Energy sector is vital for Russia, no doubt about it. In terms of GDP, it constitutes some 11%-13% (incl. electricity generation and distribition) so Russia is not overly dependent on it. It holds a lion’s share in export, some 45% for oil and gas, but then their trade surplus is some 45%.They in fact can live without selling oil and gas outside the country. Or sell it in the Far East if they would prefer.

Russia is still #8 in scientific papers, not very bad for their underfunded universities. Russia continue to produce some truly sophisticated things from nuclear plants and sattelites to soil improvement technology.

A role of BTC pipeline is most probably exaggerated a bit. It’s a good route, it goes through loyal countries, etc. It just turned out to be that there’s much less oil in the Caspian sea basin then was previously projected. And this oil is contracted already, it goes either to China or to Russia.

Russia’s population is shrinking. And yet it attracts so many immigrants from the neigboring countries due to its increasing wealth that it seems there is actually a growth albeit very moderate.

I know I sound a bit pro-Russian and this is not actually the case. We all need to get real. Russia has all the resources it needs. From fossil fuel to a proven educational system. They have a very good record of recovering after major crises from the Civil war to the WWII. They are able to defend their country. We need to talk rather then trying to isolate it.

An exact match is necessary to show the work together hand and glove. Their positions and actions clearly show they do.

The genocide claim of EU countries and NATO was a farse in the case of Kosovo. It is probably a farse for S. Ossetia too, although indiscriminant shelling describe of the capitol is questionable, iff that happened.

In Kosovo, EU countries simply used the genocide claim as an excuse to perform illegal acts of war against Serbia with the goal of regime change and, possibly for a free NATO base in the Balkans. All claims used as an excuse to attack proved to be fabricated and just plain wrong. You may beleive that those in charge have bad intelligence gathering, but I do not.

Afghanistan is also an example of where the US attacked a sovereign nation for the purpose of regime change and EU and NATO are supporting that effort. The excuse – terrorism against two buildings using airplanes by a group with ties to the regime. That terrorism group was also in the UN and EU countries, just not welcome. It is questionable.

We now see the fruits of NATO/EU policies like these – South Ossetia. Like the others, it could have been negotiated out without the use of war. Based on you beliefs, it appears that you would agree with the Russian position.

Correlation does not equal causation. To note that both the EU and NATO are expanding eastwards at the same time (i.e. as soon as was actually possible) and then conclude that they must be the same is facile (see the pirates-prevent-global-warming correlation).

NATO pre-dates the European Union, so if anything it would be more accurate to say that the EU is expanding behind NATO. But membership of one club or the other does not imply membership of both. Incidentally, I didn’t actually say that they weren’t expanding eastwards, I was pointing out that each was doing so independently.

While it is true that Ireland and Austria operate under the ISAF, which is UN-established, I should point out (the Irish wouldn’t be able to take part otherwise), their combined personnel presence is…erm…nine. Presumably they’re non-combat, as christ only knows what they plan to do with nine troops between them. Finland and Sweden have put in more, but have been out-donated by the UAE and Jordan respectively, those well-known pawns of western imperialist hegemony. Even Serbia has contributed 5 personnel, and I can’t see the Serbs being huge fans of NATO.

Portraying an attempt to end genocide as a simple case of regime change was dishonest, and I don’t believe there is any appetite in NATO for long-term occupation of Kosovo(!? Half the neighbouring countries are in NATO, what would be the point?) or Afghanistan (been there, done that, got the body-bags). Looking at the facts on the ground, NATO has more or less failed in Afghanistan because only the anglophones have contributed significant numbers of troops, and non-anglophonic troops have been kept safely out of harm’s way by government mandate.

My point is that to portray the EU or NATO as vast, unified conspiracies is just plain wrong *even within each entity*, let alone acting in unison.

For the russians, three clear advantages.

1) Manifestation of russian nationalist strength, showing that russia is able to project its interests and defend its population no matter what the west says.

2) Showing that there is might behind the rhetoric concerning Kosovo.

3) A livefire exercise of the new and improved military might that has been the talk of Russia for the last two years. Exercise of land-sea-air doctrine, test of shock and awe.

The pipelinebombing is a clear shot across the bow for the EU/USA. What would the effect be on energyprices? Show of might.

The big question is whatever the georgians (and the US and Israel by extension) thought they could gain from doing this during the olympic opening. Especially when seen in context of the US open insult of China at the same time, it seems downright idiotic.

Also

NATO operates through EU hegemony. Just because the membership roster is exactly the same doesn’t mean they operate independently. In fact all those members you list work with NATO in the Partnership for Peace Program and actively operate in Afghanistan under ISAF. If you look beyond the roster, the differences in them and their policy blur to the same bloody color.

It’s strange that you argue there’s a difference and say the EU and NATO haven’t grown eastward together. Poland, the Baltics, Romania, Bulgaria, Hungary, etc., have all joined NATO and the EU. Given the facts, your comment is in error.

I am happy you enjoy spending money on your aggressive military alliance. Unfortunately, they have killed civillians to obtain EU goals (e.g. a regime change in Serbia, longterm military bases in Kosovo, and a longterm military presence in Asia (Afghanistan)).

Best Wishes,

A Foe Fly
(as deemed by FOE Staff)