Belarus Development Group mentioned by the LarouchePAC authors:

Belarus Development Group mentioned by the LarouchePAC authors:

"Earlier this year, the Belarus Development Group published a pamphlet called "Belarus 2018: Toward Regional Leadership through Sovereign National Development," which cited LaRouche on the Eurasian Land-Bridge."

http://www.larouchepac.com/node/15287

Attack on the Iranian President

Yes, a disturbing episode . Pressure on Iran increases , but it never goes into a new quality of war which many analysts were predicting . However, taking into account the sircumstances the most realistic scenario seems to be the one that Yuri Krupnov is talking about: There will be no war. Up-side-down, there will be convergence and all the pressure on Tehran is only coertion to that convergence . At the same time one should not omit that those who deny this US-Iranian rapproachment could have big trouble. In this regard it is worth mentioning that one time Ahmadinejad came to power through nothing like stunning victory. And now his support in Iran is not unconditional.

http://edition.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/meast/08/04/iran.attempted.attack /? hpt = T2 # fbid =- 9yy6Z0FdAj
(CNN) - A grenade exploded near the convoy of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad during his visit to a western Iranian city Wednesday, according to Iran's semi-official Fars News Agency and other outlets.

Ahmadinejad was unhurt, the reports said.

However, the media department at Iran's Presidential Office denied he came under attack.

Despite the denial, there was an account about the incident on Raja news, Ahmadinejad's official website. The site reported there had been a grenade attack and quoted from the Fars News account.

Someone lobbed a homemade grenade just after the president's motorcade went by, Fars reported.

The suspect was arrested, according to both reports.

The grenade exploded during the president's visit to Hamedan, reported parlemannews.com.

The account was also carried by the conservative website Khabar Online.

The presidential convoy was headed from the airport to the city's sports stadium.

The reports also said that Ahmadinejad warned on Tuesday that "Zionists" were plotting to kill him. Iran uses the word "Zionists" to refer to Israel.

White House aides are aware of the conflicting reports, according to a senior US administration official, and were seeking more information to sort out what happened.

Death Masked as Narcotics

On June 9-10, Moscow will host the “Drug Production in Afghanistan: A Challenge for the International Community” international forum. Every year, the opium exported from Afghanistan kills up to 100,000 people worldwide, more than died in the Hiroshima atomic bombing. Russia as the country through which the main drug trafficking routes run is affected to the greatest degree – its annual death toll attributable to heroin from Afghanistan is estimated at 30,000. Raising awareness about the lethal threat posed by the evil should become a top priority in all parts of the globe.

Below is a Web message an anonymous consumer of Coaxil (Tianeptine), a drug which used to be regarded as a “harmless” antidepressant in Russia, addressed to beginning addicts: “My blood grew dense like jam... It almost did not flow, or at times did not flow at all... I had been treated with various solutions for a whole month, the transfusion apparatus getting clogged up with my blood, not to mention my own veins... This is the end!” According to medical reports, Coaxil users routinely end up in intensive therapy departments where pus has to be pumped right out of their veins. The next phase – with persistent depressions, psychosis, and suicidal tendencies - is even scarier.

Permanent Coaxil consumption causes rapidly progressing loss of eyesight due to the toxic properties of the substance and the damage it does to the oculomotor nerve. Statistics show that, for example, in the Siberian city of Surgut around 70% of drug users either have experimented with Coaxil or take it on a regular basis as a substitute for heroin in quantities ranging from 10-15 to 60 Coaxil pills per dose. The average age of such Coaxil users is estimated at 25 years. There is information that two or three years ago Coaxil addicts underwent over 200 extremities amputations within a year in Surgut alone. One of Moscow's surgical departments recently reported 17 arm amputations due to problems provoked by relatively short Coaxil abuse. On top of marked narcotic and toxic effects, Coaxil overdoses administered intravenously result in persistent blood coagulation problems, blood viscosity increase, the formation of blood clots, and – in the longer run – thrombosis and eye fundus damage. The typical consequences are blindness and gangrene necessitating extremities amputations.

There exists a vast legal market of medications containing minor doses of narcotic substances, and those who extract revenues from it are totally unconcerned about the safety of their storage and distribution. In Russia, for example, the past several years saw a proliferation of cough-suppressing syrups such as Tussin Plus and Glycodin which carry Dextromethorphan (in contrast, opioid group medications are not available over the counter in the US).

From the standpoit of the drug problem, Russia is directly affected by the situation in Afghanistan, the country which – in the settings of war and international occupation – became the global leader in oppiate cultivation (responsible for 93% of the wolrd output) and supply. It is an open secret that a surge of narcotics production in Afghanistan and across the world paralleled Washington's Afghan campaign.

Not long ago US special representative for Afghanistan R. Holbrooke unveiled Washington's fresh approach to the problem of massive drug outflow from Afghanistan. Instead of pursuing eradication, the US plans to focus on hunting Afghan drug traffickers and helping Afghan farmers switch from poppy cultivation to normal agriculture. At the moment, the US Congress decided to pour $106m into the clearly hopeless project. The view held by the US State Department is that fighting drug business should be mainly left to Afghans, and in the future Washington intends to limit most of the financial support to the Afghan provincial drug enforcement teams under the governors' command. The logic behind the plan is that provincial administrations understand local situations better than Kabul and should be able to use the money more efficiently.

Experts from the UN Office on Drugs and Crime say up to 60% of the opium produced in Afghanistan is converted into heroin domestically, which would be impossible without massive import of the corresponding precursors. Can we believe that Washington has no idea where the precursors and other materials for drug production come from?

There is widespread pessimism over the possibility of shielding Russia from the heroin supply. Russia's partners in the battle against the evil are obviously unreliable, and it has to be realized that Moscow will have to face the raising threat independently.

Alexander BARENTSEV, Strategic Culture Foundation

Original Publication

Afghanistan drug trafficking as threat to peace and security

I am working at an issue of Afghanistan drug trafficking which I think constitutes a threat to international peace and security. And in this respect there are two questions I would like to ask help me with:

1. The evolution of the notion "threat to international peace and security", its criteria and so on. Some links on this
http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p_mla_apa_research_citation/2/5/1/3/3/p251330_index.html
http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p_mla_apa_research_citation/1/3/9/8/6/p139868_index.html
http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/routledg/dip/2007/00000018/00000003/art00003
http://www.responsibilitytoprotect.org/

2. The machinery of turning issues into SC resolutions mentioning Chapter VII.

It would also be interesting to know anyone's opinion why Afghanistan drug trafficking (93% of world opiates and also a leader in cannabis production) can or cannot be qualified as the threat to international peace and security.

rammsteinus politicus

Published 24 February, 2010, 17:40
Darya Sologub for RT

An upcoming concert of German musicians has become almost a political issue for Belarusians.

Rammstein, widely known for their “not for all” music and performance, have, for the first time, included the Belarusian capital Minsk on its European 2009-10 tour list.

This March, heavy metal basses and fireworks of the new program “Liebe ist für alles da” are to challenge Belarus’ brand new Minsk-Arena, which is said to be one of the largest music and sport venues in Europe. Though the tickets for the March 7 show were quite expensive by Belarusian standards – from about 30 to over 100 USD – they were snapped up within a few days. Local fans cannot wait to see the performers on Belarusian soil for the first time. Everything seemed to be arranged and agreed upon, including Rammstein’s famous fireworks show, which often attracts increased attention from local fire-fighting services.

However, less than a month before the show the mood in Belarus has changed, and Rammstein’s appearance on the Minsk stage with their original program is under question. It all started with a joke. Somebody known as “mojo_fm” posted to his Live Journal [social networking site] a fake address of Belarusian veterans demanding that the Rammstein concert should be banned on ethical grounds, which raised a flood of public discussions among bloggers. In fact, the veterans did make a real address to the presidential administration with the same demand some time later, but that went unnoticed. The rumors say that similar addresses have been made by the representatives of the Orthodox Church and religious NGOs, a number of psychologists’ and teachers’ associations, some of which are considering an opportunity to address the General Prosecutor’s office to make a legal assessment of Rammstein’s show program according to the Belarusian legislation.

Then action was taken by the Belarusian Public Council on Morals – a non-state body representing some of the best-known and most reputable Belarusian public figures, including the heads of the Orthodox, Catholic, Jewish and Muslim communities in the country. At a sitting held on Friday, February 19, they concluded that Rammstein’s show includes actions that contravene moral and ethical standards. “The decision to organize Rammstein’s concert in Minsk is a mistake that could turn out to be extremely costly for us. According to the Council members’ opinion, the band’s music is blatant propaganda for homosexuality, masochism and other perversions, cruelty and violence”, the document said. Besides this, the musicians were accused of sympathy for Nazism. The members of the Council were indignant at the fact of staging such a controversial show in the year of the 65th anniversary of the end of the Second World War, and during the Orthodox and Catholic Lent.

Obviously understanding that it is too late to call off the concert, the head of the Public Council on Morals, Nikolay Cherginets, proposed to hold a preview of the show that Rammstein are scheduled to perform in Minsk. “I understand that the tickets for the Minsk concert are sold out. That is why we should make a preview of the show, and negotiate with it so that there will not be propaganda of immorality and violence on the Minsk stage”, he said.

Rammstein indeed are the owners of a very controversial reputation. The musicians’ lyrics are full of coarse language and much of it is devoted to the topics of homosexuality and other non-traditional sexual experiences. The band’s music is widely popular among extremist groups. For instance, police found that the Columbine School massacre in 1999 was partly inspired by Rammstein songs. The band’s live shows are even more dubious. It is not uncommon for Rammstein members Till Lindemann and Christian “Flake” Lorenz to imitate sexual intercourse right on stage, with Lindemann ejaculating from a dildo right on the fans, who are screaming with delight. In fact it is for those activities (“obscene conduct”) that Rammstein were arrested for one day after their concert in the USA in 1999, and since 2001 they have not toured in that country.

As for the current show – “Liebe ist für alles da” – in many ways it goes far beyond what the band has done so far. One of the songs from the album – “Ich Tu Dir Weh” – was banned in some European countries, including Germany, Austria and Switzerland. The new disk itself was also banned from public distribution and can be bought by adults only. A video for the song “Pussy” was recognized as pornographic and banned from demonstration not only on TV, but also on YouTube.

Art and politics

The actions of the Public Council, which are difficult to ignore, have put the Belarusian authorities in the limelight. The main question is whether the state will react to concerns of considerable part of Belarusian society. In this situation, Belarusian opposition groups have taken the role of the main critics of a possible interference with the show. In fact, Belarusian opposition made Rammstein another symbol of its fight against the “regime” and for “European values”. Belarusian political analyst Yury Shevtsov says, with reference to opposition media, that “Belarusian opposition has in fact spoken in support of all the elements of Rammstein’s activities and show. They fancy themselves to be elite ‘Europeans’, as opposed to the regressive and Moscow-oriented authorities. So, they cannot demand that Rammstein’s show be called off anyway.”

Thus, opposition groups propose an alternative to the authorities: either they censor Rammstein’s show and will be accused of breaching freedom of expression, or they do nothing and thus “listen to the progressive parts of society” (accumulated by opposition, of course).

However, the alternative proposed by opposition groups is a fake one. If the authorities do nothing in this situation, they would be ignoring the opinion of a large part of Belarusian society, which stands on traditional values. On the other hand, some restrictions do not contradict European values, so praised by opposition groups in Belarus. It is known that the recent shows in Dortmund, Germany were, in fact, censored by the federal authorities. They made each member of the band sign a written guarantee that they would not play any song from the new album that had been censured in Germany, otherwise the band would have been issued a 10,000 euro fine. In addition, fans under 18 had to be accompanied by a parent or guardian, so everybody needed their passports to buy tickets and to attend the concert.

In this situation, the “progressive” line taken by the opposition may in fact be “regressive”. Proving that Rammstein has right to express themselves is one thing. Proving that their music and performance complies with moral and ethical values is another. Will opposition activists, in an attempt to be more European, come to the concert with their families, including parents or children (in fact, Belarusian children may come to the concert – tickets were sold there without age limit)? You must be sure that, in your perception of European values, it is appropriate to do that.

Progressive in power

At the same time, the fight of the opposition against the “regime” looks strange with the news that the organizer of the Rammstein show in Minsk is the Republican Palace of the Presidential Administration. That puts the state and the opposition in the one camp, and parts of Belarusian society that are concerned with the ethical side of the show in another. We may only guess why the Presidential Administration did not bother to check what kind of show Rammstein is bringing to Minsk (maybe, Lukashenko or his sons like their music?). But it is clear why Belarusian authorities did not pay attention to the issue until they got a sign from the civil society representatives – unlike other concert managers, the Republican Palace does not have to get a “tour license” from the local authorities (this time from the Culture Directorate of the Minsk executive committee). Yury Shevtsov points out that “what we can see in Belarus is the problem of the Western culture phenomenon coming to the country, where the ‘checks and balances system’ to act against extremes is not yet fully formed.”

However, it is hard to believe that somebody inside the Belarusian Presidential Administration decided to invite Rammstein precisely to undermine the moral standards of Belarusian society. As usual, the main factor is that of cost-effectiveness. Minsk Arena was one of the greatest construction works in Belarus over recent years, and the first concert of foreign performers there must be something extraordinarily sensational and profitable. Besides, it is easier and usually cheaper to attract foreign celebrities to your country while they are touring. All this pointed to Rammstein, which had scheduled its tour across Europe for these months, and at the same time is popular enough in Belarus to pack Minsk Arena to the rafters, in spite of high ticket prices.

Some say that Rammstein’s love of scandalous behavior is nothing more than postmodernist sarcasm; others treat the band’s work as an example of a new world outlook. In Belarus, it may become a test for Belarusian authorities. They are used to noticing the opposition as it manages to earn some place in the public life of the country. Will they listen to the voice of the other part of Belarusian society which constitutes the basis of their legitimacy?

Published at RT.COM

Tightening the screws in Belarus?

20 August, 2009, 16:09

The President of Belarus wants to strengthen law-enforcement agencies before the 2010 presidential campaign.

Aleksandr Lukashenko ordered his administration to draft legislation that would create revolutionary changes in the country’s laws on special investigations. Whereas earlier these could have been ordered exclusively on the authorization of a prosecutor or the Prosecutor General’s Office, the President wants to grant such rights to the Minister of Internal Affairs and the heads of the Committee for State Security (KGB) and the Financial Investigations Department of the State Control Committee.

Many Belarusian experts say this legal innovation could open the door to human rights abuses. A member of the Belarusian Helsinki Committee Garry Pogonyaylo says that in case such changes are adopted the authorities will be able to launch campaigns against dissidents on a whim. At the same time the top law enforcement leaders in Belarus have expressed their full support for these measures.

Aleksandr Lukashenko views this legislation as a means of satisfying the requirements of both legality and operational efficiency. The Belarussian President recently criticized the work of prosecutors’ offices throughout the country at a meeting with these officials. The President accused Belarussian prosecutors of creating stifling bureaucracy which led to lack of operational effectiveness in special investigations and law enforcement across the country. So the president’s proposition at first glance looks like a logical step towards addressing those problems.

Lukashenko’s critics, however, believe that nepotism is behind the prosecutor shakeup. What arouses suspicion is that Alexander Lukashenko’s oldest son Viktor is going to benefit from the planned changes in Belarusian legislation on special investigation activities. At least one of the three functionaries that will be given the powers to authorize special investigations is widely known to be a close associate of the President’s son – Vadim Zaitsev, the head of the Belarusian KGB. Since the KGB remains powerful in Belarus one can say that Viktor Lukashenko may be assuming leadership over a special service of his own – no less powerful than the Presidential Security Service.

Yet the State Prosecutor’s office will not give up its powers and special status so easily. At a board sitting held on August 19, the agency decided to fight back. It issued a statement blaming operatives of KGB, Ministry of Internal Affairs and Financial Investigations Department of the State Control Committee for “multiple infringements of citizens’ rights and explicit falsification of criminal cases.” The Prosecutor-General’s office carried out an assessment of activities of the named agencies and upon getting results decided to put their activities “under strict control”.

It is obvious that there is more in the initiatives of Aleksandr Lukashenko than just succession intrigues behind the scenes. The shakeup of law enforcement agencies is being made in anticipation of two major events. The first is the planned privatization of state enterprises dictated by International Monetary Fund functionaries as a condition for further international loans to prop up the sagging Belarusian economy. Facing this perspective, the president needs a reliable system of checks and balances to prevent any single enforcement agency from monopolizing regulative power during this process. That is why at a meeting with the enforcement institutions on August 8, he also made a proposal of creating the Investigative Committee which would independently carry out investigations for the respective agencies. The head of such a committee could be subordinated directly to the President, thus providing him with the means to intervene if any one agency assumes too much power.

Another major oncoming event is the presidential election scheduled for late 2010 or early 2011. Facing the deteriorating economic situation and falling public support, together with growing pressure from both the West and Russia, Aleksandr Lukashenko clearly understands that keeping the situation in 2010–2011 under his control might require harsh measures. And it is likely that in such situation the Belarusian president will choose maintaining control over the country to Western recognition of the elections as democratic and legitimate.

Consolidating law enforcement into the hands of the most active and loyal Lukashenko functionaries is part of an election campaign which has already begun. On August 18, the Belarusian government did not renew its contract with the Bell Pottinger Group – a British PR company that coordinated the Belarusian–Western rapprochement of 2008–2009. That company’s director Timothy Bell – a close associate of the exiled Russian tycoon Boris Berezovsky who is also said to be close to Belarusian president – refused to comment on the news. But experts agree that it was justified for the Belarusian side to get rid of all outsiders on the eve of an election campaign that would probably involve massive voter rigging and other undemocratic practices.

It seems we can expect another crackdown by the regime in Belarus in the nearest future. And in the wake of this the enforcement agencies are waging a war for the right to become the top defenders of the State. But it is unlikely that Aleksandr Lukashenko – a very skilled and cautious politician – will allow any single agency to dominate the game.

Darya Sologub for RT

Belarus highly recommends caution

24 July, 2009, 00:18

Belarusian authorities have advised their citizens to remember Georgia’s laws while visiting Abkhazia and South Ossetia. Does it mean Minsk will not recognize the independence of the two republics?

In Russia the statement was immediately taken as a sign that Belarus still regards Abkhazia and South Ossetia as integral parts of Georgia, and the news was made a front-page story in the media. The issue was taken up by the country’s deputy foreign affairs minister Grigory Karasin, who called his Belarusian colleagues’ statement “odd.” If Georgia’s laws “must be taken into account,” then Belarus believes they are in force on the territory of the two Caucasian republics, which means that for Minsk those territories are still subordinate to the government in Tbilisi.

On the one hand, as Belarus has not recognized the independence of the two republics, it can freely stick to such views. But on the other hand, there is still strong confidence in Moscow that sooner or later, as Abkhazian President Sergey Bagapsh said recently, that Belarus will make a positive decision and all will be settled. However, the issue of recognition of the two republics is yet to be put on the Belarusian parliament’s agenda, and the recent hurdles between Moscow and Minsk show that a diplomatic escalation is quite possible.

So, the main problem seen by Moscow in this statement is whether it shows Belarus’ unwillingness to recognize the two young Caucasian states. The answer, however, is far from political games and allusions.

Here is the message from the Belarusian Ministry of Foreign Affairs:

“Georgia’s legislation introduces restrictions on movement of foreign citizens on the territories of Abkhazia, South Ossetia and the adjacent territorial waters. Entry of foreign citizens to Abkhazia and South Ossetia are allowed only through Zugdidsky and Goriysky regions of Georgia. Entering Abkhazia and South Ossetia from any other directions without special permission from Georgia’s authorities is prohibited and punished according to Georgia’s Criminal Code. We strongly recommend that our citizens take into account the mentioned provisions of Georgian legislation while planning their trips to Abkhazia and South Ossetia.”

And here is the story behind the statement.

About two weeks ago there were incidents with Belarusian citizens who were arrested in Georgia for illegally staying on the territory of an “occupied” Georgia’s “autonomy” (meaning Abkhazia). A young woman and later a man were detained in Tbilisi. The reason for the arrests was that they had previously entered Abkhazian territory, in violation of Georgia’s laws, from the Russian Federation. The woman was put into prison and the man, who had come to Abkhazia for just three days to visit his father’s grave, was fined $1,220. Neither received the maximum sentence: Georgia’s Criminal Code provides 3-5 years in prison or a fine of $3,000-$5,000 for such an offence.

The Belarusian Foreign Affairs Ministry was silent about the two citizens’ adventures in Georgia until the question was raised by a newspaper in Minsk outraged at Belarus’ lack of action to help its citizen allegedly imprisoned since May. The much discussed official statement, therefore, was just a reply to a media inquiry.

“There was an idle sensation in the Russian media,” explains Belarusian political analyst Yury Shevtsov. “Belarus’ statement does not have any significant political meaning. It is just an explanation for Belarusian citizens that if you are going to Georgia you have to remember that in case your passport has a note about crossing the border with Abkhazia and South Ossetia from Russia’s side, you will be subjected to Georgia’s law and can even find yourself in prison. By the way, it is the same for Russian citizens and for citizens of any other country of the world.”

So it is not with Belarus that Russia has problems in this situation. We all must check our passports before going to Georgia and take the positive side: Belarus is not against recognizing Abkhazia and South Ossetia. But whether it is for recognition, nobody knows.

Darya Sologub for RT