hub.
The result was largely unexpected, as until recently United Russia party had dominated the political scene, capitalizing on the centrist conservative course which appeals to ordinary Russians, and taking credit for strong social programs and independent foreign policy that are both trademarks of President Vladimir Putin’s course.

United Russia candidate Vladimir Znatkov had the additional advantages of being acting mayor since January this year and before that heading the economic bloc in the city administration for several years. At the same time he faced serious problems during the race – in March a city court ordered he be removed from the ballot over abuse of power. Competitors had complained that Znatkov used every appearance on TV as propaganda and as the city head he spent more time on screen than the rest of the contenders. Very soon this decision was overturned by the regional court, but the damage to Znatkov’s reputation remained.
However, the main reason behind the interim mayor’s defeat is the coordinated efforts of opposition forces – a relatively rare occasion in modern Russia. The initial number of registered candidates in the Novosibirsk poll was 17. In the middle of the race, five people, including leftist lower house MP Ilya Ponomaryov and former senator Ivan Starikov, made a pact and withdrew their candidacies in favor of just one representative of the opposition - member of the Communist Party’s Central Committee and former State Duma MP Anatoly Lokot.
One more candidate quit without supporting anyone, bringing the number of candidates to 11.
On Monday morning Lokot gave a press conference as mayor-elect and thanked all Novosibirsk residents for their “credit of trust,” adding that he did not intend to waste it. The first initiative of the Communist politician was to hold a major ‘Subbotnik’ – a day of voluntary community service that was first introduced in the early days of the Soviet Union.
The mayor-elect also dismissed media allegations of the looming “red terror” – major purges in the administration stating that he planned to use civil servants’ professionalism as the only criteria in forming the new team. Lokot promised to use his old connections in the federal power bodies to get more federal funds for development of the Novosibirsk communal sector and transport, including the Metro.
The newly-minted mayor also unveiled a plan to boost the cooperation between the administration and the society by adding openness to the various state bodies. The first step in this will be free entrance to City Hall for everyone.
“We should remove all curbs. What is there to be afraid of? Protest actions? Hard work will do away with such fears,” Lokot was quoted as saying by Rossiiskaya Gazeta daily.

Russian communists join international anti-NATO proposal

The Russian Communist Party has signed a proposition by international leftist groups condemning NATO politics and demanding the bloc is disbanded.
The motion was prepared by the Communist Party of Portugal to mark the 65th anniversary of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.About 50 different left-wing parties and movements have already signed it.
“We demand NATO dissolution and support the sovereign right of all nations to decide on their countries’ withdrawal from this aggressive alliance,” reads the document, a Russian copy of which was posted on the Russian Communist Party website on Wednesday.
The left claim NATO is responsible for the "non-stop" arms race and blames the bloc and its allies for over two thirds of the world’s total military budget. Nevertheless, NATO and its leading member, the USA, are constantly seeking to expand their military base network and areas of influence, the address reads.
The motion says the bloc acts under its openly hostile strategic concept and also expands the area where military intervention and occupation are possible, adding that such behavior confirms NATO’s main role as “a military wing of the major transnational monopolies.” It goes on to blame the USA and its NATO allies for numerous war crimes and significant damage, for cruel acts of aggression in Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya, interfering with other nations' domestic affairs, like in Syria or a policy of intimidation that is being applied to Iran.

The leftists also accused NATO, the USA and the European Union (which they called NATO’s European cushion) of aiding the growing militarization of international relations and other aggressive and hostile processes resisting the struggle for freedom of different peoples and the working class as a whole.
The proposal demands a stop to NATO expansion, the nuclear arms race, and the program to place US and NATO missile defense systems in Europe. It also promotes the complete ban on weapons of mass destruction, and the closure of foreign military bases all over the world, the immediate withdrawal of foreign military forces from Afghanistan and other countries.
“We call the working people and nations of the whole world to join in the common struggle for peace, against war and NATO, and for the future where peace, progress and social justice would become priorities, where every nation could freely decide on its future,” the call reads.
The Communist Party of the Russian Federation is traditionally anti-Western and anti-NATO. The official position is much more tolerant – despite listing NATO as a potential enemy in its military doctrine, Russia has developed cooperation with the bloc, allowing cargo to be transported through its territory to Afghanistan and even opening a major transport hub for the purpose.
Ordinary Russians are more cautious. According to a poll conducted by the Levada polling center in mid-2013, two-thirds of Russians did not consider NATO to be a partner of their country, and only one in seven Russians thought that cooperation with NATO was a good thing. At the same time, NATO ranked only 13th in the rating of external threats, far behind international terrorism, drug trafficking, Mideast countries and China.

Managing Democracy in Russia

Rafael Khachaturian 

For the third time in twelve years, a familiar face is set to take over as Russia’s president. The outcome of the March election was scarcely in doubt. Ever since Vladimir Putin made it clear back in September that he and Dmitry Medvedev had struck a tacit deal years ago, in which Medvedev would take over the post essentially as a placeholder (while Putin served as prime minister), his re-election has been a foregone conclusion. The only uncertainty was what percentage of the vote Putin would obtain, and what effect his re-election would have on the rumblings of the opposition movement that emerged last December.
The official poll results claim that Putin gained 63.6 percent of the vote—down from 71.3 percent in 2004 and Medvedev’s 70.3 percent in 2008. By these measures, Putin comfortably skirted the 50 percent threshold, which he needed to do in order to avoid a second round run-off.

The Russians are leaving … Russia --- Vladimir Radyuhin

Highly qualified middle-class professionals, feeling ignored by the country's economy and political system, are emigrating in search of greener pastures.

Andrei and Nadezhda are, by any measure, successful professionals and a happy family. They are the kind of people who are supposed to be the mainstay of new Russia and the driving force of its resurgence. Except that they are planning to leave this country for good.

They live in the ancient Russian city of Vladimir, about 200 km east of Moscow. Andrei, 40, and Nadezhda, 36, have decent jobs, a two-bedroom flat and a car, and are raising two daughters, aged 10 and 4. Four years ago they took a firm decision to emigrate. Why?

“We don't see a future for us here,” says Nadezhda. “Once a military and industrial giant, our country today is reduced to a raw material appendage to other economic powerhouses. Look at our shops: You won't find any goods made in Russia. Our well-being depends on the price of oil and on decisions taken by politicians and economists in other countries. We don't feel we are needed here.”

Results of a survey

This harsh indictment of the situation in this country is shared by many Russians. A survey conducted last year by the respected Levada Centre found that 50 per cent of Russians do not think there is future for them in Russia, while 63 per cent said they would like their children to live elsewhere.

Andrei and Nadezhda are part of a new emigration wave from Russia. There are no reliable emigration statistics, partly because the departures are hard to document. According to the Federal Migration Service, almost 30,000 left Russia in the 11 months of last year. However, the figure includes only those who gave up their Russian passports, whereas most émigrés retain Russian citizenship. The Auditing Commission, last year, estimated on the basis of tax returns that almost 1.25 million Russians had left during the past decade. Other estimates put the number of émigrés at 2 million. The shocking fact is that the exodus from Russia after the breakup of the Soviet Union is comparable to that in the wake of the October 1917 Bolshevik revolution. In those days Russians fled violence and hunger. Today their motives are different.

The first post-Soviet emigration wave, when an estimated 1.1 million left Russia in the 1990s, was largely attributed to the lifting of Communist-era travel restrictions and the country's painful transition to a market economy. It was baffling though when the outflow picked up again during Vladimir Putin's presidency in the 2000s. After all, under Mr. Putin, Russia overcame the chaos of the 1990s, posted steady growth and saw people's incomes rise significantly. However, economic growth has been largely confined to the extracting industries, limiting opportunities for self-fulfilment. The corrupt nexus of Russian business and the state became overwhelming, stifling competition and producing a new breed of billionaire bureaucrats. Many felt that the political regime increasingly resembles the Soviet Union where people had no say in government, the Parliament was decorative and elections were a sham. At the same time, the notion of social justice for which the Soviet Union was famous has all but disappeared in new capitalist Russia. Over the past decade, Russia earned an estimated $1.6 trillion from the sale of oil and gas alone, or more than $11,000 per head of its population, but the money landed in the pockets of the privileged few. Moscow today has more billionaires than any other world capital, but across the country, over 21 million people out of the population of 142 million live below the minimal subsistence level. Last year, the number of poor people increased by two million compared with 2010, according to Rosstat, the State statistics committee.

“In Russia, incredible riches of the oligarchs contrast with the lack of social security, quality medicine and education for the people,” complains Nadezhda, who was 18 when the Soviet Union collapsed and can compare life then and now. “Today crime, drunkenness and narcotics rule the roost. We are totally alienated from the state; we can't change the government through elections.”

Who could have imagined two decades ago that Russians would be leaving their country in search of social justice and security? Yet, this is what Andrei and Nadezhda hope to find in Canada.

“We want our children to have good education, good jobs and social security; we want them to live in a country governed by law and caring for its citizens,” says Nadezhda. But it could take several more years for that dream to take shape as emigration to Canada involves a long and cumbersome process.

Focus on middle class

What is worrying about Russian emigration is that it is fuelled by the middle class. Andrei is a skilled mechanic and electrical engineer. Nadezhda has two university diplomas in accounting and management. They say job opportunities in their home city of 350,000 people are far and few between. While they await their passage to Canada, Andrei, like many other people in Vladimir, has taken a better paid job in Moscow. He commutes to the capital twice a week to work in 24-hour shifts.

“Big industrial enterprises that used to employ the bulk of the workforce in Vladimir either closed down in the 1990s or split into small companies,” says Andrei. “It is still possible to find a job, but the pay is low and people go to Moscow in search of work.”

Last month, the 250-year-old Gusevsky Crystal Glass Factory, the main employer and tax-payer in Gus-Khrustalny, a town of 60,000 residents less than an hour's drive from Vladimir, went bankrupt and fired its remaining workers. Once famous for its beautiful designer crystalware, Gus-Khrustalny, which means Crystal Goose, has recently made headlines as a town controlled by criminal gangs. The scandal broke out when residents complained to Mr. Putin of mass extortion racketing that was patronised by local police.

In absolute terms, emigration from Russia is not that big when compared with many other countries. Moreover, it is offset by the influx of immigrants from other former Soviet States. The problem is that the country has been haemorrhaging highly qualified and entrepreneurial cadres, the cream of society, whereas the bulk of newcomers are unskilled labourers from Central Asia.

Professor Anatoly Vishnevsky of the Institute of Demography at the Higher School of Economics has estimated that more than 1,00,000 researchers with academic degrees had left Russia over the past two decades and the outflow continues.

Some of the best Russian universities today serve as a free source of talent for foreign laboratories. Seventy per cent of students at Novosibirsk State University plan to leave the country after they get their degree, according to research conducted by the Novosibirsk branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences.

A poll conducted by the All-Russia Centre for Public Opinion Studies (VTsIOM) last year revealed that the number of people ready to leave Russia for good has grown fourfold since the breakup of the Soviet Union 20 years ago. Today, 21 per cent of Russians consider emigration as their chance for self-attainment and a better life. Among the educated young people, the share of potential emigrants is staggering — 39 per cent.

In contrast to the 1990s, when Russians mostly headed in the Western direction, today they are also looking to the East. Tens of thousands of Siberians, mostly small and medium-size businessmen, have moved their businesses and families to China to escape bureaucratic pressure and extortion at home.

“I think the era of doing honest business in Russia has ended,” said Ivan Smolin, a businessman from Krasnoyarsk now living in Harbin. He says he had left because the business and political climate in Russia was suffocating.

“I left to escape stagnation. I felt it was impossible to change things. You can be successful only in two cases: if you dodge taxes or sit on the oil pipe [do business in hydrocarbons].”

Cynics say the Kremlin is only too happy to see the disgruntled leave the country and this is one reason why it has been pushing for a visa-free travel arrangement with Europe. The country that lives off its oil and minerals does not need that many qualified specialists anyway.

Protests and political system

Mass protests against rigged parliamentary elections in December showed, however, that many educated urban Russians, instead of packing their bags, are now ready to pack the streets to demand reforms and freedoms.

The peaceful protests have already prompted the Kremlin to promise pro-democracy reforms and 25 million new skilled jobs over the next decade. This generated hopes that many potential emigrants would delay, if not rethink, their departure.

Andrei and Nadezhda, however, do not believe that things could change in Russia in their lifetime. They showed me a recent news item in a local paper.

The paper reported a fire in a municipal district administration in Vladimir that destroyed all ballot papers of the December parliamentary election from two polling stations, where Mr. Putin's party received over 90 per cent of the votes (twice the average for Vladimir). What is more, the two polling stations never opened on the election day. Police blamed the fire on faulty electrical wiring.

“What changes can we hope for in a country where authorities act with such impunity,” asked Nadezhda. “Putin's decision to return as President has only strengthened our resolve to emigrate.”

The Hindu

Moscow: Thousands join pro- and anti-Putin protests

Thousands of people are marching in Russia's capital Moscow in protest at Prime Minister Vladimir Putin's grip on power.

It is the third rally since December's parliamentary election was marred by allegations of vote-rigging.

But supporters of Mr Putin, who will stand in next month's presidential election, are holding their own rally at a different location.

People at the rallies will be braving temperatures as low as -19C.

Both the organisers of the "For Honest Elections" march and Mr Putin are hoping the freezing temperatures do not affect the turn-out, but urged their respective supporters to wrap up warmly.

"The main thing is for people not to catch pneumonia... Three hours in the cold is a serious thing," said liberal politician Boris Nemtsov, an organiser of the opposition rally.

Pressure

Moscow's Kaluzhskaya Square was filling up with protesters carrying white balloons - the colour adopted by the protest movement - for the start of the march.

The turnout is seen as a key indicator of whether the protest movement against Mr Putin still has momentum, observers say.

As many as 50,000 people turned out in Moscow for the first rally, following 4 December elections, which were won by Mr Putin's party.

Despite government denials of widespread vote-rigging, protests spread to other cities.

The organisers of Saturday's protest are demanding a re-run of December's election, and calling on people to vote against Mr Putin in March's presidential election.

The BBC's Steve Rosenberg in Moscow says the organisers do not expect to be able to stop Mr Putin from winning March's election, but they hope they can pile the pressure on him to institute political reform.

BBC

Mood shift in Russia

The winds of change blowing in the Arab East appear to have reached Russia. The ruling United Russia party has suffered big losses in Sunday's parliamentary elections in a sign of dramatic shifts in the public mood in Russian society. United Russia polled just under 50 per cent of the popular vote, almost 15 percentage points lower than it did four years ago. It will still occupy more than half the seats in the 450-member State Duma, thanks to votes cast for outsiders, but it will see its majority slashed from 90 to 15 seats. Three opposition parties represented in Parliament have made impressive gains: the Communists will have 92 seats in the new house, an increase of 60 per cent, followed by A Just Russia with 64 seats, up from the current 38 seats, and the Liberal Democrats of Vladimir Zhirinovsky with 56 seats against today's 40 seats. The reduced support for United Russia, which has controlled Parliament for the past 10 years, is partly a reaction to the economic crisis of 2008-2009, which hit people's earnings; it is also a protest against the failure of authorities to rein in corruption, which has slowed Russia's modernisation drive. The election results also indicated people's growing political activism and impatience with the overbearing dominance of the political scene by a single party.

United Russia's election setback deals a blow to its chairman, Prime Minister Vladimir Putin, just as he prepares to reclaim the presidency in the March 2012 election under an agreement with President Dmitry Medvedev. Previous election successes of the ruling party — set up in 2001 to provide a political base for President Putin — have closely mirrored his popularity as a strong leader who presided over Russia's resurgence from the chaos of the 1990s. When United Russia swept to a two-thirds constitutional majority in the State Duma in 2007, it was seen as a vote of thanks for Mr. Putin who refused to cling on to power and promoted a younger leader to steer Russia along the path he had charted. However, instead of stepping back, Mr. Putin remained the dominant power behind the throne in the past four years, holding back political and economic reforms proclaimed by his successor. The disappointing performance of United Russia is the writing on the wall. It came two months after the two top leaders announced their decision to switch jobs and barely a week after the party formally nominated Mr. Putin as its candidate in the forthcoming presidential elections. Mr. Putin's assured return appears to have failed to inspire Russians. They have sent a strong message the Kremlin can ignore only at its own peril. People want political competition, they want progressive reform, and they want new leaders.

Editorial-The Hindu

Thousands protest ‘election fraud’ in Moscow

uAllegations of massive election fraud brought thousands of protesters into the streets of Moscow on Monday night in what appeared to be the largest opposition rally in years.

An estimated 8,000 to 10,000 people defied icy rain to protest the official results of Sunday’s parliamentary election, which gave victory to the ruling United Russia party led by President Dmitry Medvedev and Prime Minister Vladimir Putin.

People chanted “Russia without Putin,” “Down with Thieves and Crooks”, “We’ll neither forget nor forgive” – in reference to what opposition leaders said was large-scale vote rigging that allowed the Kremlin party to grab more than half the seats in the State Duma, the lower house of the Russian Parliament.

As the crowd swelled, police were forced to stop security screening of arriving protestors with metal detectors and remove fencing.

“We will not let them rob us of our votes, they must know we hate them all,” said popular whistleblower Alexei Navaly, who coined the now famous catchword “Party of Thieves and Crooks”, which has stuck fast to the United Russia party.

At one point, protesters began marching towards the Central Election Commission and the Kremlin, breaking through police lines and shouting anti-government slogans. It was not until riot police reinforcements arrived that they managed to break up the crowd, bundling people into dozens of buses parked on side streets.

About 300 people were detained, including a number of Russian and foreign reporters.

“I have not seen such a crowd in Moscow since 1993,” said Kommersant FM radio editor Dmitry Solopov. He was referring to a standoff between then President Boris Yeltsin and the Parliament that led to armed clashes and the storming of the legislature in October 1993 in which hundreds were killed.

Similar protest rallies took place on Monday in St. Petersburg and Samara, where police also detained scores of people.
The Hindu

Putin's party losing support in parliamentary vote

Prime Minister Vladimir Putin’s party struggled to hang onto its majority in Russia’s parliamentary election, results showed on Monday.

Rival parties and election monitors said even a result of around 50 per cent was inflated, alleging ballot-stuffing and other significant violations at the polls. Many expressed fears that the vote count would be manipulated.

The United Russia party held a two-thirds majority in the outgoing State Duma, which allowed it to change the constitution unchallenged. But the party is increasingly disliked, seen as representing a corrupt bureaucracy.

The Communist Party appeared to benefit from the protest vote, with exit polls and the early returns predicting it would get nearly 20 per cent, up from less than 12 per cent four years ago.

But Mr. Putin should still have no serious difficulties getting his laws passed. The two other parties in parliament also looked set to gain seats, and both have consistently voted with United Russia. Even the Communists pose only tempered opposition.

The results with over 92 per cent of the precincts counted showed 49.8 per cent for United Russia. This was in line with an exit poll conducted by the VTsIOM polling agency that had United Russia tallying 48.5 per cent and another done by the FOM polling agency that had it winning 46 per cent of the vote. The two polls were reported by the two state television channels.

AP