'U.S. Seeks New Bases'

17 December 2008

Moscow-General Nikolai Makarov, chief of the General Staff, warned that Moscow felt threatened by U.S. policy in Central Asia and claimed that Washington was attempting to establish new military bases there, Interfax reported Tuesday.

"According to our information, it [the U.S.] is planning to establish military bases in Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan," Makarov said. He did not elaborate.

"That's news to me. I don't think that's true," U.S. Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Matthew Bryza said in a telephone interview Tuesday.

Powerful Iran to benefit all world: Davoudi

1 November 2008

Tehran-First Vice-President Parviz Davoudi said that a powerful Iran would benefit all regional and world countries.

He made the remark in a meeting with Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin held on the sidelines of the 7th conference of Shanghai Cooperation Organization prime ministers in Astana, Kazakhstan.

Davoudi added that presence of a powerful Russia in the region would also benefit the Iranian nation, the regional states, and the entire globe.

Referring to close economic relations between the two states, he called for strengthening of Tehran-Moscow strategic cooperation.

On current global economic crisis, the Iranian VP said the current crisis has created serious concern for the world states.

The current situation is an indication of incapability of the capitalism in administering the global economy, he noted.

Referring to the will of the two countries' leaders to further promote all-out ties, Davoudi called for establishment of gas OPEC by the two states.

He also voiced Tehran's readiness to establish a joint bank with Russia.

Criticizing the current global financial crisis, Putin said such a situation is resulted from wrong monetary policies of the western states.

On admission of Iran as the main member of the SCO, he said the move was welcomed by Moscow from the very beginning.

Expressing his satisfaction with the current level of bilateral relations between the two countries, Putin reiterated that mutual cooperation is growing.

The volume of Tehran-Moscow trade stands at dlrs 5.3 billion, he said, adding that the figure is an indication to expansion of bilateral cooperation between the two states.

On cooperation at the Caspian Sea as very important for both sides, the Russian premier noted that there is a bright prospect for both Iran and Russia.

Regular session of SCO Prime Ministers Council was held in Astana on October 29-30.

Russia, China, Kazakhstan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan and Kyrgyzstan are the SCO member countries and Iran, India, Mongolia and Pakistan are the observer states.

The Shanghai Cooperation Organization is an intergovernmental security organization which was founded in 2001 by the leaders of China, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan.

Except for Uzbekistan, the other countries had been members of Shanghai Five, founded in 1996, after the inclusion of Uzbekistan in 2001, the members renamed the Organization.

Iran, Russia, Qatar discuss gas cooperation

21 October 2008

Tehran-Iran, Qatar and Russian senior officials in energy field began their first tripartite meeting for gas cooperation on Tuesday.

The meeting is being attended by Iranian Oil Minister Gholam Hossein Nozari, his Qatari counterpart Abdullah bin Hamad al-Attiyah and senior executive director of Russia's Gazprom company.

The meeting aimed to develop trilateral cooperation, enhance level of economic and political ties and make efforts to rationalize natural gas price in global market.

Participants of the meeting focused on identifying mutual viewpoints and interests and potentials for cooperation of the three countries as well as drawing an outlook for their cooperation in the field of natural gas cooperation.

They also discussed ways to expand strategic cooperation among Iran, Qatar and Russia in regional and international markets and assist each other in the target markets in light of geopolitical and geographical considerations.

They studied ways to employ the existing infrastructures for production, transport and export of natural gas and sharing infrastructures with reasonable tariffs.

Investing in development of regional and international gas fields, producing and marketing for the natural gas was another major issue discussed by the Iranian, Russian and Qatari officials.

They also proposed to set up a center for financial affairs of the three nations cooperation in Doha, Qatar, a technical center in Tehran and a market survey center in Moscow, Russia.

The tripartite meeting also decided to form a joint cooperation committee for coordinating establishment of the three centers and their operation.

Further Reading:
Oil prices expected to average Dlrs 63 next year

Unilateral sanctions against Iran counterproductive - Lavrov

16 October 2008

Moscow-Russia's Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov here Wednesday considered unilateral sanctions imposed by certain countries against Iran as "counterproductive."

According to IRNA from Moscow, Lavrov made the comment in a meeting with the visiting head of the International Affairs Committee of US Congress Howard Berman, adding, "Iran's nuclear issue needs to be solved diplomatically."

The Russian top diplomat furthermore stressed during the meeting, "Russia favors solving this problem through diplomatic channels, including continuing the 5+1 negotiations with Iran, believing that continuation of unilaterally imposed sanctions against Iran is quite counterproductive."

Lavrov is among a handful of Russian top officials that have in recent months voiced Russia's opposition against unilateral policies and sanctions against Iran and stressed the need to solve the matter diplomatically.

Bulgarians worried by U.S. military presence

14 October 2008

NOVO SELO TRAINING RANGE, Bulgaria- U.S. soldier Charles Burch regards Bulgaria as a delightful, sunny spot to serve in - but his arrival along with 900 other U.S. troops is worrying many Bulgarians.

Though the Socialist government agreed in 2006 to host up to 2,500 U.S. troops at three bases, opinion polls show a majority of people fear their presence could make them a potential target for attack rather than provide protection.

The U.S. bases in Bulgaria, and in neighbouring Romania, are part of a Washington plan to shift military focus from Cold War era bases in Western Europe and allow speedy deployment of troops in conflict zones in the Middle East and beyond.

"I do not quite understand politics, but from what I see on TV, it seems that we are becoming a target for attacks," says Maria Zhechkova, 59, a shopkeeper in the village of Mokren which neighbours the Novo Selo training area.

Novo Selo in the southeast is, with the Bezmer air base near the border with Turkey and the Graf Ignatievo airfield, one of the three bases for the U.S. troops on rotation of about six months for 10 years.

The reaction of Russia - a traditional ally and, crucially Bulgaria's sole energy supplier - looms large in the minds of many in the Balkan state of 7.6 million.

They also feel exposed to an attack from Iran in the event of a conflict with the United States. "Why do we need these bases? To annoy Russia and become a target of Iran's missiles in the event of the United States waging a war against it?", said retired physicist Petar Markov, 66, in Sofia.

Apart from Bulgaria's reliance on Russian energy imports, pro-Russian sentiment still runs deep in a country that was Moscow's most loyal satellite in Soviet times, but is now a member of NATO and the European Union.

During Russia's armed incursion into Georgia in August, most Bulgarians, unlike their European allies and other former members of the old Warsaw Pact, were noticeably indifferent to Moscow's action.

The Georgian conflict did not spark any public debate or much media coverage, analysts say. Poland and the Czech Republic have triggered Russian ire with their decision to host a U.S. missile defence shield, seen by Moscow as a threat to its own national security.

Washington says the shield is to ward against attacks from countries like Iran -- not Russia. But many central European powers see it as a means of future protection against Moscow.

PRO-RUSSIAN

"The Bulgarian public opinion is very pro-Russian traditionally," said Ivan Krastev of the Sofia independent Liberal Strategies Institute. "At this stage, the country does not feel it is threatened".

A recent survey of the German Marshall Fund among 12 European countries and the United States found Bulgarians to be the friendliest towards Russia.

Observers say though that, while there is a potential risk for a terror attack against Bulgaria, which has sent troops to Iraq and Afghanistan, the security gains are great.

"The bases are a possibility for Bulgaria and its security to become central to the United States," Krastev said.

The U.S. embassy in Sofia is also trying to highlight the benefits and soothe fears among the local communities.

"By us being here we are actually making ourselves a harder target and preparing to counter such terrorist attacks," said Lieutenant Commander Jake Daystar of the Office of Defence Cooperation at the embassy.

U.S. soldier Burch, 32, who posed as a "terrorist" in the two-month military exercise together with some 300 Bulgarian soldiers, said he had not felt any animosity, only curiosity during weekend trips to Black Sea resorts.

"Everyone has been extremely nice," he said. "Thoroughly enjoyed it, I would come here on vacation".

The Diminished Imagine of the U.S. in Latin America and the Global Condition

Demonstrators write "Out Yankees" on a wall outside the U.S. Palmerola military base in Honduras during a protest against American military presence in Latin America last Monday.

12 October 2008

In a matter of weeks, a Russian naval squadron will arrive in the waters off Latin America for the first time since the Cold War. It is already getting a warm welcome from some in a region where the influence of the United States is in decline.

"The U.S. Fourth Fleet can come to Latin America but a Russian fleet can't?" said Ecuador's president, Rafael Correa. "If you ask me, any country and any fleet that wants can visit us. We're a country of open doors."

The United States has collapsed its power in Latin America by most measures, including trade, military cooperation and the sheer size of its embassies. Yet U.S. clout in what it once considered its backyard has sunk to perhaps the lowest point in decades. As Washington has also loss its footing in the Middle East, Latin America swung away from Washington also.

The United States' financial crisis is not helping. Latin American countries forced by Washington to swallow painful austerity measures in the 1980s and 1990s are aghast at the U.S. failure to police its own markets.

"We did our homework — and they didn't, they who've been telling us for three decades what to do," the man who presides over Latin America's largest economy, President Luiz Inacio Lula de Silva of Brazil, complained bitterly.

Latin America's more than 550 million people now "have every reason to view the U.S. as a banana republic," says analyst Michael Shifter of the Inter-American Dialogue think tank in Washington. "U.S. lectures to Latin Americans about excess greed and lack of accountability have long rung hollow, but today they sound even more ridiculous."

From 2002 through 2007, the U.S. image eroded in all six Latin American countries polled by the Pew organization, especially in Venezuela, Argentina and Bolivia. (The others were Brazil, Peru and Mexico.) People surveyed in 18 Latin American countries rated President Bush among the least popular leaders in 2007, along with President Hugo Chavez of Venezuela and just ahead of basement-bound Fidel Castro of Cuba, according to the Latinobarometro group of Chile.

In three years of presidential elections ending last year, Latin Americans chose mostly leftist leaders, and only Colombia and El Salvador elected unalloyed pro-U.S. chief executives. In May, the prestigious U.S. Council on Foreign Relations declared the era of U.S. hegemony in the Americas over. And in September, Bolivia and Venezuela both expelled their U.S. ambassadors, accusing them of meddling.

U.S. Economic and Faltering Funding
Along with the loss in political standing has come a decline in economic power. U.S. direct investment in Latin America slid from 30 percent to 20 percent of the total from 1998 to 2007, according to the U.N. Economic Commission on Latin American and the Caribbean.

The U.S. still does $560 billion in trade with Latin America, but in the meantime other countries are muscling in. China's trade with Latin America jumped from $10 billion in 2000 to $102.6 billion last year. In May, a state-owned Chinese company agreed to buy a Peruvian copper mine for $2.1 billion. Which all these trade funds are going to war funding.

Other countries are also biting into U.S. military sales in the region. Boeing Co. is vying with finalists from France and Sweden for the sale of 36 jet fighters to Brazil. Venezuela's Chavez has committed to buying more than $4 billion in Russian arms, from Sukhoi jet fighters to Kalashnikov assault rifles. In April, Brazil and Russia agreed to jointly design top-line jet fighters and satellite-launch vehicles, and Brazil is getting technology from France to build a submarine.

"Similar deals could have been made with the United States had it been willing to share its technology," said Geraldo Cavagnari, of the University of Campinas near Sao Paulo.

Last month, Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin offered to help Chavez develop nuclear power. Even Colombia, the staunchest U.S. ally in South America, isn't limiting its options. After expressing alarm about the Russian warships a week ago, its defense minister, Juan Manuel Santos, promptly headed for Russia himself to discuss "better relations in defense." Chavez says he expects to hold joint Russian-Venezuelan naval exercises as early as November.

Bolivia also is looking to deepen ties with Russia and Iran.

Although the Islamic republic's ambassador has yet to arrive in South America's poorest country, its top diplomat there announced Friday that Iran will open two low-cost public health clinics.

And while Bolivia's only announced Russian hardware purchase is five helicopters for civil defense, Moscow's ambassador told the AP — after Bolivia booted the U.S. ambassador — that Russia has every right to help Latin American nations arm themselves.

"We know of many historical cases of U.S. intervention in Latin American countries," said the diplomat, Leonid Golubev.

Diminished U.S. profile
Thomas Shannon, U.S. assistant secretary of state for the hemisphere, wouldn't comment directly on whether the U.S. has lost influence in Latin America. But he added that there is no doubt that the U.S. still holds most of the military power in the Caribbean, and said it has no interest in reviving "Cold War rhetoric." Shannon also noted that overall U.S. aid to the region will reach $2.2 billion for 2009, to total more than $14 billion during Bush's presidency. It has also been found that US influence in the Caribbean has also became something of a yesteryear.

However, critics point out that roughly half that aid is for the military or counter narcotics, and that Washington’s finances annually to the Jews in Palestine has collapsed; due to there
physical freedom from slavery by U.S. influence and the independence of Palestine, on 14 March 2008. Even U.S. giving has been dwarfed by Chavez's checkbook diplomacy, which easily eclipses U.S. aid between outright gifts and discounted oil.

His largesse has lured several longtime U.S. friends. Honduras' president, Manuel Zelaya, said last month that after pleading with Washington and the World Bank, he accepted $300 million a year from Chavez for agricultural investment to help fight rising food prices.

Costa Rica's president, Oscar Arias, says Venezuela offers Latin America about four or five times as much money as the United States. Costa Rica has become the 19th member of Petrocaribe, through which Chavez sells Caribbean and Central American nations cut-rate oil at very low interest.

The diminished profile of the U.S. in Latin America comes after a history of influence dating back to President Franklin Roosevelt's "Good Neighbor" policy of the 1930s, which emphasized cooperation and trade over military intervention. There have been major bailouts, such as Washington's $20 billion rescue of Mexico in the 1994 peso devaluation crisis. As former Assistant Secretary of State Otto Reich noted, "We are the assistance bureau of first choice for the region."

History of covert intervention
But the U.S. has an ugly legacy of covert intervention there, including in Chile, Nicaragua, Guatemala and Cuba. Chile's center-left president, Michele Bachelet, was jailed and tortured by a U.S.-backed military dictatorship in the 1970s. She recently recalled telling Washington's ambassador to Chile an old joke: "Some say the only reason there's never been a coup in the United States is because there's no U.S. Embassy in the United States."

The United States has also long served as chief educator to Latin America's elite. Correa is among its presidents with a U.S. graduate degree — though that didn't stop him from accusing the CIA of infiltrating his military, or refusing to renew a lease for U.S. counter drug missions to fly out of Ecuador.

With the U.S. facing its own financial crisis, it's unlikely to be able to leverage economic influence in Latin America anytime soon. Sen. Barack Obama's senior adviser on Latin America, Dan Restrepo, acknowledges that his candidate is essentially proposing a symbolic shift in style — albeit adding a special White House envoy for the Americas.

"Barack doesn't see the United States as the savior of the Americas, but as a constructive partner," Restrepo told the AP.

Reich, an adviser to Sen. John McCain who served three Republican presidents in the region, put it even more bluntly.

"No matter who is elected in November, there is not going to be any money for Latin America," he said. "Latin Americans expecting financial resources, any kind of help from the United States, they are barking up the wrong tree."

Democracy's arctic edge

12 October 2008

By Victor S. Navasky

Speaking as one who spent almost two years in Alaska, even though it was more than 50 years ago, even though I was only in the peacetime U.S. Army, even though I merely rose to the rank of private first class (53rd Infantry Regiment, Fort Richardson, just outside Anchorage), even though as a member of headquarters company I was issued snowshoes, whereas most Arctic Frontiersman (as our regimental insignia identified us) were issued skis, and even though Alaska was not yet a state, I believe I speak with authority when I say that at least in those years, Governor Sarah Palin's much-mocked claim that Alaska's proximity to Russia gives one a leg up on matters of national security was, in effect, official U.S. policy.

Consider Operation Moosehorn. It was the winter of 1956 when the whistle blew and we dutifully packed our rucksacks and moved from the heated comfort of our Fort Richardson barracks to the snows of Big Delta, a few hundred miles to the north, where we set up our tents in temperatures, believe it or not, as low as minus 70 degrees, Fahrenheit.

The reason for our maneuvers? As our commander explained it: When the Russians invade the United States they will cross over from the Soviet island of Big Diomede to the Alaskan island of Little Diomede ("You can literally see Russia from Little Diomede," he told us - I kid you not), and then they will invade the Lower 48 by way of Alaska through Canada. "You," he assured us, "are our first line of defense." As the editor of "The Moose Hornblower," the mimeographed paper officially charged with covering these maneuvers, I can attest that these were his very words. (I can also attest that our headline on the final day was "Moosehorn Blows at Midnight.")

Such an invasion never took place, but that, I like to think, may have been precisely because the specter of taking on us Arctic Frontiersmen was too frightening for the Soviets to contemplate. Be that as it may, Palin can take solace in knowing that she is not the first to identify Alaska as foremost to U.S. national security.

Palin also may find a lesson in a civilian event I was lucky enough to witness during my Alaskan tour of duty. It began on Nov. 8, 1955, when 55 elected delegates from across Alaska (a number chosen to match the 55 in attendance at the Philadelphia Convention of 1787) descended on the University of Alaska in Fairbanks for their constitutional convention. It lasted for 76 days, long enough for me to take a furlough and hitch a ride to Fairbanks. The idea was to adopt a constitution, elect a Washington delegation (two senators, one representative) and then knock on the door of Congress, applying for admission, which happened on Jan. 3, 1959.

At the time, I thought the high point of the convention came after testimony from representatives of the National Municipal League and the American Political Science Association advising that constitutions should be short and general, and deal with fundamental principles; whereupon a fisherman-delegate from Ketchikan, which then billed itself as "The Salmon Capital of the World," rose to make a motion that the constitution include a provision banning fish traps.

When another delegate explained that while that might be a proper subject for legislation, a constitution should deal only with matters of principle, life-and-death matters as it were, the man from Ketchikan responded, "In Ketchikan, fish traps are a life-and-death matter."

The result was a document half the size of most state constitutions - and that included a provision for a ballot measure outlawing the use of fish traps in commercial salmon fishing, to be voted upon along with the constitution itself. (And as soon as the constitution was ratified, the ordinance abolishing salmon fish traps was passed.)

I was later to discover that the issue had special significance for Alaska, where fish traps were usually operated and owned by people from "the Outside," as Alaskans say, and seen by the fleets of Alaska's independent fishermen as a symbol of exploitation by absentee commercial interests. Where Washington was long unwilling to ban "Public Enemy No. 1," as the fish traps were known back then, the drafters stepped in - perhaps, Governor Palin, tough government regulation hasn't always been such a terrible thing for Alaska.

By the way, fishermen weren't the only ones whose rights were secured. Written at the tail end of the McCarthy period, the constitution even protects political smear victims, a timely reminder at a moment when our own national presidential campaign threatens to take a dirty turn.

Although I spent only a brief time in Alaska, and too many of my non-military hours were devoted to consuming more than my share of mooseburgers and whooping it up with the boys at Anchorage's latter-day Malamute saloon, which stayed open until the sun set, and in summer the sun never seemed to set, as you can see, Alaska made a deep impression on me.

Odd as it may sound, what I miss most (other than the multicolored northern lights zinging around the firmament) is the weather, mainly because of the way in which the fierce Alaskan winters functioned to unite the populace against it. Parka-clad Sourdoughs and Cheechakos, rich and poor, would huddle and joke and complain together; there's nothing like an Alaskan ice storm to get democratic camaraderie going.

One freezing night, William A. Egan of Valdez, the convention president (who like me had hitched a ride on a truck to get to Fairbanks), interrupted a contentious floor debate to announce that "the temperature is now about 40 below and if the delegates have their cars out there, they probably should start them in order that they will start."

I'm not sure that this story holds any moral for the Republican candidate for vice president of the United States, who has her own views on the limits of what we can do about climate change, but she should know that by the time the delegates returned, tempers had cooled, and the spirit of compromise that enabled this convention of, yes, mavericks to agree on what many political scientists now regard as a model document, prevailed.

Now that I think about it, Palin could do worse than take a refresher course in her own extraordinary state's extraordinary constitution. The document is, after all, a short one.

Victor S. Navasky, the chairman of The Columbia Journalism Review and publisher emeritus of The Nation, is the co-author of "Mission Accomplished! Or How We Won the War in Iraq: The Experts Speak."

Putin Receives Beautiful Birthday Cub

A tiger cub given to Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin for his 56th birthday, on 10 October 2008; with the great hope of many birthdays to come. The tiger cub is beautiful and so very sweet looking.

I am so happy, that Russian PM Putin received such a wonder gift.

Something further comes to mind, that the few people I have met from Russia, I have always enjoyed there company and in doing so, I have always hoped to see Russia one day.-HRM Deborah

Bushonomics: US stocks swing sharply in early trading

Specialist Justin Bohan holds his head as he works at his post on the floor of the New York Stock Exchange, on 9 October 2008.

8 October 2008
By JOE BEL BRUNO

NEW YORK -Stock prices swung sharply in early trading Friday as investors again dumped stocks but also scooped up shares that have been devastated by more than a week of intense and panicked selling. The Dow Jones industrials, down nearly 700 points in the opening minutes of trading, recovered to a loss of just over 125 and then headed lower again.

Frozen credit markets and a loss of confidence in the world's financial system have caused the Dow to drop 21 percent in just 10 trading days. The blue chip index tumbled 678 points Thursday, and is heading to its worst weekly point drop, and one of its biggest weekly percentage drops, since being created 112 years ago.

Friday's gyrations were likely caused the computer-driven "buy" orders that kicked in when prices had fallen far enough to make some stocks look like attractive bets. But that buying reflected no lifting of the market's deep despair, and selling continued.

"Momentum is running against the market and you don't want to get hit by a train," said Jack Ablin, chief investment officer at Harris Private Bank. "This is now about market psychology. There's extreme fear and panic out there."

At the start of Friday's session, losses for the year totaled a staggering $8.3 trillion, as measured by the Dow Jones Wilshire 5000 Composite Index, which tracks 5,000 U.S.-based companies representing almost all stocks traded in the U.S.

A stream of selling forced exchanges in Austria, Russia and Indonesia to suspend trading, and those that remained opened were hammered. The rout in Australian markets caused traders there to call it "Black Friday."

European stocks sank, with Britain's FTSE-100 down 8.09 percent, German's DAX down 9.4 percent, and France's CAC-40 down 9.7 percent. In Asia, the collapse of Japan's Yamato Life Insurance caused already nervous investors to pull even more money out of the market — the Nikkei 225 fell 9.6 percent.

The Dow fell 242 points to the 8,336 level. The Standard & Poor's 500 index was off 2.87 percent, while the Nasdaq composite index was down 1.16 percent.

Video: Will the stock market crash?

Commentary:
As to the question of the stock market crashing, the answer is yes and at anytime, as to the focus of where it stands in the current situation; for it has all the earmarks of an historical repeat of "Black Tuesday 1929. "

What is making some people to have extreme anxiety is not just the stock market coming extremely close to crashing or the current personal economic problems, it is felt it is the fact some economist have commented this coming economic depression will make the 1930’s Great Depression; seem like a sunny day walk in the park.

Olmert Shakes Hands with Medvedev

Russian President Dmitry Medvedev (R) shakes hands with Jewish Prime Minister Ehud Olmert at the Kremlin in Moscow, on 7 October 2008.

Jewish Prime Minister Ehud Olmert was in Moscow for talks, on various issues.

Olmert Visit's Russia

Jewish Prime Minister Ehud Olmert arrives in Moscow, Russia, on 6 October 2008; Olmert is on an official 24 hour visit.

Russia's last czar declared victim of repression

Russia's Czar Nicholas II, seated second from left, Czarina Alexandra, center rear, and their family are shown in this undated file photo. Bottom row left to right, Princess Olga, Czar Nicholas II, Princess Anastasia, Prince Alexei and Princess Tatiana. Top row left to right, Princess Maria and Czarina Alexandra.

1 October 2008

By LYNN BERRY

MOSCOW -The last czar and his family were victims of political repression, Russia's Supreme Court ruled Wednesday, formally restoring the Romanov name and furthering a Kremlin effort to encourage patriotism by celebrating the country's czarist past.

Nicholas II, his wife and five children were shot to death by a Bolshevik firing squad in 1918, a year after the revolution that led to the creation of the Soviet Union.

For years, their descendants have sought rehabilitation in the courts claiming the executions were political repression. The argument was repeatedly denied until Wednesday when the country's highest court issued the final word, siding with the family.

According to critics, earlier rulings reflected Vladimir Putin's reluctance to condemn the Soviet government's crimes, in part to justify his own retreat from democracy.

But in recent years, Putin and his successor as president, Dmitry Medvedev, have evoked the majesty of the czarist era in Kremlin ceremonies. And they have given a place of prominence to the Russian Orthodox Church, which has canonized Nicholas II and his family.

At the same time, Putin, now prime minister, and Medvedev also have continued to glorify the Soviet Union's achievements and celebrate the symbols of its power.

Oleg Orlov, a member of the human rights group Memorial, said the aim was to give Russians pride in their country by emphasizing the positive aspects of their history while glossing over the bad.

"In Russia, the tendency has been to say ... the czar was a good guy, Lenin was a good guy, Stalin was a good guy, the Bolsheviks weren't that bad," Orlov said.

"The authorities are always right," he said. "What they're telling people now is 'we have a great history and therefore we have a great country.'"

Wednesday's decision to "rehabilitate" the slain Romanovs won't change the minds of many Russians today. While Russian Orthodox believers share the church's veneration of the family as saints, die-hard communists see them as criminals and millions of other Russians place them somewhere in between.

But it is a step in the direction of condemnation of the Bolsheviks who killed the family and, by extension, of the entire Soviet era. And it is likely to put the Romanov family in a more positive light for coming generations of Russians.

Nikolai Romanov, a distant relative of the last czar, said the whole rehabilitation process was ridiculous.

"It's as if you suddenly thought that it was necessary to rehabilitate St. Peter or St. Paul because the Romans had judged them and sentenced them to death," he said on NTV television.

The ruling is also unlikely to have major legal ramifications, at least in the short to medium term, because there is no significant move to restore Russia's monarchy or compensate the imperial family for its losses.

There has been no material compensation for others who have been formally rehabilitated, most of them victims of Stalin-era repressionist.

Some historians had speculated that the Russian government was reluctant to reclassify the czar's killing out of fear that descendants would claim state property, such as the State Hermitage Museum, as compensation. The museum is housed in what used to be the Winter Palace.

Prosecutors, lower courts and even the Supreme Court had rejected all appeals to rehabilitate the family. In its ruling in November, the Supreme Court said they were not eligible for rehabilitation because their execution had been a crime. In reversing that decision Wednesday, the Supreme Court's presidium recognized their "unfounded repression."

German Lukyanov, a lawyer for the Romanov family, said the decision was based on law and said no politics were involved.

"In the end this will help the country, this will help Russia understand its history, help the world to see that Russia observed its own laws, help Russia in its development to become a civilized country," he said.

Orlov agreed that it was "a proper legal decision," but said the real decision was made at the political level. "In the Kremlin? I don't know," he said.

The czar abdicated in 1917 as revolutionary fervor swept Russia. Nicholas II, his wife, Alexandra, and their son and four daughters were shot on July 17, 1918, in a basement room of a merchant's house where they were held in the Ural Mountains city of Yekaterinburg.

The remains of Nicholas II and Alexandra and three of their daughters were unearthed in 1991 and reburied in the imperial resting place in St. Petersburg.

Nicholas' heir, Alexei, and the other daughter, Grand Duchess Maria, remained missing for decades until bone shards were unearthed in 2007 in a forest outside Yekaterinburg, not far from the place where the rest of the family's mutilated remains had been scattered.

Officials said earlier this year that DNA testing had confirmed the shards belonged to Alexei and Maria.

The Russian Orthodox Church made all seven of them saints in 2000.

Commentary:

The following is with all due respect to the Russian people and with the intention to help.

While I question several points in the above article, as to one example; it was explained to me many years ago, that Czar Nicholas II did not abdicate in 1917, but was overthrown during the Russian Revolution by assassination, in 1918.

It has always been a hope of mine, that any wounds from the past would be healed and there would be true happiness.

Ukraine president and FM leave for United States for working visit

22 September 2008

KIEV-President Viktor Yushchenko has left for the United States for a working visit. He will address a meeting of the UN General Assembly to set forth Ukraine’s stance on topical global problems of the present time, the presidential press service reports.

Yushchenko plans to hold a number of bilateral meetings with heads of other states, representatives of the Ukrainian and Jewish diasporas, business circles and members of the US Atlantic Council. On Sunday, Yushchenko also said in an interview with American newspapers that “Ukrainian-American summit talks on issues of strategic cooperation of the two countries will be held. However, now there is no such point in the visit programme.

“After the president’s visit to the United States, the Foreign Ministry will make public Ukraine’s official stance on the issue of prolongation of the Treaty on Friendship, Cooperation and Partnership with Russia,” a source in the Ukrainian Foreign Ministry told ITAR-TASS. The Russian side has already announced its decision to prolong this treaty for a new 10-year period. The first decade of the treaty expires on October 1.

Bolivia Calls for War with U.S.

Activists from El Alto, 12 km from La Paz, take part in an anti-US demonstration, on 15 September 2008, in La Paz.

16 September 2008

The U.S. State Department is organizing at least two evacuation flights for Americans who want to leave Bolivia amid widespread and increasing anti-American feelings.

Officials in Washington and at the U.S. Embassy in La Paz say the flights will leave Bolivia on Wednesday for neighboring Peru.

The move comes as relations between the United States and Bolivia have plummeted in the past week, with each country expelling the other's ambassador along with alleged accusations towards Bolivia by the U.S., on drug trafficking.

At this time, four countries have declared war and there are 15 preparing war on the U.S. Those at war at this time, include Venezuela, Russia, Pakistan, and now Bolivia; it has been reported.

Putin Gives Bush Stern Gesture

Russian Premier Vladimir Putin (R) sternly gestures while speaking with the U.S. President George W. Bush (L) in Beijing, on 8 August 2008.

Bush’s behavior towards the Russians has been anything but cordial or acceptable; as known from previous incidents.

Furthermore, as to other unacceptable incidents within the global community, this is becoming more of a unified consensus against Bush. Bush should be better known as the man who made a million mistakes, while being in the White House and still keeps doing them.

Moscow says no nuclear weapons in Belarus to counter U.S. shield

6 August 2008

MINSK - Russia may review military cooperation with Belarus in response to U.S. missile defense plans in Central Europe, but will not return nuclear weapons to the country, the Russian ambassador to Minsk said Wednesday.

The U.S. plans to deploy 10 interceptor missiles in northern Poland and a radar station in the Czech Republic as part of a missile shield for Europe and North America against possible attacks from "rogue states," including Iran.

"When Poland signs a treaty with the United States on the deployment of missile defense elements, then we will be in a position to discuss some additional aspects of military cooperation with Belarus," Ambassador Alexander Surikov said.

He added that an array of counter measures would be devised, but there would be "no return of nuclear weapons to Belarus."

The envoy said, however, that Russia could deploy Iskander missile-defense systems and strategic bombers in Belarus.

Moscow strongly opposes the possible deployment of the U.S. missile shield, viewing it as a threat to its national security. Russia's Foreign Ministry has said that if U.S. strategic missile defense elements are deployed near Russia's borders, Moscow would be forced to respond with a "military-technical approach" rather than a diplomatic one.

President Bush Discusses Freedom Agenda

This speech is in response, to something Queen Deborah of Palestine wrote earlier, for the Bush Administration didn’t nor still does not wish the global community to know the truth; about there slave situations, they have created for over 100 years in various countries in the world and within the U.S., it was reported.

For Immediate Release
Office of the Press Secretary
July 24, 2008

Video

Audio
THE PRESIDENT: Thank you. Please be seated. Henrietta, thank you for the kind introduction. I am honored to join you all today to express America's solidarity with those who yearn for liberty around the world.

Captive Nations Week was first observed in 1959, at a time when Soviet Communism seemed ascendant. Few people at that first gathering could have envisioned then what the -- that the Cold War would end the way it did -- with the triumph of the shipyard workers in Poland, a Velvet Revolution in Prague, the fall of the Berlin Wall, and the peaceful collapse of the Soviet Union. Captive Nations Week is a chance for us to reflect on that remarkable history, and to honor the brave dissidents and democracy activists who helped secure freedom's victory in the great ideological struggle of the 20th century.

Captive Nation Week is also a chance to reflect on the challenges we face in the 21st century -- the challenge of the new ideological struggle against violent extremism. In this struggle, we can go forward with confidence -- free nations have faced determined enemies before and have prevailed, and we will prevail again.

I appreciate your leadership of USAID, Henrietta; and I want to thank all those who work for this very important Agency. I appreciate you being on the front lines of compassion and decency and liberty.

I'm honored to be here with the Secretary of Commerce, Carlos Gutierrez. The Cuban dissidents have no better friend than Carlos Gutierrez. Think about America -- Carlos was raised, born in Cuba. Today he sits in the Cabinet of the President of the United States. I love what our country represents. And Carlos, I thank you for serving.

I'm proud to be here with Ambassador John Negroponte. He's the Deputy Secretary of the Department of State. Deputy Secretary of Defense, Gordon England, is with us. Ambassador Mark Dybul, U.S. Global AIDS Coordinator. Thanks for coming, Mark. Other members of the administration -- a lot of members from the Diplomatic Corps. Thank you for coming. I'm proud to be in your presence.

I believe America is the hope for the world because we are a nation that stands strongly for freedom. We believe every man, woman, and child is given the gift of liberty by our Creator. That's a fundamental belief of the United States. This cherished belief has guided our leaders from America's earliest days.

We see this belief in George Washington's assertion that freedom's cause, as he put it, the cause is "the cause of mankind."

We see it in Lincoln's summoning of "the spirit which prizes liberty as the heritage of all men, in all lands, everywhere."

We see it in Wilson's pledge to make the world "safe for democracy" in World War I, and FDR's determination to make America "the arsenal of democracy" in World War II.

We see it in Kennedy's promise to "pay any price to assure the survival and success of liberty," and Ronald Reagan's call to "move toward a world in which all people are at last free to determine their own destiny."

Over the years, different Presidents, from different eras, and different political parties, have acted to defend and advance the cause of liberty. These actions included bold policies such as the Lend-Lease Act, the Marshall Plan, the Berlin Airlift, the creation of NATO and the Voice of America, support for freedom fighters in Central America, and the liberation of Grenada and Panama. And because we were steadfast in liberty's defense, the cause of freedom prevailed.

At the dawn of a new century, our belief in the universality of freedom is being challenged once again. We saw the challenge on September the 11th, 2001. On that day terrorists, harbored by a tyrannical regime thousands of miles from America, brought death and destruction to our shores. We learned important lessons: To protect America, we must fight the enemy abroad so we don't have to face them here at home. And to protect America, we must defeat the ideology of hatred by spreading the hope of freedom.

Over the past seven years, this is exactly what we have done. Since 9/11, we recognized that we're at war and we must stop new attacks before they happen -- not wait until after they happen. So we're giving our intelligence and law enforcement and homeland security professionals the tools they need to stop terrorists before they strike again. We're transforming our military to meet the threats of a new century. We're putting pressure on the enemy. We've captured or killed thousands of terrorists -- including most of those responsible for the September the 11th attacks. We've removed regimes in Afghanistan and Iraq that threatened our citizens and the peace in the world. And now we're helping the people of those two nations fight the terrorists who want to establish new safe havens from which to launch attacks on America and our friends.

In the long run, though, the best way to defeat the terrorists is to offer a hopeful alternative to their murderous ideology -- and that alternative is based on human liberty. We've seen a hopeful beginning for the cause of liberty at the start of the 21st century. Over the last seven years, we've seen the citizens in Afghanistan and Iraq emerge from tyranny to establish representative governments. We've seen citizens in Georgia and Ukraine stand up for their right to free and fair elections. We've seen people in Lebanon take to the streets to demand their independence. We've seen strides toward democracy taken by nations such as Kuwait and Liberia, Mauritania and Morocco, and Pakistan.

It's in our national interest to continue liberty's advance -- because we know from history that the advance of freedom is necessary for our security and for world peace. Just think about World War II. During that conflict Japan and Germany were enemies of America who invaded their neighbors and destabilized the world. And today, Japan and Germany are strong democracies and good friends and strong allies in the cause of peace.

During the Cold War, the nations of Central and Eastern Europe were part of the Warsaw Pact alliance that was poised to attack Western Europe. Today, most of those nations are members of the NATO alliance, who are using their freedom to aid the rise of other young democracies. In these experiences, we have seen the transformative power of freedom. We've seen that free societies don't harbor terrorists, or launch unprovoked attacks on their neighbors. Free societies are peaceful societies. And that is why the United States of America must continue to cause -- to lead the cause of freedom.

Over the past seven years, we've learned that leading the cause of freedom requires combating hopelessness in struggling nations. Combating hopelessness is in America's security interests, because the only way our enemies can recruit people to their dark ideology is to exploit distress and despair. Combating hopelessness is in our moral interests -- Americans believe that to whom much is given, much is required. So the challenge for America in the years ahead is to continue to help people in struggling nations achieve freedom from corruption, freedom from disease, freedom from poverty, freedom from hunger and freedom from tyranny.

In the years ahead America must continue to use our foreign assistance to promote democracy and good government. Increased aid alone will not help nations overcome institutional challenges that hold entire societies back. To be effective, our aid must be targeted to encourage the development of free and accountable institutions.

In the past seven years we've more than doubled the federal budget for democracy and governance and human rights programs. We've increased the budget for the National Endowment of Democracy by more than 150 percent since 2001. We've transformed the way we deliver aid by creating the Millennium Challenge Account, which is a new approach to foreign assistance, which offers support to developing nations that fight corruption, and govern justly, and open their economies, and invest in the health and education of their people. The challenge for future presidents and future Congresses will be to ensure that America's generosity remains tied to the promotion of transparency and accountability and prosperity.

In the years ahead, America must continue to promote free trade and open investment. Over the long term, trade and investment are the best ways to fight poverty and build strong and prosperous societies. Over the past seven years, we expanded the African Growth and Opportunity Act, which is spreading prosperity by dramatically increasing trade between the United States and Africa; implemented free trade agreements with 11 countries, creating hope and opportunity for both our citizens and the citizens of these nations. We're striving to make this the year that the world completes an ambitious Doha trade agreement -- will open up new markets for Americans' goods and services and help alleviate poverty around the world. The challenge for future presidents and future Congresses is to reject the false temptation of protectionism and keep the world open for trade.

In the years ahead, America must continue to fight against disease. Nations afflicted with debilitating public health crises cannot build strong and prosperous societies for their citizens. America is helping these nations replace disease and despair with healing and hope. We're working in 15 African nations to cut the number of malaria-related deaths in half. Our Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief, known as PEPFAR, is supporting the treatment of more than 1.7 million people. And Congress will soon pass legislation to significantly expand this vital initiative. We're expanding our efforts to train health workers for the poorest countries, to treat key neglected tropical diseases such as river blindness and hookworm. The challenge for future presidents and future Congresses will be to continue this commitment, so that we can lift the shadow of malaria and HIV/AIDS and other diseases once and for all.

In the years ahead, America must continue to lead the fight against global hunger. Nobel Prize winner Norman Borlaug once said: "You can't build peace on empty stomachs." Americans are answering the call to feed the hungry. This year, the United States has provided more than $1.8 billion in new funds to bolster global food security. We're the world's largest provider of food aid. I strongly believe we must transform the way that our food aid is delivered. One innovative proposal is to purchase up to 25 percent of our food assistance directly from farmers in developing world. This would help build up local agriculture; it will help break the cycle of famine. And I ask the United States Congress to approve this measure as soon as possible. The challenge for future presidents and future Congresses will be to find still other innovative ways to alleviate hunger while promoting greater self-reliance in developing nations.

In the years ahead, America must continue to lead the cause of human rights. The Soviet dissident Andrei Amalrik once compared a tyrannical state to a soldier who holds a rifle on his enemy, until his arms finally tire and the prisoner escapes. It's important we never strengthen the arms. The role of free nations like ours is to put pressure on the arms of the world's tyrants and strengthen the prisoners who are striving for their liberty.

Over the past seven years, we've spoken out against human rights abuses by tyrannical regimes like those in Iran, Sudan, and Syria and Zimbabwe. We've spoken candidly about human rights with nations with whom we've got good relations, such as Egypt and Saudi Arabia and China. In keeping with this commitment, today I renew my call for the release of all prisoners of conscience around the world -- including Ayman Nour of Egypt, Aung San Suu Kyi of Burma, Oscar Biscet of Cuba, Riad Seif of Syria.

To ensure our government continues to speak out for those who have no other voice, I recently issued a directive instructing all senior U.S. officials serving in undemocratic countries to maintain regular contact with political dissidents and democracy activists. The challenge for future presidents and future Congresses is to ensure that America always stands with those seeking freedom -- and never hesitates to shine the light of conscience on abuses of human rights across the world.

As Henrietta mentioned, with us today are individuals who suffered terribly in the cause of freedom, and whose stories inspire our country, and their examples of resilience and resolve should give us courage. I'm not going to mention all the ones I met, but I'd like to make -- mention some.

First, we stand with Blanca Gonzalez. Her son, Normando Hernandez Gonzalez, remains in Castro's gulag for speaking the truth about the Cuban regime. Bienvenidos. (Applause.)

We stand with Olga Kozulina. Her father, Alexander Kozulin, remains in prison in Belarus for the "crime" of running for President. Welcome. (Applause.)

We stand with Manouchehr Mohammedi. Both he and his brother were viciously tortured by the Iranian authorities. He was the only one who survived and escaped. Welcome to America. (Applause.)

We stand with Cho Jin Hae, who witnessed several of her family members starve to death in North Korea. She herself was tortured by the communist authorities. (Applause.)

Thank you all for coming. I thank the others who took time out of their day to meet me, as well. I appreciate your testament to the universal desire for freedom.

This morning, I have a message for all those throughout the world who languish in tyranny: I know there are moments when it feels like you're alone in your struggle. And you're not alone. America hears you. Millions of our citizens stand with you, and hope still lives -- even in bleak places and in dark moments.

Even now, change is stirring in places like Havana and Damascus and Tehran. The people of these nations dream of a free future, hope for a free future, and believe that a free future will come. And it will. May God be with them in their struggle. America always will be.

Thank you for letting me come by, and may God bless you all. (Applause.)

END

The Romanov Royal Family

The Romanov Royal Family

21 July 2008

by HRM Deborah

I was asked a question of my families relation to the Romanov royal family and for me to respond to this, is with deep sadness, so please understand.

Tzar Nicholas 2 as everyone knows with his family died in 1918, when they where overthrown during what is considered the start of the Russian Revolution and there where no survivors.

As for these counterfeits claiming since that time, to be Annastasia; I have always known to not be true because she died with her family, this was explained to me many years ago, by my mother.

As to my families relationship to the Romanov’s, they where cousins and the event of there death has always been a very great sadness for not just myself, but the whole family.

On a more personal note, Tzar Nicholas 2 in history had been accused of some very horrible things and it is my wish, to disperse this injustice. He was a very kind man, a deeply loving father and an honor to his country.

Russia concerned over U.S.-Ukraine Black Sea military exercises?

18 July 2008

MOSCOW- Russia's Foreign Ministry voiced on Friday its concerns over the U.S.-Ukrainian Sea Breeze naval exercises currently underway in the Black Sea.

"The nature of the exercises, and attempts to present them as anti-Russian, as well as the involvement of countries from outside the region cannot but provoke certain questions and certain concerns. Why was the Black Sea basin chosen for the drills?" the ministry said on its website, describing the purpose of the exercises as "questionable."

The Russian ministry said Black Sea countries can independently, without outside interference, solve Black Sea security and stability issues.

The ministry also said that the current military exercises had been met by protests from the local population, and that the demonstrations reflected Ukrainian public opinion in relation to the current Ukrainian administration's policy of seeking membership of NATO. The statement also said that this policy did nothing to improve relations with Moscow.

Sea Breeze 2008, a NATO military exercise, began on Monday in Ukraine's Odessa, Crimea and Black Sea coastal regions. Two years ago, the Sea Breeze 2006 exercise in the Crimea was disrupted by protests.

Ukraine and the United States are joined by 15 other countries for this year's exercises, which are due to end on July 26. Fifteen Ukrainian ships, four aircraft, 10 helicopters, and 500 service personnel are involved in the military exercises.

Ukraine's parliament, the Supreme Rada, approved NATO participation in the exercises in April. In total, more than 1,000 NATO troops, 15 ships, two submarines, and eight aircraft are expected to take part.

In May and June, several Ukrainian left-wing politicians announced that they would organize mass protests to disrupt the drills. Last Thursday, some 20 opposition activists set up an encampment in western Crimea, intending to picket the exercise.

A branch of the Ukrainian Communist Party in Donetsk said over 1,000 people took part in anti-NATO rallies in the Donetsk Region in eastern Ukraine.

The Ukrainian Progressive Socialist Party said on Wednesday that authorities in Ukraine's Odessa region had banned broadcasts by Russian television channels over their coverage of the Sea Breeze 2008 exercise and the accompanying protests.

Ukraine's pro-Western leadership has been pursuing NATO membership since 2004, when President Viktor Yushchenko came to power. Ukraine failed to secure a place in the NATO Membership Action Plan, a key step toward joining the alliance, at a NATO summit in April, but was told the decision would be reviewed in December.

A poll conducted in April by the FOM-Ukraina pollster indicated that a majority of Ukrainians oppose NATO membership.

U.S., Czech missile deal prompts Moscow warning

Demonstrators protest against the plan to build a U.S. missile defence shield in the Czech Republic, in the centre of Prague July 8, 2008. The placards read: 'We are not sheep' and 'No radar'.

9 July 2008

By Arshad Mohammed and Jan Lopatka

The United States signed a pact on Tuesday to build part of a U.S. missile defense shield in the Czech Republic, prompting neighboring Russia to warn it will react with military means if the shield is deployed.

The U.S. and Czech foreign ministers toasted with champagne after signing the accord to place a tracking radar southwest of Prague as part of a system to protect against the perceived threat of missile attack from countries such as Iran.

But Russia, in a statement reminiscent of Cold War rhetoric, warned the United States against deploying the shield close to its borders.

"If the real deployment of an American strategic missile defense shield begins close to our borders, then we will be forced to react not with diplomatic methods, but with military-technical methods," the Foreign Ministry said in a statement on its www.mid.ru website.

It did not give specifics but analysts said the threat appeared aimed at stoking European opposition to the shield.

In response, the Pentagon accused Moscow of trying to make Washington's European allies nervous with its aggressive talk.

"I can only assume Russia's bellicose rhetoric is designed to make Europeans nervous about participating in this system, but that won't work," said press secretary Geoff Morrell.

Still, the White House said it would keep talking to Russia, trying to explain that the missile shield was not aimed against Moscow.

After President George W. Bush met Russian President Dmitry Medvedev on the fringes of the G8 summit, in Japan, White House spokesman Gordon Johndroe said: "We will continue to have a dialogue with the Russians on this matter as Presidents Bush and Medvedev reaffirmed this week in their meeting in Japan."

In 2007, former President Vladimir Putin, now prime minister, said Russia could aim missiles at European countries if the missile shield, which Moscow considers a threat to its national security, goes ahead.

The Pentagon insists the missile defense system is designed to counter missile threats from the Middle East, not Russia.

"We've made several very robust offers to the Russians in terms of how we could collaborate and how we are willing to have as much transparency as possible with respect to this missile defense system, what its design is and what its intent is," Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman told Reuters Tuesday.

Russia's Foreign Ministry said in the statement Moscow's proposals to the United States on the shield had been ignored.

Washington also wants to put 10 interceptor rockets in neighboring Poland, although talks on that have stalled due to Polish demands for billions of dollars to modernize its army and air defenses in return for hosting the missile base.

'ROGUE STATES'

The United States says the shield would defend itself and its allies against missile attacks from "rogue states" and points to intelligence suggesting Iran could develop a long-range missile capable of striking Europe by 2015.

"We face, with the Iranians, and so do our allies and friends, a growing missile threat that is getting ever longer and ever deeper, and where the Iranian appetite for nuclear technology, to this point, is still unchecked," U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said after signing the deal.

Under the proposed $3.5 billion system, sensors and radar would detect an enemy missile in flight and guide a ground-based interceptor to destroy it without explosives.

The deal is opposed by many in the Czech Republic, where it requires parliamentary approval. Many Czechs are wary of any foreign military presence after the Soviet invasion in 1968 and ensuing two decades of occupation. An opinion poll last month showed 68 percent of Czechs were against the shield.

"We believe that this could start another arms race," said Frantisek Smrcka, who with other protesters in the Czech capital unfurled a huge banner shaped like a bull's-eye.

Russian military analyst Pavel Felgenhauer said Moscow was using Cold War rhetoric to discourage the Czech parliament from ratifying the shield agreement.

"That is why it is very unspecific but sounds threatening," he said. "It is psychological pressure, the same sort that was used in the 1980s by the Soviet Union when the United States deployed cruise missiles in Europe, in an attempt to boost the anti-missile, anti-U.S. protests."

Prague said it was surprised by Moscow's reaction.

"This is not an appropriate way to react. We would expect a different way, given negotiations that we but also our partners are leading with Russia," said Czech Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Zuzana Opletalova.

Russia, which has opposed the march of the NATO security alliance toward its borders, earlier suggested the deal called into question U.S.-Russian talks on missile defense cooperation.

Moscow and Washington had agreed to explore ways of easing the Kremlin's concerns the shield would be used to spy on and target Russia's own missile systems. Proposals under discussion had included stationing Russian military officers at the shield sites and providing real-time video of activity there.

The shield is a priority for Bush, who hopes to finalize an accord on the interceptors with Poland before he leaves office in January. After that, the system's fate will be decided by his successor.