Blog of Q's

from Russia Reform Monitor No. 1335, December 21, 2005 American Foreign Policy Council, Washington, DC.
Freedom House has
again placed Russia among the world’s “Not Free” countries in its
annual Freedom in the World survey. “The Putin leadership’s
anti-democratic tendencies appeared, if anything, more pronounced in
2005,” the New York-based human rights group stated in a press release.
Freedom House lowered Russia’s rating from “Partly Free” to “Not Free”
in last year’s survey.

By Steve Rosenberg,  BBC News, Moscow, Dec. 22, 2005

Russian MPs have approved a controversial bill that would tighten state
control over non-governmental organisations (NGOs). 

The lower house, the Duma, passed the bill in the second of the
three readings it needs to become law. The authorities argue the
changes are necessary to ensure the security of the Russian state. The
bill has been criticised by human rights groups and Western governments
as a threat to civil society.
‘Foreign spies’
It is one of the most controversial bills to be debated in the Russian
parliament since President Vladimir Putin came to power. There was
little doubt that it would pass its second reading. Russia’s parliament
is dominated by pro-Kremlin MPs and it is the
Kremlin which has been leading the call for tighter controls over the
activities and finances of non-governmental organisations. If adopted,
the new legislation would provide just that, making Russian and Western
NGOs more accountable to the state.

The authorities argue that NGOs are being used by Western governments
and foreign spies to fan revolution across the former Soviet Union. But
human rights groups accused the Kremlin of trying to strangle civil
society and of legislating to extend its own power. There has been
widespread criticism of the draft law in Russia and
abroad, including from the US Congress and the Council of Europe.
Earlier this month, President Putin proposed a number
of changes, but prominent Russian NGOs have complained that even in its
revised form, the bill would severely hamper their activities and
represents a danger to democracy.

from Pedro Burelli’s blog of 12/8/05:

… Clearly the
population was long intending on going against Ch

by Patrick J. Buchanan, November 30, 2005
…

Flush with tax dollars and tax-deductible contributions, NED,
Freedom House and their collaborator foundations and think tanks now
routinely interfere in the internal affairs of foreign nations. Under
the rubric of promoting democracy, creating free markets, etc., they
seek to dethrone recalcitrant rulers and advance to power those who
share their ideology and will advance their interests and agenda.

Democracy
is our goal, the neocons claim. But viewing their target lists in the
Middle East, Near East, Central Asia and Latin America, it is perhaps
more exact to say the Neo-Comintern seeks destabilization of any and
all regimes that fail to meet its criteria for membership in their
world democratic revolution.

Though a radical leftist
populist, Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez was democratically elected. He
charges that NED had a hand in the 2002 coup that briefly overthrew his
government and in the recall election forced upon him in 2004. …

Setting
aside what we think of Pat’s argument, we are astounded that he gives
ink and credence to a liar such as Chavez. Read about Russia’s own
“NED”, below.

From the American Foreign Policy Council, November 18, 2005

Moscow’s Anti-NGO OffensiveWORRIES WHITE HOUSE.
The Washington Post reports that during his meeting with Russian
President Vladimir Putin at the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation forum
in Pusan, South Korea, President Bush planned to raise concerns over
the latest Kremlin move to tighten control over Russian democracy. A
Kremlin-backed bill introduced in the State Duma would bar foreign
non-governmental organizations from operating offices in Russia and
require all 450,000 of them to re-register with the state to ensure
that they do not engage in foreign-funded political activity. “We have
some pretty serious concerns about it, both the legislation itself and
how it would be implemented,” the newspaper quotes a Bush
administration official as saying.

The Duma, meanwhile, has approved an amendment to the 2006 budget
allocating more than $17 million to support “non-profit organizations
involved in developing the institutions of civil society” in Russia and
to protect the rights of ethnic Russians in the Baltic countries.
“Look, democracy, freedom and human rights are being violated” in the
Baltic states, Deputy Speaker Vyacheslav Volodin of the pro-Kremlin
“United Russia” party told Interfax. “It is necessary to develop
democracy in those countries.”

Compare Volodin’s comments with those of Pat Buchanan in a recent article, reproduced above.

Consider the horrors of peace.
(from Slate.com) By Christopher Hitchens, Posted Monday, Nov. 7, 2005, at 6:05 PM ET

It looks as if the realists have won the day in the matter of Darfur.
Or, to phrase it in another way, it looks as if the ethnic cleansers of
that province have made good use of the “negotiation” and “mediation”
period to complete their self- appointed task. As my friend Johann Hari
put it recently in the London Independent: “At last, some good news
from Darfur: the genocide in western Sudan is nearly over. There’s only
one problem—it’s drawing to an end only because there are no black
people left to cleanse or kill.” …

From Pedro Burelli’s blog on Venezuela, Halloween, 2005:
As a response to my letter to ABC Nightline’s Ted Koppel, I have been
in touch with members of his team and have a feeling that their
patience with Hugo Chavez’s is just about to run out. Failure … to
deliver the information he offered during the September 16th interview
is not taken lightly …
Chavez made the following offer about the US concocted invasion plans
they (assume it includes his allies in Havana) had purportedly
uncovered:

By Hans F. Sennholz
In their foreign dealings many American businessmen are enjoying the
present situation. Virtually all their international liabilities are
denominated in U.S. dollars while some 70 percent of their foreign
assets are reckoned in foreign currencies. The value of foreign assets
and liabilities obviously changes with every change in the exchange
rates of the currencies. A fall of the U.S. dollar immediately trims
the value of virtually all American liabilities while it raises the
value of American assets owned abroad; a rise of the dollar effects the
opposite. … The Federal government with rapidly rising debt of more
than $8 trillion is by far the biggest beneficiary.

American officials and their academic friends are quick to reject such
analyses and conclusions. They dismiss all thought of responsibility
for the situation and instead point to an acute savings predisposition
on the part of creditor countries…
…
Many countries, rich and poor, now are supporting the richest country
on earth. This odd situation raises serious questions of consequences
if the creditor countries should suddenly tire of their chore and call
a halt to the burden. What would happen if, for instance, the Asian
central banks should suddenly refuse to add to their dollar holdings or
even reduce them and instead decide to invest their surpluses in euros?
Surely, such a reaction would lead to much international turbulence and
severe economic crisis.

Friday, October 07, 2005, 
By Alan Tonelson

… it would be tempting
to describe the United States and China as two ships in the night. But
there’s a crucial difference. China has set ambitious but concrete
goals and has mapped out a strategy for achieving them that has already
produced great progress. The United States, by contrast, seems content
to drift strategically, and to confuse pipe dreams with policy. …

Very good summary of the politics of the election of the President of the Interamerican  Development Bank.