RUSSIAN WAR CRIME - HOSPITAL IN AZAZ DELIBERATELY TARGETED BY RUSSIAN FORCES

ANOTHER RUSSIAN WAR CRIME - Azaz hospital air raid: 'No terrorists, no fighters, just babies'

The UN says that 50 people were killed in attacks on at least three medical facilities including a children's hospital in northern Syria on Monday, with one medical charity saying it appeared they had been deliberately attacked by Russian or government jets.

On Monday evening, UN chief Ban Ki-Moon called the strikes "blatant violations of international law", with a UN spokesman saying the attacks had "cast a shadow" on the ceasefire agreement made between the 17-country International Syrian Support Group last week.

Fears of an escalation of the five year civil war were further sparked as Syrian government forces and Kurdish People's Protection Units (YPG) fighters reportedly took Tel Rifaat on Monday night, a key town enroute to the city of Azaz where air strikes fell on Monday.

As Turkey shelled Syrian targets across its border for the third day in a row, Turkish Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoglu said on Monday his country would not allow Azaz to fall to Kurdish fighters.

Meanwhile, Russia's defense ministry said Turkey's shelling was "open support to international terrorism".

Syrian government forces reportedly told Al Jazeera late on Monday that they planned to continue their march to Azaz, a flashpoint town in Aleppo province near the Turkish border, where it would appear a major escalation in fighting could occur.

'Only babies'

Earlier in the day, at least 14 people were reported killed when bombs hit a children's hospital in Azaz.

A video posted by a French NGO operating in Syria reportedly captured the first moments after the attack, saying that there were "no terrorists or combatants, only babies".

"We have been moving scores of screaming children from the hospital," medical aid worker Juma Rahal told Reuters.

According to Storyful social news agency, Syria Charity built the hospital.

Two other hospitals in Maaret al-Numan, Idlib province, were also hit. At least seven people were reported killed when four bombs destroyed a hospital supported by the Doctors Without Borders (MSF) charity.

Air strikes also hit the National Hospital on the north edge of town, killing two nurses, the UK-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights and opposition groups in Syria said.

MSF said it believed its hospital was attacked by either Russian or Syrian government forces, while Turkish officials separately said Russian planes hit the Aleppo hospital.

Neither report was independently verified or confirmed by the Russian government.

Russia has been conducting an intense bombing campaign against rebels in the nearby province of Aleppo, and has also hit targets in Idlib.

Russian planes also resumed air attacks on Monday in northern Latakia province near the Turkish border, bombing rebels to allow the Syrian army to advance.

Rescue workers and rights groups say the bombing has killed scores of civilians at market places, hospitals, schools and residential areas in Syria.

Massimiliano Rebaudengo, the head of MSF's Syria mission, said the Idlib attack "appears to be a deliberate attack on a health structure, and we condemn this attack in the strongest possible terms.

"The destruction of the hospital leaves the local population of around 40,000 people without access to medical services in an active zone of conflict."

MSF said at least seven people were killed and at least eight members of staff were missing after four rockets hit the 30-bed facility, which had 54 staff, two operating theatres, an outpatients' department and an emergency room.

The charity's president, Mego Terzian, said he believed Russia or Syrian government forces were behind the attack.

The MSF organisation supports about 150 hospitals in Syria, with 16 hospitals - or about one every three days - hit this year alone.  

A video shared by investigative website founder Eliot Higgins reportedly shows the aftermath of the bombing on the MSF hospital, although the footage is yet to be verified by the group.

‘Criminal in the Kremlin’: An Interview with Professor Walter Clemens

 

Below is an interview conducted recently with Walter Clemens, a professor emeritus of political science at Boston University and an associate of the Davis Center for Russian and Eurasian Studies at Harvard University.

 

MOTYL: Walter, you’re well known for tackling complex moral and legal issues of international relations in your work. One of your books was Can Russia Change?

 

CLEMENS: I’m still doubtful.

 

MOTYL: Your current project is titled “Can—Should—Must We Negotiate with Evil? The World and North Korea.”

 

CLEMENS: The subtitle could also read “The World and Vladimir Putin.”

MOTYL: What should the international community do about Mr. Putin?

 

CLEMENS: He should be indicted and brought before the International Criminal Court. Putin is probably guilty of all types of transgressions the court is authorized to prosecute—genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and aggression. As Russia’s president or prime minister, Putin dispatched Russian armed forces against the peoples of Chechnya, Georgia, and Ukraine while keeping them in a province of Moldova. His troops killed between 100,000 and 200,000 Chechens, split off South Ossetia and Abkhazia from Georgia, and watched as South Ossetians carried out ethnic cleansing of Georgian villages. Putin’s forces have seized Crimea, putting Tatars as well as Ukrainians at risk. Putin has fomented separatism in eastern Ukraine and sent several thousand Russians to fight alongside the separatists. He may not have intended for his proxies to shoot down a Malaysian airliner, but he provided the equipment and training that permitted them to do so and kill nearly 300 civilians. When weapons based in Russia strike targets inside Ukraine, however, there is no doubt about Putin’s intentions.

 

MOTYL: Do his actions actually meet the definitional requirements of the crimes you outline?

 

CLEMENS: The Rome Statute setting up the International Criminal Court in 2002 gave precise definitions of genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes—all of which fit Putin’s policies. But the member states’ lawyers did not define “aggression” until 2010. According to this definition , aggression includes “the invasion … by the armed forces of a state of the territory of another state”; “annexation by the use of force of the territory of another state”; “bombardment by the armed forces of a state against the territory of another state”; and “the sending by or on behalf of a state of armed bands, groups, irregulars or mercenaries … against another state.” Putin’s forces have clearly committed all these forms of “aggression,” but the ICC cannot exercise its jurisdiction over such crimes before 2017 and until the requisite number of member states have given their approval.

 

Meanwhile, it is clear that Putin’s Kremlin has violated the 1929 “Litvinov Protocol,” which put into force for Russia, Poland, Romania, Estonia, and Latvia the Pact of Paris outlawing war. That pact is still in force.

 

MOTYL: Very well, let’s agree that Putin’s armed forces are guilty on each of these counts as well as of committing crimes of genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes. Is the man Vladimir Putin guilty of these crimes as well? Couldn’t he argue that he knew nothing about them?

 

CLEMENS: Putin might counter that he bears no personal responsibility for what Russian forces have done. On the other hand, he has reigned as a virtual dictator over Russia since 1999 and cannot evade responsibility for the crimes his troops commit. Putin could deny that the ICC has jurisdiction, because Russia is one of 31 states that have signed but not ratified the Rome Statute. Pending ratification, however, Russia is obliged under international law not to violate its ICC obligations.

 

MOTYL: So who would bring charges against Putin?

 

CLEMENS: That’s where the complexities get deeper. The Rome Statute gives first jurisdiction to courts in the home country of the accused. Since Russian courts are puppets of the president, they cannot be expected to try and convict their boss. The United Nations Security Council could refer the Putin case to the ICC, but Russia would surely veto such a move.

 

Some 122 states have signed and ratified the Rome Statute. The statute provides that a party to the treaty “may refer to the prosecutor a situation in which one or more crimes within the jurisdiction of the court appear to have been committed” and request “the prosecutor to investigate the situation for the purpose of determining whether one or more specific persons should be charged with the commission of such crimes.” Three states party to the statute have cause to bring charges against Putin: Moldova, Georgia, and the Netherlands. Given that the Netherlands lost nearly 200 citizens on MH17, it probably has the strongest grounds for bringing charges against Putin. Georgia and Moldova, for their own reasons, have solid reasons to join the suit. Nongovernmental actors such as Human Rights Watch and Chechen organizations could also file charges. The Rome Statue permits the prosecutor to initiate investigations motu proprio, or on his/her own initiative, on the basis of information received from individuals or organizations.

 

Malaysia and Ukraine also have grounds to bring charges against Putin, because Flight MH17 belonged to Malaysia and was shot down in Ukrainian airspace. But their failure to ratify the statute disqualifies them from taking their complaints to the court. The United States has also disqualified itself by the George W. Bush administration’s decision to “un-sign” the Rome Statute negotiated and signed by the Clinton White House.

 

MOTYL: Do you seriously expect charges against Putin to be brought?

 

CLEMENS: Putin’s crimes rank with those committed by leaders in the former Yugoslavia who were charged and convicted of war crimes. But there are obstacles. Whereas complaints from ultranationalist Croats and Serbs about persecution of their heroes did not rattle the international community, many governments and businesses in Europe do not wish to offend the Kremlin. Even the United States prefers to retain Russian cooperation in many spheres, from outer space to North Korea.

 

Still, the climate is changing. Putin’s actions in late July–early August led the European Union and the United States to intensify their sanctions against Russia. To try and put the leader of a regional superpower in the dock would be a further step up the ladder. Significantly, Navi Pillay, the UN high commissioner for human rights, said the downing of the Malaysia Airlines jet may be a “war crime.” In July, the Court of Arbitration in The Hague ordered Russia to pay $50 billion in damages to shareholders in the defunct Russian oil company Yukos. That same month, Washington announced that Russia has been testing ground-based cruise missiles in violation of the 1987 Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces Treaty. These accusations come on top of other suspicions aroused by a string of unexplained murders of Russian journalists and others who challenged Putin over the years. And did not the recent cyber attacks against Ukrainian government offices in Kyiv and abroad originate in Putin’s Kremlin? A milieu of crime appears also to have spawned the theft by Russian gangsters of 1.2 billion usernames and passwords belonging to more than 500 million e-mail addresses around the globe.

 

The bottom line is obvious. If the world does not stand up to Putin today, as the Economist warned on July 26th, “worse will follow.”

Moscow Skyscraper Stunt Sparks Memes, Suspicion, And Confusion

A stunt this week in which the star and spire atop one of Moscow's iconic Stalin-era skyscrapers was painted in the blue-and-yellow colors of the Ukrainian flag has sparked a wave of Internet memes and suspicion about potential copycat acts.

 

The Belarusian opposition website Charter97.org, for example, has cast the caper as the work of a Ukrainian Spider-man adorned in yellow and blue and swooping down from the skies toward the red star of the skyscraper.

 

 

Others have used the incident to mock Dmitry Medvedev's fondness for "selfies," suggesting that it was the Russian prime minister who was responsible for the skyscraper stunt.

 

And some have taken to posting images showing the Kremlin and a map of Russia colored in yellow and blue.

 

All this yellow-and-blue mania appears to have made Russians extra-sensitive about Ukraine's national colors.

 

On August 22, Oleg Ilyin, a history teacher in St. Petersburg, was stopped at a street festival marking Russian Flag Day, while wearing a blue-and-yellow cap with "Ukraine" written on it. He was approached by police officers, who told him it was a "provocation," and detained him for two hours. 

 

The same day, Ekho Moskvy listeners heard that blue and yellow parallel lines had mysteriously appeared on the cobblestones of Red Square. Nonsense, said a Kremlin official -- they're three-month-old lines marking the route of the May 9 military parade. 

 

And in what first appeared to be a copycat stunt, an Instagram user on August 21 noticed an electricity pylon painted yellow and blue.

 

But a spokesman for the United Electric Grid Company said the incident was not a copycat stunt. The pylon, he said, was meant to be painted in the company's official colors, yellow, blue, and white -- but the white was left off by mistake.

 

The workers responsible, however, were detained for questioning.

 

This prompted opposition figure Aleksei Navalny to post pictures of the Moscow electricity company soccer team dressed in their yellow-and-blue uniforms, hinting sarcastically that they should be punished.

 

Other Twitter users have focused on the plight of the four young Muscovites who have been accused in the skyscraper incident and charged with hooliganism, which carries a maximum sentence of seven years in prison.

 

Ragozin also called for the case to become a cause celebre.

 

'They are simply urban thrill seekers who happened to be in the vicinity with climbing gear and parachutes'.

 

Founding Pussy Riot member Nadezhda Tolokonnikova has taken to Twitter to proclaim their innocence, writing that "House arrest for walking past a [protest] action is of course a victory."

 

Friends of the four accused have also launched a campaign to get them exonerated.

 

Vladislav Dovgopol, head of a Russian Parachuting Society and a friend of the four, vouched for the two men and two women in an open letter to President Vladimir Putin posted on VKontakte on August 21. 

 

"I am ready to vouch for each of them that they did not commit the act of vandalism attributed to them and have nothing to do with politics at all, or anything to do with the events in Ukraine in particular," Dovgopol wrote. "Base jumping and parachuting are always outside politics. It's what we do for fun. It's our choice."

 

Likewise, Anna Ivanova, a friend of one those arrested, also proclaimed the group's innocence on VKontakte. "The worst thing is that no one is looking for the person who actually did this, while four people sit side by side in a cell. Everyone wants blood and not justice," she wrote.

 

In a post on his Facebook page late on August 22, the Ukrainian urban climber Mustang Wanted claimed responsibility for the stunt. 

Ukrainian statehood in the face of Russian aggression

Analyses

 

The Ukrainian state is facing the most difficult period since it became independent almost exactly 23 years ago. In the east of the country a war is ongoing between government forces and Russian fighters, armed and largely sent by Russia. The economic situation in Ukraine is deteriorating rapidly, and the outlook is pessimistic. In mid-June, Gazprom stopped gas supplies, and it is unlikely that the parties will reach an agreement in the coming months. Although the general public has been mobilised by the external aggression, as time goes on and the economic performance worsens, Ukrainian public feelings will inevitably deteriorate. At the same time, Ukraine is entering a campaign for early elections to parliament, which will revive the hitherto muted internal political conflict; and radical parties may win strong representation in the new Verkhovna Rada.

 

Despite such enormous challenges, and Russia’s obvious efforts to bring the Ukrainian state to political, economic and humanitarian disaster, Kyiv is unlikely to agree to Russia’s demands (mainly broad autonomy for the east of Ukraine, and the abandonment of plans for European integration), which would be tantamount to complete capitulation to Moscow. After the revolution on the Maidan and the upheaval which the loss of Crimea meant, Ukraine finds itself in an accelerated process of building a new state identity. The Ukrainian authorities are under strong social pressure; they realise that Ukraine’s survival as a sovereign state, and what its constitution and boundaries will be, depend on how they cope with the conflict with Russia and other challenges. So, this struggle is ultimately about the preservation of Ukrainian statehood as such.

 

Russian military aggression …

 

In recent weeks, the armed conflict in the east of Ukraine which started in April took on the form of actual Russian aggression, which remains a determining factor in Ukraine’s current state of crisis, while at the same time it has temporarily suspended other political and economic problems. Russian weapons and people, many of whom are probably professional soldiers, are flowing into the Donbas at an unprecedented rate. Russia’s military activity has intensified due to the success of the Ukrainian forces, including their encirclement of Donetsk and Lugansk (although this is still incomplete). Kyiv wants to complete the operation before the parliamentary elections (which will most likely be held in October). However, all the indications are that this will not be possible, and Russia will continue to wage war.

 

In addition to the military operations, the Ukrainian authorities are facing a growing problem of refugees from the Donbas in other districts of the country (estimated at a minimum of 200,000 persons) and a growing humanitarian disaster in the region. In the big cities, supplies of water and electricity are regularly interrupted, and there are problems with supplying stores. More and more large companies have wholly or partly suspended production, which exacerbates the difficult economic situation for the local population. As a result of the fighting, the destruction of civilian infrastructure is increasing, and according to government calculations, reconstruction will cost at least $8 billion.

 

Kyiv is also facing a difficulty in the growing aversion of some Donbas residents towards the Ukrainian state, based on the conviction that the authorities are responsible for the current situation in the region, as well as the increasing losses among the civilian population. In large part this is due to the fact that the main sources of information for the majority of the population in east Ukraine are the Russian media. At the same time, the most active part of the community has left the Donbas. This all means that re-integrating the region with the rest of the country and the subsequent process of reconciliation will be long and difficult. Moreover, if the parliamentary elections do not allow political representation for Donbas to emerge, integrating the region with the rest of the country will become even more complicated.

 

... and economic assault

 

In addition to its military actions, Moscow has in recent months launched economic pressure on Ukraine, primarily in the form of further sanctions on Ukrainian production. Russia has traditionally been the most important market for Ukraine (23.8% of Ukrainian exports in 2013), and finding alternative markets to Russia will be a big challenge. In the first half of this year, Ukraine’s exports to Russia fell by 23.3%, and because of the embargo they will fall at an even faster pace over the coming months. Another problem is the interruption of supplies of Russian gas, which results from a lack of agreement on the price. In fact, Kyiv is determined to hold a full review of its current gas cooperation with Russia, which at present is very unfavourable for Ukraine. Ukraine’s current gas reserves will be exhausted within a few months. Russian sanctions are contributing to the further deterioration of Ukraine’s already very difficult economic situation, which has been in crisis for over two years. According to moderate estimates, GDP will fall by at least 7% this year, but a much greater decline is actually more likely.

 

The country’s deepening economic problems, rising unemployment, and the impoverishment of society, in conjunction with the expectation that the gas will run out in the autumn, will raise levels of social discontent. Although the Russian aggression has mobilised the majority of the population to rally around the government led by President Poroshenko, maintaining a similar degree of mobilisation in the long run will be difficult.

 

The risk of domestic political destabilisation

 

The parliamentary elections expected in October will most likely bring to power a coalition of parties which will continue Ukraine’s current harsh political approach to Russia. This is due to an observed reduction in support for the major political parties, and the transfer of sympathy for non-parliamentary parties who employ radical and anti-Russian rhetoric (such as the Oleh Lashko Party and the Hromadska Pozytsiya party led by Anatoly Hrytsenko). In addition, all the indications are that pro-Russian groups will only gain minor political representation in the next Verkhovna Rada. It is difficult to predict the balance of power in the new parliament, but there is a potential risk of political destabilisation in the post-election period.

 

President Poroshenko, who is currently still the strongest power centre in Ukraine, and the government which is formed after the election, will also have to face the challenge posed by the increased influence in the country of some oligarchic groups, mainly the group around Ihor Kolomoyski, the governor of the Dnipropetrovsk region. The current alliance between him and Kyiv is merely tactical, and the reforms announced by the government strike directly at the Kolomoyski group’s critical interests, which threatens potential conflict. The future role and importance of the Ukrainian oligarchic system, which in recent years has monopolised the country’s economy and was an unavoidable factor in politics, is one of the key ‘frozen’ problems which the Ukrainian state will have to confront.

 

 

Prospects: Kyiv will not capitulate

 

The distribution of political forces and the enduring public pressure on the authorities since the Maidan mean that – despite the increasingly difficult situation in the Donbas and the accumulation of many political and economic problems – Kyiv will not agree to any of the concessions expected by Moscow. This was confirmed by the negotiations between the foreign ministers of Ukraine, Russia, Germany and France held in Berlin on 17 August. Kyiv might be willing to reach some form of compromise with Moscow, although this would be risky because of the possibility of an explosion of public discontent; but any such agreement would have to be linked to a change in Russian policy. Russia’s actions, however, indicate that it is only interested in resolving the conflict on its own terms, which would be tantamount to a complete surrender by Kyiv.

 

In connection with Ukraine’s rejection of Russian demands, Moscow intends to continue its current policy of ‘demolishing’ the Ukrainian state. Kyiv seems to be aware that Russia is trying to create a situation where the costs of not capitulating to Moscow will be higher than the costs of accepting the Russian conditions. In this variant, this means that the Ukrainian-Russian conflict in its various manifestations (the de facto state of war in eastern Ukraine, the trade war, and the gas war) will last a long time. Regardless of the final outcome, the price for Ukraine will be very high, because it will involve a worsening humanitarian situation in eastern Ukraine; a sharp decline in GDP; the inhibition of necessary reforms and the modernisation of the country; an increase in labour migration; and difficulties with the future re-integration of the Donbas. On the other hand, as a consequence of the Maidan, and in the face of ongoing Russian aggression, a new Ukrainian political nation and social potential is being created, which in the future may bring about changes in the functioning of the Ukrainian state of a profound nature, although they are difficult to predict today.

Russia's first Project 11356 frigate, the Admiral Grigorovich, will join the Black Sea Fleet in 2014, Vice-Admiral Alexander Fedotenkov said on Monday.

“The newest Project 11356 escort ship, the Admiral Grigorovich, should be launched in 2013 and join the Black Sea Fleet in 2014,” Fedotenkov said.

The Kaliningrad-based Yantar shipyard is to build a total of six Project 11356 frigates for delivery between 2014 and 2016 under a contract with the Defense Ministry.

The lead warship in the series, the Admiral Grigorovich, was laid down in December 2010, the second, the Admiral Essen, in July 2011 and the third, the Admiral Makarov, in February 2012.

The Project 11356 frigates, displacing 3,850 tons, are designed for anti-surface and anti-submarine warfare, both independently and as an escort, and are also armed with air defense systems.

The class are armed with an eight-cell launcher for Kalibr and Klub (3M54E) anti-ship and surface-to-surface missiles, a 100-mm main gun, Kashtan gun/missile close-in air defense systems, Shtil vertical-launch air defense missile systems, two torpedo tubes, an anti-submarine rocket system and a Ka-28 or Ka-31 helicopter, according to globalsecurity.org and rusnavy.com.

The Indian Navy received two Talwar class frigates, based on the 11356 design, in April and November last year, Times of India reported.

Moscow fires warning shot across bow of US naval-based ABM

The guided missile cruiser USS Lake Champlain

A top Russian official says a US missile defense system near Russia’s border is strategically destabilizing and may prompt an arms race.

Speaking to SW on the threat of mobile naval-based elements of the US missile defense system  “suddenly appearing” on Russia’s coastline, Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin said such an event would trigger “the harshest reaction from Russia."

"We must consider the effective protection of our strategic nuclear forces," Rogozin said in an interview with the magazine Voyenny Parade (‘Military Parade’).

Rogozin, while not elaborating on what Russia’s response would be, noted that Russia is taking definite steps to counter American ships “equipped with the Aegis integrated naval weapons system.”

Russia has warned its US and NATO partners on numerous occasions that unless the two sides can reach an acceptable agreement over NATO plans to unilaterally build a missile defense shield in Eastern Europe, another arms race is inevitable.

Ironically, it was US President Barack Obama – the same American leader who pushed for a “reset” with Moscow – who introduced the current missile defense plans that may include stationing Aegis missiles aboard US warships in the Black Sea.

Washington says the missile defense system, which is capable of intercepting short- to intermediate-range ballistic missiles, is vital for protecting Eastern Europe from “rogue states,” like Iran and North Korea. At the same time, however, the western military alliance ignores Moscow’s concern the strategic balance may be upset. In fact, NATO even refuses to provide Moscow with written, legal guarantees that the system will not in the future target Russian territory.

Judging by Rogozin’s strong words, it seems that another arms race has already begun.

"U.S. missile defense in its current form is obviously destabilizing and prompting an arms race between Russia and the U.S. and NATO," Rogozin noted.

Russia is considering ways of “suppressing and penetrating” the missile defense system in ways that will guarantee “unacceptable damage to any aggressor, and force it to resist the temptation to test Russia's strength,” the Deputy Prime Minister added.

Rogozin, who served in a previous capacity as Russia’s NATO envoy, explained his use of blunt language.

"We must be frank about this. I was the Russian envoy to NATO for four years and I know what language they understand best of all," he said.

US seeks ‘world supremacy’ through advanced weapons - Security Chief

 A RIM-7P NATO Sea Sparrow Missile being launched from the Nimitz-class aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln (CVN 72) during a stream raid shoot exercise.

The Secretary of the Security Council of Russia has provided his views on a number of national security issues, including the importance of preserving Russia’s nuclear arsenal against potential adversaries.

­Nikolay Patrushev, commenting on how atomic weapons play more of a political role than a military one, said the consequences of even a “limited nuclear intervention” are so catastrophic that it makes the usage of such weapons absolutely impossible. 

Nuclear arsenals therefore continue to serve as an effective deterrent against any possible large-scale war, Patrushev told Komsomolskaya Pravda newspaper in an interview.

Patrushev spoke candidly on the nature and source of threats to Russian security, and what those challenges mean for the country.

“We…understand that the atomic weapons of leading western counties are aimed mainly against Russia,” he said. “In these conditions – and given the insufficient strength of Russia’s conventional armed forces – the preservation of the nuclear potential is a priority task.”

While ruling out the possibility of total nuclear disarmament, Patrushev nevertheless explained that a new generation of weapon systems – including anti-ballistic missiles – is changing the nuclear calculus.

Earlier, Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin spoke on the threat mobile, naval-based elements of the US missile defense system “suddenly appearing” on Russia’s coastline. Such an event would trigger “the harshest reaction from Russia," he warned.

Rogozin said that Russia is now taking definite steps to counter US warships “equipped with the Aegis integrated naval weapons system.”

Moscow has frequently warned of “another arms race” unless a bilateral agreement is reached on NATO’s plans for missile defense near the Russian border.

Patrushev continued that theme in his interview, underlining the technological advances that have changed the face of war.

Not long ago, any state that possessed nuclear weapons was undoubtedly a “dominating force” in the international arena, he noted. However, in a clear reference to US plans for a naval-based missile defense shield in Eastern Europe, Patrushev mentioned that a new generation of weapons is being developed, and that “the United States has proven successful in this field of research.”

Patrushev explained that Russia, which has seen success in developing state-of-the-art technology, had not given enough attention to that field of research. As new weaponry appears, the US appears to be reconsidering the role of strategic nuclear arms in the fulfillment of a “geopolitical idea of world supremacy,” the security official added.

Russia to arm Nicaragua’s war on drugs

Moscow says it is ready to supply equipment and weapons to Nicaragua as the global fight against the scourge of drug production and smuggling continues.

Cooperation with the Central American country “comes down to the question of weapons, uniforms and police equipment,"Viktor Ivanov, head of the Federal Drug Control Service, told reporters following negotiations with Nicaraguan police chief Aminta Granera in Moscow.

Monday’s announcement signals the next chapter in Russian-Nicaraguan drug-fighting efforts.

In February, officials from both countries agreed to conduct joint operations against drug trafficking and establish a drug enforcement training center in the Nicaraguan capital of Managua.

The center trains law enforcement officers from all Latin American countries affected by the cocaine trade, Ivanov noted.

Granera said Nicaragua was grateful for the pledge of "specialized equipment [from Russia], which will strengthen the ability of Nicaraguan police to deter crime" related to the drug trade.

Russia is no stranger in the global war on drugs. Moscow is currently working with NATO to study ways of halting drug trafficking out of Afghanistan, the Central Asian country that has experienced a sharp increase of heroin production following the removal of the Taliban.

There are approximately 2 million drug addicts in Russia, while an estimated 100,000 Russian citizens die of drug-related illnesses each year, according to statistics from the Federal Drug Control Service.

Meanwhile, Russia is also interested in stability in Central and South America due to its business investments in the region.

Ivanov mentioned that Russia has already invested about $16 billion in energy projects in Venezuela.

"Russia is developing economic relations with Latin America, which is demonstrated by the the recent development of oil fields in Venezuela,” Ivanov said. “Our task is to improve the level of professionalism [among drug control officials] in order to protect our investments in that region from drug lords."

With relations strained between the United States and various Central and South American countries, including in Nicaragua and Venezuela, Russia has found space for political and economic development.

Fire engulfs Moscow Military Academy - Video

A huge fire has erupted in a hangar located at Moscow’s Air Force Academy in the north of the capital. Firefighters struggled for hours to put out the flames, and helicopters had to be called in as well.

The fire, which started in the hangar, quickly intensified, forcing firefighters to assign a difficulty level of 3 of a possible 5. Over two thousand square meters were ablaze, with plumes of thick smoke seen across the capital.

Luckily, no one was injured, but the situation became intense after firefighters were seen running into the burning building and coming out with gas tanks that were stored there. Many local residents feared an explosion, but thanks to the combined efforts of men and machines, the fire in the hangar was contained.

Overall, 47 fire brigades and 4 helicopters battled the blaze for over four hours.

Belgrade pays homage to Moscow on Kosovo claim

Russian President Putin (R) and Serbian President-elect Nikolic speak during their meeting in Moscow.

Serbia is on a “long and uncertain” road to joining the European Union but will not give up its claim to Kosovo for the sake of membership, President-elect Tomislav Nikolic told Russian President Vladimir Putin on May 26, who promised to provide an $800 million loan during the meeting.

It was former leader of the ultranationalist Radical Party Nikolic’s first foreign trip since he was elected president on May 20. The pair spoke warmly of ties between their nations, which share mostly Slavic, Orthodox Christian culture.

$800 million ‘aid’

“We see Serbia as our spiritual brothers,” said Putin, who met Nikolic on the sidelines of a congress of the dominant United Russia party just outside the Kremlin.

Nikolic told Putin that “Serbia is a partner of Russia in the Balkans” and said he would protect the interests of Serbia and Russia. Nikolic offered further assurance that he wants Serbia to join the EU.

“Serbia is on the road to the EU. It is a long and uncertain road. We will order our country according to the rules that exist in the EU,” Nikolic told Putin, according to Russian news agency Itar-Tass and Serbia’s Tanjug.

Putin told Nikolic that Russia was “ready” to provide an $800 million infrastructure improvement loan that has long been under negotiation, but did not say when it might be finalized. In December, the had entered final negotiations for the loan to overhaul the Balkan country’s dilapidated rail network, part of a wider economic pact agreed in 2009.

Nikolic added that he has “not heard there exists the condition that Serbia should recognize Kosovo.

We cannot do that, even if it meant breaking off negotiations at that very moment.”

World powers maintained united front during nuclear talks with Iran in Moscow

Iranian stalling tactics, veiled threats by the six powers and odd PowerPoint presentations, but nary a word about Israel in the third round of nuclear talks with Iran.

Iranian stalling tactics, veiled threats from the six powers, an odd PowerPoint presentation about religious rulings by Iranian spiritual leader Ali Khamenei, and nary a word about Israel: That is some of what happened behind closed doors at Moscow's Golden Ring Hotel, where a third round of nuclear talks with Iran took place this week.

The intensive talks held in Moscow on Monday and Tuesday between Iran and the six powers - the United States, Russia, China, Britain, France and Germany - ended in failure. The six powers were unable to bridge their major gaps with Iran.

A Western diplomat who asked to remain anonymous in light of the sensitivity of the talks said that one major obstacle revealed by the Moscow talks relates to the underground facility for uranium enrichment in Fordo, near the city of Qum.

According to the diplomat, the Iranians responded only in a broad, vague fashion to demands that it limit its enrichment of uranium to a level of 20 percent and move such uranium outside the country, and they refused to discuss the Fordo plant at all. The Iranians claimed that Fordo is not a military facility, so it should not be included in the talks.

"We learned that Fordo is a taboo subject for the Iranians, and that it is the flagship of their nuclear project," the diplomat said.

After ending the second round of talks in Baghdad with the feeling that the six powers were desperate to forge an agreement, the Iranian delegates arrived in Moscow feeling confident. But Western diplomats, who realized that expectations had been raised too high in Baghdad, came to Moscow skeptical and cautious. The message they broadcast was that the powers want an agreement, but not at any price.

The Western diplomat said that several times during the Moscow talks, Western representatives conveyed veiled threats and warnings to the Iranian delegation. The message was that "we are not under pressure, and we prefer no deal to a bad deal."

Western delegates, he added, told the Iranians that "packing our bags and going home won't be a problem. That won't cause anything bad to happen to us. But if you are the ones to pack your bags and leave, you'll have a lot to lose."

The six powers presented tough terms to the Iranians, and they rejected Iran's request to conduct a fourth round of talks with higher-level representatives. "Another round of talks like this one will not lead to results, so we told the Iranians that there's no point in holding them," the Western diplomat said.

They did agree to arrange a meeting of jurists and nuclear experts to conduct a detailed review of the positions presented by both sides during the Moscow discussions. But the powers made it clear to the Iranians that they "want concrete actions, not just talks."

The Iranians were surprised that delegates from the six powers managed to maintain a united front throughout the discussions. The Iranians had hoped to bring the Chinese and Russian delegates into their corner. But during separate meetings with the Russian and Chinese diplomats, the Iranians heard the same message that was relayed consistently in the meetings with representatives from all six countries.

Throughout the Moscow negotiations, Saeed Jalili, head of the Iranian delegation, tried to carry out delaying tactics and evasive maneuvers. One odd moment occurred on the second day of the discussions, when the Iranians announced that they were willing to discuss an initiative broached by Russia's President Vladimir Putin regarding the nuclear dispute.

Delegates from the six powers began passing notes among themselves in an effort to ascertain what Putin's initiative actually said. Some of the diplomats in the conference room sent text messages to colleagues outside, asking that they conduct Google searches to see whether Putin had sponsored an initiative they didn't know about.

After a few minutes of searches, it became clear that the initiative in question was actually an article published by Putin four months ago, during his presidential campaign. Putin stated in the article that Iran should be allowed to enrich uranium under certain restrictions, to be monitored and enforced by the International Atomic Energy Agency. The agitated Russian delegation hastily explained that this article was not a formal diplomatic initiative and bore no relevance to the diplomatic negotiations then underway.