Eyes of Russian analysts and publicists

Breakdown and subjectivity.

The increasingly shaky post-miss in Central Asia.

On 9 August, a "sixteenth consultation gathering of the Heads of Central Asia" took place in the capital of Kazakhstan. Information resources traditionally omit this forum due to the fact that it is actually a consultation in the region.

Greater attention is usually paid to the negotiations on abroad policy, the alleged "central Asian Friday" or "C5+1". In the autumn, Japan will service as "+1", most likely with the fresh Prime Minister.

In fact, it's usually in consultation meetings that discuss what 5 will be working on during the year. The "Military Review" publishes a number of material showing the links between consultations, interior policies and further steps under C5+.

The sixth consultation gathering this year is definitely distinguished in terms of the presentation in Russia from the general cycle, as almost everyone noticed it, not the gathering itself, but the statements of the president of Kazakhstan K.-Ż. Tokayeva.

The fact is that before the negotiations, K.-Ż. Tokaev published an extended political article in the diary “Kazakhstanskaya Truth”, entitled “The Renaissance of Central Asia: towards sustainable improvement and prosperity” (https://www.akorda.kz/ru/renessans-centralnoy-azii- naputi-k-ustoychivomu-razvitiyu-i-procvetaniyu-1272135).

From a alternatively extended material, peculiar attention was drawn to the following text:

"In the context of the continuing hard military-political situation on the outskirts of Central Asia, there is simply a request for cooperation in the field of defence and safety policy.

The creation of regional safety architecture is peculiarly important, including through the improvement of a Catalogue of safety Threats for Central Asia and their prevention measures.

The key priorities of the countries of the region include the creation of an indivisible safety space in Central Asia, the search for comprehensive approaches to address key problems in the fight against conventional and fresh threats, the improvement of consequence and prevention measures, and active interaction with the UN and another global and regional organisations in this field."

What fresh architecture of regional security, not to mention 1 of its most important, not nominal, but real factors – Russia? The formulation of a question is mostly logical and becomes even more logical in the context of events taking place in our country. In Kazakhstan, as a associate State of the OUBZ (Organization of the Collective safety Act -PZ), which received real and concrete assistance from the OUBZ, the text could have been composed differently.

The phrase K.-J. Tokayev in this case is not yet clear. The performances at SPIEF 2022 (Petersburg global economical Forum 2022 -PZ) were clear (even besides bright). In this case, focusing only on this part of his article, we hazard losing sight of the more crucial meanings of this material. However, it is affirmative that this has been given greater attention; at the same time, we will yet draw attention to the expression of consultation meetings.

Article by K.-J. Tokayeva is good at doing his occupation for analysts and observers, collecting step by step all the most crucial milestones of yearly consultation meetings and combining them with C5+ abroad policy work.

In fact, the issue of regional safety architecture was raised not today, but already in July 2022 at the 4th consultation gathering in Kyrgyzstan (Czołpon-Ata – it is simply a city in Kyrgyzstan, PZ). Tripartite signed there (Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan) A treaty on friendship, good neighbourhood and cooperation for the improvement of Central Asia in the 21st century.

The agreement contained a alternatively crucial wording:

– "to refrain from utilizing force or threatening to usage force in interstate relations"

– ‘not to join military alliances, blocks or another associations of states directed against the contracting parties’,

– "prevent the usage of their territories, communication systems and another infrastructure by 3rd countries to the detriment of the sovereignty, security, stableness and territorial integrity of the another party"

Then in Russia (as well as today) we were amazed by these thesis, the media besides complained about connections with OUBZ, etc. Well, they forgot.

However, the agreement itself was already discussed, due to the fact that in 2021, at the 3rd consultation meeting, it was simply discussed (it would be good to agree and sign). In 2022 it was signed by 3 out of 5 countries (Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan), Dushanbe and Aszchabad, as usual, are taking a break, but this process is ongoing.

Six months and December 2022. Astana and Tashkent have already signed a strategical document: "An agreement between the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Republic of Uzbekistan on Allied Relations" (the Treaty of the Union of Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan. A second step towards the implementation of a large project).

So it says precisely the same word: “The Parties confirm the work not to participate in any blocks and alliances, and refrain from participating in any action against the another Party”.

This means that all these meetings, with all the seemingly external declarativeness, like water, gradually blur the stone and the situation in the region changes. They are not discreet – they are part of 1 process.

In our country, emphasis is usually placed on safety-related thesis, as well as on events related to it: the exercises that took place, the United States participated, did not participate, etc.

But in this case, the main task of these consultations, treaties, agreements is to make an economical and political bloc, and the military part, in the form of joint exercises, consolidates these positions. Only that you always see military exercises and US PR moves that traditionally effort to signal their presence.

But there are also crucial and crucial moments. Azerbaijan was not present at the 4th consultation meeting, but was present at the 5th and 6th meetings. Now I. Aliyev is proposing a fresh format "C5+1".

"Azerbeijan and Central Asian countries are 1 historical, cultural and geopolitical space that is becoming increasingly strategic. Our nations connect centuries-old history, culture, religion and common values."

This can be done with “C5+2, “C5+3”, “C5+N”. Iran and Syria can be successfully introduced into a common historical space, even if we try, Egypt and Mongolia, let alone Turkey.

It is clear that we are not talking about cultural communicative coatings. We see that in the last 4 years, although with any difficulty, a separate economical and political association in Central Asia has been developing. “C5” has already worked as a consolidated negotiator with the outside world, as K.-Ż. stated. Tokayev in the article , listing the "tory" of negotiations.

In the last 2 years, the first summits of “Central Asia – Russia” (Astana), “Central Asia – China” (Xi’an), “Central Asia – USA” (New York), “Central Asia – Germany” ( Berlin) have been held, 2 meetings of the Heads of States of Central Asia and the European Union (Astana, Czolpon-Ata), the first summit of “Central Asia – GCC” (Judda) and “Central Asia – India” (on the Internet). This year the first Central Asia-Japan summit will be held in Astana.

In fact, 9 major fora, in which 5 countries are present as 1 participant, is simply a lot. A maximum of 2 events per year shall be held in 1 format. And there's 4 or 5 of them. It's highly active. The Central Asian 5 evidently feels request from all sides, and further unification will enable this request to be monetised virtually and figuratively.

It is time to position Central Asia not only as a link between Asia and Europe but besides as a separate regional actor in global relations

Which is good in the K.-J. article. Tokayev virtually presents all these aspects, but the military-political aspect is traditionally immediately brought to the fore in our country.

Each time C5 passes 1 or more steps from the Forum to a separate global institution. For example, in 2010, specified regional engagement was ensured through another larger formats – SCO, EAEU-Eurasian economical Community and CICA.

Two points can be peculiarly highlighted here.

The first is the proposal to establish an global Water and Energy Consortium, which deals with food security. Everything is logical, without water and energy you can't get food, but there is nuance.

The consortium is ideologically formed around the climate and problems of the Aral Sea, which is besides logical, but there is no single parameter here – gas natural material and gas production. This means that cooperation with Russia will take place indirectly.

It is known that without gas from Russia it is impossible to accomplish an energy balance in the region, but the water is separate, with global structures and within C5, and gas is separate.

The second point, which besides concerns the alleged nuances, is simply a proposal from Uzbekistan to consider the anticipation of common access to public procurement in C5 regional cooperation.

The fact is that this circumstantial issue is 1 of the long-term topics of discussion in EAUG (Eurasian economical Union-PZ). At the last summit in May, A. Lukashenko couldn't aid himself, and he said it was unusual that after all these years it had not been resolved.

It is known that the gathering besides discussed transport corridors, logistics nodes, digitalisation of infrastructure, but the permanent participation of Azerbaijan, which shifts the format from C5 to C5+1, shows that it is so-called. The central trade corridor is seen as 1 of the main priorities.

By focusing on safety issues, we overlook the fact that these nuances, together with another conventional discussions on logistics, limit what is possible under EAUG. Finally, C5 fundamentally discusses the creation of an EAUG analogue. But it will not be possible to make both simultaneously.

This does not mean that individual will abandon EAUG or leave it, just that is the organisational limit. Moreover, EAUG will act alone, fresh projects will be conducted separately in the framework of negotiations between C5 and Moscow. It's not good or bad anymore, it's given.

These data will have their own characteristics, which are best analysed in advance.

Firstly, with C5 the most problematic safety state is Tajikistan, or alternatively its leadership position on Afghanistan.

Almost everyone in C5 has already normalised relations with the Taliban in 1 way or another (an organisation banned in the Russian Federation), and China and Iran have besides done so. Dushanbe gets out of the general mood, which will inevitably origin many problems and misunderstandings.

Secondly, in C5, the Turkmenistan origin appears as a country categorically active in maintaining neutrality in any form. This applies not only to the military sphere, and here the knowing of Ashchabad is unique.

In particular, the chief of Turkmenistan noted at this meeting

As the initiator of organising summit meetings in this form, Turkmenistan comes from the fact that they should be consultative and supply a platform for political communication without strict rules and procedures.

However, both Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan are in favour of the final transformation of C5 into a full-fledged institution and formalized global player with principles, procedures, regulations and structure. That is why Turkmenistan will effort to avoid full institutionalization.

Thirdly, Russia frequently highlights Turkey's increasing influence in Central Asia, including through the Turkish State Organisation (OTS). Therefore, there may be an opinion that Azerbaijan is present in the region as the frontman of Ankara.

However, everything is much more prosaic and thus more realistic: Baku intends to get the maximum from the Turkmenistan-Iran-Azerbejjan natural gas bypass and at the same time get the maximum from the Central Corridor through the Caspian Sea.

This is simply a more substantive and feasible task than promoting Turkey's political influence. Moreover, in fact, OTS in Central Asia do not put countries first in terms of global cooperation. Turkey has possible only through separate interaction with the C5 countries, but Ankara will not be able to work as a leader in C5 unification.

Russia will gotta make a choice here. The first option is to effort to proceed working on the EAUG and the basis of existing bilateral agreements, i.e. to leave everything unchanged. The second option is to preserve EAUG, but not to focus on its development, while gradually shifting priorities in work with EAUG and bilateral agreements for interaction specifically with the 5 of Central Asia as a separate player.

Written by Mikhail Nikolaiewski

SOURCE:

https://topwar.ru/248146-kazahstan.html

(PL)

About backroom Russian-Ukrainian talks

The spirit of Istanbul-2... inactive alive

"Washington Post" published exclusive material, in which it was virtually leaked that in Qatar there were to be indirect negotiations between Ukraine and Russia.

The most interesting subject is the ceasefire.

It is true, only partially, although the parties planned to agree to mutually end the attacks on energy infrastructure. And it is now clear why Russia has not carried out mass rocket attacks for a long time. The last 1 took place on 8 July, which is at the same time as the X-101 hit the children's hospital. And if we're talking about the energy situation, there are no blackouts in Ukraine right now.

However, Ukraine continued to hit the refinery and oil storage, the last 1 taking place tonight. As of 1 August in Russia, a ban on the export of petrol was renewed, indicating its shortage on the home market.

However, a partial ceasefire is clearly the first step towards de-escalation of the conflict, as ND writes:

Some negotiators hoped to accomplish a more comprehensive agreement ending the war

Therefore, it is clear why Ukraine has just begun operations in the Kursk Oblast now that we know for certain that its main nonsubjective is to improve its negotiating position.

You'd think the negotiations were broken but not, and the ND besides mentioned this:

Russia "did not cancel the negotiations, said: give us time," the diplomat said.

This means that the Kremlin is inactive determined to end the conflict, and I talked about its causes earlier. If the war doesn't end quickly, Russia will be forced to declare mobilization. And this is not the only problem; so the question arises as to what to arm the mobilized (even the "motor leagues" are not inexhaustible) and whether the economy will withstand it (the immense shortages of hands to work already indicate and the large inflation problems, which is simply a fact).

In short, while the little wise compare the size of the population, the remainder understands that Russia's war resources are at any rate close to exhaustion, without a complete transfer of the state to martial law. The situation in Ukraine is no better. The arms supply is almost gone, there are apparent problems with mobilization, there is simply a immense gap in the budget, and next year the financial revenues will be little than this year.

Funny thing is, this article didn't like both sides.

In Russia, chauvinist patriots were excited who inactive believe that the SOW at least without Odessa will not end, and now they think that it is essential to respond someway for the course circuit, but in the case of Ukrainians they thought that "the article bought Putin" due to the fact that it puts everything in the light that Russia agrees to negotiations, but Ukraine disturbs them. And if both parties don't like something, but at the same time it corresponds to nonsubjective processes, it means that it is true. Well, like my blog.

And here we see confirmation that preparations for negotiations are ongoing.

The parties agree to take the first step and in the foreseeable future, even the business of part of the Kursk circuit has not changed anything substantially yet. It is clear that the current preliminary findings between all participants may apply until the U.S. elections followed by a change of government. The interest of all participants is so understandable in order to resolve this issue before November, so as not to pass on the initiative to Trump in the event of Trump's victory.


Author:

Prochor Gromov
Source: https://stalingrad.life/

( Develop. and crowd. PZ)

NEW, good planet – NOT FOR DUTIES

Totally not funny.

All nations have the same kind of fairy tale. but Russian. Just look at the characters of these fairy tales – Hoja Nasreddin, Dyla Sowirzzarz, Hersz, or Lazy Jack.

Asian, European, Jewish, British and another heroes are cunning, villains, cheaters, buffoons, etc. who cheat, cheat and teach others. And sometimes, like Chinese Ma Liang, they do something good for people.

In Russia and Russia, the main hero is Ivan Błazen, who can't (and is not going to) teach anyone anything, everyone cheats him, and if he succeeds, it is usually just that he is lucky. kind of, God willing.

Unfortunately, the situation does not change in the 21st century... British, American and Israeli “wise” decided to change a planet where there should be no place for Russians and anyone who slows down “progress”.

The war on the Russians is entering a decisive phase... But Ivan the Fool inactive believes in any agreement, in the goodwill of the enemy, possibly in the Providence of God... It is as relaxed as before, lying on a stove and hiding its “goldfish”... And it seems that it will only begin to descend from the furnace erstwhile the enemy approaches Moscow, and even that is not a fact: foolish things in man tend to accumulate... It seems that a “new Russian” fool is ready to sale his hut, bake and everything else and completely change his identity...

(I have described many times how “The Law of concentration of capital”, “The Iron Law of oligarchy” and “The Law of inevitable degradation of the fool” operate.)

The Russian fool seems to have fallen to specified a level that he does not realize and does not want to realize at all what is happening... He believes that migrants will someway abruptly become bunnies themselves, and the peculiar Military Operation of the Armed Forces of Ukraine in the Kursk Oblast, is another unpleasant episode of our daily... He can't see that planet War III is changing its format importantly for the 3rd time.

What is the global planner doing in the summertime of 2024?

A) In relation to the United States, the decision was made to guarantee Democratic power at all costs as a consequence of the presidential election (even if it was essential to actually kill Trump).

B) The EU is ordered to start a war with the Russian Federation and to surrender Russia at any cost, reshaping the effects of planet War II and the UN.

(C) With respect to NATO, it was decided to decision towards direct military action against the Russian Federation in Russia.

(D) With respect to Israel, it was decided to launch atomic attacks on Iran.

(D) As far as Ukraine is concerned, they are allowed to blow up atomic power plants in Zaporozh or Kursk, as well as to usage a "dirty" bomb.

E) Decisions have been made concerning all mankind:

– launch pandemic-2 – with ‘monkey smallpox’;

– accelerate the creation of the digital currency with the subsequent blocking of the access of "anti-vaccinators" to digital accounts,

(c) deprive unvaccinated persons of their freedom of movement; first block them at the borders and then subject them to criminal proceedings;

(d) begin the widespread introduction of social ratings (ratings),

(e) introduce a strategy to prohibit the access of "lowly assessed" citizens to healthy foods... – and another 50 points in the global agenda...


(On Monday, an extended article on this subject will be published on Boosty.)

for: https://t.me/vladimirlepehin/2164

(PL)

KURSKI ATAK – IT'S ONLY designation OF FIGHT

another interesting reflection by W. Lepiechin

The wisest people understand: the offensive of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, reinforced by the French Legion, the Polish army, British instructors and thousands of units of military equipment, is just the beginning. This is, in fact, the designation of combat. investigating the forces of all: Putin, Generals of the Russian Ministry of Defence, local officials and the population.

The experience of the Primogyn march to Moscow, during which no 1 in the Russian Federation stood in his way (on the contrary, many officials decided to vanish from Moscow), became a training tool for the Armed Forces of Ukraine and NATO, calculating (whether this illusion or competent calculation – time will show) that this can be repeated.

In short, the fruit isn't here yet. And while the bridgehead occupied by the Armed Forces of Ukraine in the Głuszkowski Oblast will repel Russian conscript attacks, NATO will prepare strikes on Crimea, Briansk and everywhere else. That's how I see it.

The Western press notes how presently respective twelve trains with equipment are equipped in Poland towards Kiev. (Do they want to scare? I don't think so. Poland is actually entering a war with the Russian Federation. And Macro wants to improve his image with a triumph over Russia (and at the same time revenge on who ignored his calls).

But let's not make hypotheses, and let's not interfere where the president suggested civilians not to interfere...

Note 1 crucial fact: almost all Russian Federation leaders are on vacation and usually abroad. And they don't seem to care what happens to Russia.

Where's Miszustin today? Where are the deputy prime ministers? Where is Golikova – in Spain or Switzerland? Where's Wolodin? Where are the MPs? Where is the Secretary of the safety Council?

for: https://t.me/vladimirlepehin/2167

(PL)