Military Review

Comrades, do not worry, NATO is here!

76
I understand that many people will not like this article. BUT! I didn’t like the reaction of the Russian journalists to the recent statement by the President of Kazakhstan Nursultan Nazarbayev:


"Kazakhstan is preparing to increase the transit potential for the supply of NATO goods to Afghanistan, expanding the transit potential of the port of Aktau."

Immediately there were speculations on the themes: “Kazakhstan will establish a NATO base”, “Kazakhstan is moving away from Russia”.

Comrades, do not worry, NATO is here!


But, let the gentlemen readers, why panic? Why these cries about the fact that we provide our territory and infrastructure for a potential enemy? Why all this panic and indignation, when it has long been known, that is a fact.

With that fact, and for Russia itself.

Start with the last Newsthat passed somehow imperceptibly literally one week ago:

"Russia offered NATO a Russian port for transit from Afghanistan
Russia's permanent representative to the North Atlantic Alliance, Alexander Grushko, said today that the intention of Russia to offer NATO to use the Russian port of Ust-Luga in the Baltic for transit from Afghanistan, Interfax reports.


And this is not the first time Russia has literally asked itself to act as a transshipment point for NATO. Let's nostalgic and recall the news a year ago:

“The Russian government has officially allowed NATO to use air transit through Ulyanovsk to secure the forces of the western coalition in Afghanistan: Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev made the appropriate changes to the government resolution.

The Russian government officially authorized the use of not only ground, but also air transit through Ulyanovsk of armament and military equipment for the Western coalition in Afghanistan. In a previously issued government decree “On the procedure for land transit through the territory of Russia of armament, military equipment and military equipment to the International Forces promoting security in the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan and in the opposite direction ”are being adjusted. In it, the previously authorized "land transit" is replaced by "land and combined transit", which includes the use of rail, road and air transport.

However, numerous protests against the "NATO base" in Ulyanovsk forced the authorities to declare that the transit point and the military base are not the same thing. "


Well, and our president Nazarbayev declares that in the seaport of Aktau there will be only a transit point for NATO troops.

What else amused me at one time was the fact that despite all the cries of conscious citizens about preventing the “NATO boot” near Ulyanovsk, it was not our politicians, but the Americans, who rejected the idea of ​​this transit point:

“The overly expensive transportation of goods by NATO countries in Afghanistan through a transit point in Ulyanovsk in an interview with the Kommersant newspaper was announced this week by NATO Deputy Secretary General Alexander Vershbow during a visit to Moscow.

In the beginning of February, Russia's permanent representative to NATO, Alexander Grushko, spoke about the transportation of the first cargo. According to him, the test flight with cargo from Afghanistan took place in December last year. There was no more transit of NATO cargo through Ulyanovsk. Answering the question when the transshipment point will work at full capacity, Vershbow said that the technical part is fully coordinated and licensed, but the problem lies in the commercial side. According to the representative of the alliance, NATO countries are currently exploring financially more profitable alternative transport networks. As an example of an inexpensive option, he mentioned transit routes through Pakistan, which were closed some time ago, but recently reopened ... ”.


A logical conclusion suggests itself: is the Russian leadership so strongly opposed to providing its territory for NATO needs?

Judging by the following excerpt - no:

“The subsidiary of Russian Railways TransContainer for 2012 year earned on the transit of goods of NATO, half a billion rubles. About this newspaper "RBC daily" with reference to the company reporting under IFRS.

Russia and NATO signed an agreement on the transit of goods to Afghanistan in 2009. Prior to this, the unit delivered the necessary goods through Pakistan, but the latter refused to cooperate. The Pakistani authorities resumed supplies to NATO through their territory only in July 2012 of the year. ”


As you can see, the contract for the transportation of NATO goods through Russia has long been ratified and regularly executed by both parties.

The example of Ulyanovsk once again showed that the leadership of the country would only be glad to strengthen its cooperation with the North Atlantic Alliance.

That is a logical conclusion: the worse Kazakhstan is. There is nothing personal - just business. In my understanding, the cries about the fact that we in the territory of the former USSR should not have a single NATO member deprived of the foundation, at least by the fact that we live in conditions of wild capitalism, in which economic interests are often more important than political interests.

In addition, both Kazakhstan and Russia are trying to increase their role as world transport carriers. Kazakhstan participates in the construction of a road from Western Europe to Western China. Russia is building roads in the Far East to the ports that will carry goods to Japan.

Both our and your country are doing everything to increase foreign traffic through their territory. Well, if it so happened geographically that we lie closer to Western Europe than the same Pakistan, on the path of supplying NATO troops in Afghanistan. Well, if it is known that in a year the freebie with the transportation of goods by NATO to Afghanistan will run out to a large extent, and now there is a demand, then why shouldn’t Kazakhstan use the right moment for that?

Say: they sacrificed independence, betrayed Russia. As you can see from the examples above, we are all in the same boat.

We all develop our transport structure, we all (state treasury) have our profit from this. So, it is better to look at the prospect - where will all this technique go next? Well, for now:

“Today, 22 of April, the Parliamentary Committee on International Affairs of Kyrgyzstan approved a draft law on ratification of an agreement between the Government of Kyrgyzstan and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization on transit through the territory of the Kyrgyz Republic by land (rail and road) cargo of the International Security Assistance Force.

According to Transport and Communications Minister Kalykbek Sultanov, the document was signed on 22 on May 2012 of the year in Chicago (USA).

The official explained that, with the signed Agreement, NATO plans to transport ISAF goods by land transport along the transit route Afghanistan-Tajikistan-Kyrgyzstan-Kazakhstan.

Similar agreements have already been signed with Russian Federation, Kazakhstan and the Republic of Tajikistan. "


Sources:
http://www.gazeta.ru
http://www.fondsk.ru
Author:
76 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. FC SKIF
    FC SKIF 4 May 2013 06: 56 New
    24
    If we ourselves are engaged in "enemy transit", then why shouldn’t the Allies be so?
    1. zvereok
      zvereok 4 May 2013 07: 04 New
      15
      Russian Railways sold half of the freight cars to Lisin at a rather strange auction with two participants. Now in transit Lisin wants to cut some money.
    2. radio operator
      radio operator 4 May 2013 10: 11 New
      +1
      But is it to us? negative
      1. Retx
        Retx 4 May 2013 10: 38 New
        -4
        The faster they dump, the better. And relations with NATO should be kept a little bit stable, there will be fewer problems.
    3. The comment was deleted.
      1. Lopatov
        Lopatov 4 May 2013 10: 54 New
        +6
        You are mistaken. It was. Near Poltava
        1. Landwarrior
          Landwarrior 4 May 2013 14: 47 New
          +3
          Quote: Spade
          You are mistaken. It was. Near Poltava

          There simply was a "jump airfield". The African bombers bombed Germany, refueled and recharged in Poltava and flew back, processing other targets in Germany along the way. But it did not last long.
          It’s somehow not like transit no
          1. Lopatov
            Lopatov 4 May 2013 14: 48 New
            +2
            It is in transit and it seems.

            And thanks also we will not wait.
            1. Landwarrior
              Landwarrior 5 May 2013 00: 47 New
              +1
              Well, at that particular moment of gratitude, the figs would have waited. The safety of the airfield was not provided by AT, therefore, Ukrainian nationalists in the service of the Wehrmacht 5 bombers were blown up, and the rest was given to the Luftwaffe. Therefore, such cooperation was short-lived ... wink
              1. Lopatov
                Lopatov 5 May 2013 01: 01 New
                0
                Airfields. Three. And our Americans were warned about this in advance. And they asked the planes to disperse. The smartest decided otherwise.

                By the way, where did the OUN firewood come from?
                1. Landwarrior
                  Landwarrior 5 May 2013 12: 42 New
                  0
                  Quote: Spade
                  By the way, where did the OUN firewood come from?

                  Ah, this is from childhood. The yard was "committee". Grandfathers will sit in the yard in the summer to play dominoes, well, and at the same time share cases from practice. About that case was told as an example of complete gouging.
                  We can, of course, have contributed something.
    4. Ivan.
      Ivan. 4 May 2013 10: 45 New
      +6
      If we ourselves are engaged in "enemy transit", then why shouldn’t the Allies be so?

      Truth is always in the details. I remember when there was a chatter about Ulyanovsk they said that NATO insisted that the goods go unattended, I don’t know how it ended, but since NATO said it was not profitable for them, they didn’t make any concessions - I’ll believe that they’re accurate in advance all were not calculated. It's all about the details. If the territory in which they are located will be uncontrollable and the inspection of goods is prohibited, what are they trying to achieve, then we need it? But if on the contrary, they don’t need, how to transport drugs, dubious or forbidden goods?
      1. SASCHAmIXEEW
        SASCHAmIXEEW 4 May 2013 13: 18 New
        +7
        If without inspection, but on the piece of iron for amers expanse! How many tons of drugs will be transported, and ours that will be cut down in the subject of a bobla !!! For one signing of such documents, I would judge! As for treason to the motherland !!! And for bribery !!!
    5. Nick
      Nick 4 May 2013 21: 35 New
      +1
      Quote: FC Skiff
      If we ourselves are engaged in "enemy transit", then why shouldn’t the Allies be so?

      The presence of NATO in Afghanistan, Russia is now profitable. What will happen on the southern borders of the CIS, when NATO leaves Afghanistan, only God knows. Well, if so, why not make money on our "friends" when common interests coincide.
      1. Lankov Victor
        Lankov Victor 1 June 2013 23: 02 New
        0
        The Taliban was beneficial to Russia, almost completely strangling drug production. Under the American occupation, Afghanistan became the world leader in drug trafficking. The main consumer is Russia.
    6. The comment was deleted.
  2. aszzz888
    aszzz888 4 May 2013 07: 00 New
    +5
    “For the 2012 year, a subsidiary of Russian Railways Transcontainer earned half a billion rubles from NATO cargo transit. About this the newspaper RBC daily writes with reference to the company's financial statements under IFRS.


    For money, unfortunately, they will sacrifice everything, even territory for NATO. Money plays an important role in world politics. And double standards in the understanding of the provision of bases, this is someone who sees from what direction. +
    1. GreatRussia
      GreatRussia 4 May 2013 08: 28 New
      +3
      Quote: aszzz888
      For money, unfortunately, they will sacrifice everything, even territory for NATO.


      Do not get excited out of the blue.


      MOSCOW, Mar 13 - RIA News. All NATO cargo that is planned to be transported to Afghanistan through a transshipment point in Ulyanovsk, will undergo customs inspectionDeputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin said on Tuesday.

      "Customs inspection is mandatory. Stop panicking. Already the NATO dry closets were scared." - Rogozin wrote on his Facebook page.

      He also confirmed that for these purposes there is no plan to deploy a NATO base near Ulyanovsk. “I'm tired of reading about the“ US base near Ulyanovsk. ”I explain: we are talking about the so-called“ multimodal transit of non-lethal cargo for the needs of the international security assistance forces in Afghanistan, ”Rogozin said.

      According to him, in Ulyanovsk, mineral water, napkins, tents and other non-military cargo will be reloaded from the train to airplanes and then continue to Afghanistan. “This transit is commercial, that is, the Russian budget receives money for it. I don’t think that transit of NATO toilet paper through Russia is a betrayal of the Motherland,” the Russian Deputy Prime Minister wrote.

      RIA Novosti http://ria.ru/defense_safety/20120313/593391908.html#ixzz2SIL8lXlh

      Rogozin showed "NATO base"
      .
      http://topwar.ru/18099-rogozin-pokazal-bazu-nato.html
      1. shark
        shark 4 May 2013 09: 22 New
        12
        Rogozin, of course, well done. I reassured. Only here are those who hold less and less faith in our government.
        1. GreatRussia
          GreatRussia 4 May 2013 09: 27 New
          +5
          Quote: shark
          Rogozin, of course, well done. I reassured. Only here are those who hold less and less faith in our government.

          Well, faith, I think nothing to do with it.
          You need to look at the results.
          1. alexdol
            alexdol 4 May 2013 14: 19 New
            +2
            GreatRussia SU "Well, faith, I think nothing to do with it. You need to look at the results."
            -----------------------------------
            I completely agree with shark (Vladimir)! Our authorities always say one thing, and then do something completely different? !!! Especially there is no trust in the “Mr.” Medvedev, and here he managed to check in! I already wrote about his "art" before and here is a small addition. So there is NO faith in them, but what “results” do you propose to look at - is completely incomprehensible?
          2. S_mirnov
            S_mirnov 4 May 2013 17: 20 New
            +2
            "Well, faith, I think nothing to do with it.
            We need to look at the results. "And according to the results we have one of the most corrupt states in the world! Just let NATO into the territory, then they will agree, and at the highest level.
        2. Drednout
          Drednout 4 May 2013 23: 19 New
          +2
          Carry so many dry closets and pipyaxes ???
          Apparently NATO in Afghanistan is very much justified .. ra .. los! what
          1. Lankov Victor
            Lankov Victor 1 June 2013 23: 09 New
            0
            US special forces are special people who are able to live an entire week without Coca-Cola and pizza.
            The rest of the ji-ai may go on strike if they do not bring the menu-ordered pineapple ice cream. It is widely known how in Vietnam the American company refused to go on the attack precisely for this reason.
      2. aszzz888
        aszzz888 4 May 2013 12: 54 New
        +2
        Something with the evidence base is rather weak.
    2. APASUS
      APASUS 4 May 2013 09: 28 New
      +7
      Quote: aszzz888
      “For the 2012 year, a subsidiary of Russian Railways Transcontainer earned half a billion rubles from NATO cargo transit. About this the newspaper RBC daily writes with reference to the company's financial statements under IFRS.

      It seems that RZD is only interested in profit?! Although RZD is like a state-owned company and should bear the social component!
      But passenger transportation is carried out in cars of the last century! And constant extortion on the topic: Loss of passenger transportation!
      In a normal country, I would be paid extra for driving in a carriage
      who is 40 years old !!!!
    3. ia-ai00
      ia-ai00 4 May 2013 10: 24 New
      +4
      Money is money, but considering that both the Russian government agents and the Kazakh government are both Blair and a whole team of “cultural advisers” from the United States, there’s nothing surprising what is happening ...
    4. SASCHAmIXEEW
      SASCHAmIXEEW 4 May 2013 13: 28 New
      +6
      Those who signed an agreement with NATO on bases on our territory betrayed both their homeland and our people !!! Such things only through a referendum !!! And these s..ki for the money, over the head, in tikhara, and I am sure that there are not one such agreements to the detriment of RUSSIA !!! If the DUMA approves such agreements, then it must be dispersed immediately !!!!
      1. elmi
        elmi 4 May 2013 14: 32 New
        +3
        Quote: SASCHAmIXEEW
        Those who signed an agreement with NATO on bases on our territory betrayed both their homeland and our people !!! Such things only through a referendum !!!

        What are you talking about? you live in Russia! unless we were asked when the GDP of 14 on October 2008 of the year Putin gave China part of the territory of Russia! Tarabarova island and part of the Bolshoi Ussuriysky island, part of the shelf of the Barents Sea, which was ceded to Oslo by Dmitry Medvedev in the 2010 year when hydrocarbons worth 30 billion euros were found there; And what do you think the power will allow to disperse itself? The answer is obvious - no. And the increase in army and police salaries on the eve of the State Duma elections says a lot. Elections will not help either, because the one who counts, and not the one who votes, wins, and the governors under control that will stay in place will do everything to get the desired result. So it remains to hope for good
        1. Joker
          Joker 4 May 2013 19: 51 New
          +4
          What are you talking about? you live in Russia! unless we were asked when the GDP of 14 on October 2008 of the year Putin gave China part of the territory of Russia! Tarabarova Island and part of the Bolshoi Ussuriysky Island, part of the Barents Sea shelf, which Oslo Dmitry Medvedev ceded in 2010 when they found hydrocarbons worth 30 billion euros

          But how dare you put slander on a holy man?!?!? How can you not be ashamed! This is a real officer!
          Thus, the share of British Petroleum in Rosneft amounted to 19,75 percent, given BP’s current 1,25 percent interest.

          According to Russian President Vladimir Putin, increasing the share of British Petroleum in the domestic Rosneft is “a sure step in privatizing state property.”

          And this is also a lie, saint Putin, everyone is doing it behind him. hi
          1. elmi
            elmi 5 May 2013 01: 55 New
            +3
            Quote: Joker
            But how dare you put slander on a holy man?!?!? How can you not be ashamed! This is a real officer!

            The irony is clear laughing , it’s like from the opera that Yevgeny Fedorov fills that the GDP in all disasters has nothing to do with it! the encirclement and henchmen of the West are to blame, I confess I initially behaved, but changed my mind in time.
  3. Kaa
    Kaa 4 May 2013 07: 05 New
    +5
    The main thing is that the USA is serious and long in Afghanistan, so they can always be blackmailed by the possibility of stopping transit. This is what Pakistan is doing. And if they leave, they won’t leave: “The United States paid too high a price for“ entering ”the region (Afghanistan and Central Asia - approx. REGNUM news agency), and therefore“ leaving ”the region seems illogical and unbelievable. About this, during the virtual forum on the basis of the Central Eurasia project, commenting on some features of American politics in Afghanistan, said political analyst from Turkmenistan Murat Dzhumaev, a REGNUM correspondent reports.
    The expert emphasizes: as you know, a complete withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan will not happen. Moreover, because it was not at all with the purpose of leaving that one day that the American military department "settled" there? According to Washington, the presence of US troops in Afghanistan was triggered and dictated by the "threat of international terrorism emanating from the region." At the same time, the Americans themselves admit that the conditions for the emergence and presence of this threat are still preserved. "The United States decently" invested "in this war financially and financially. - Observer notes. - Moreover, the numerous anti-terrorist operations in Afghanistan were accompanied by significant losses among The Americans themselves assess it as follows: “a war sponsored by our taxes claimed the lives of our loved ones.” As a result, the United States paid too high a price for “entering” the region, and therefore “leaving” the region seems illogical and incredible "
    "In addition, officials from the State Department (USA) regularly talk about the continuation of overseas troops in Afghanistan. For example, the same Robert Blake during a press conference in Ashgabat in January of this year unequivocally spoke out in favor of continuing" training and technical assistance Afghan troops. "" It is clear that all this is considered by Moscow itself as a "factor of additional regional tension."
    "It is difficult for me to assess the likelihood and the results of new negotiations with the Taliban, where the focus of the agenda is the complete withdrawal of foreign troops from Afghanistan. It is no coincidence in this regard that the statement by President Hamid Karzai that NATO’s actions are more focused on convincing the opposite and justifying his presence "
    http://www.regnum.ru/news/polit/1655294.html#ixzz2SHzQMF4V
  4. Sibiryak
    Sibiryak 4 May 2013 07: 06 New
    +1
    In my understanding, cries about the fact that we should not have a single NATO member on the territory of the former USSR, if only because we live in conditions of wild capitalism, in which economic interests are often higher than political interests.

    Transnational capital has long been regulating and actively participating in political processes in the world, so why talk about the separation of economic and political interests among some interested parties, these are different means to achieve a common goal.
    As can be seen from the above examples, we are all in the same boat.

    We may be with you, but those in power are sailing on a yacht.
    We all develop our transport structure, we all (the treasury of the state) have our own profits from this. So, it’s better to look at the prospect - where will all this equipment go further?

    Yes, most of it will not go anywhere, but will be sold for wild money to the conquered country!
    1. SASCHAmIXEEW
      SASCHAmIXEEW 4 May 2013 13: 46 New
      0
      In the same yacht with NATO, you wanted to say? I think some of them would like to be with those, but not all traitors !!! And they will leave the weapon to our bastards! In payment for transit !!!
  5. fenix57
    fenix57 4 May 2013 07: 20 New
    +6
    Transit is the transportation of goods and passengers through a point that is intermediate, transshipment, transfer between points of departure and destination, without levying customs duties and taxes, as well as without applying economic policy measures to goods. Therefore, comrades, do not judge me strictly, but there is no reason for any unrest. hi
    1. Egoza
      Egoza 4 May 2013 09: 16 New
      +4
      Quote: fenix57
      Therefore, comrades, do not judge me strictly, but there is no reason for any unrest. hi

      While it is possible to receive money from them - let there be transit. But in fact, if necessary, you can block all these points? No? And then let them make complaints and try to do something. so really, hello, and we won’t worry.
  6. vladim.gorbunow
    vladim.gorbunow 4 May 2013 07: 25 New
    0
    Hello ! Boy Bad Boy. And your eternal dreams of a barrel of jam and a box of cookies.
  7. Strashila
    Strashila 4 May 2013 07: 34 New
    +2
    “The official explained that the NATO signed agreement plans to carry out ground transportation of ISAF cargo on the transit route Afghanistan-Tajikistan-Kyrgyzstan-Kazakhstan.” ... and now about the participants in the divorce, their list doesn’t remind you of anything, they’ve been right all the time praspaltsovki with a collision with Russia ... and the casket just opened.
    1. Delink
      Delink 4 May 2013 07: 43 New
      +2
      transit route Afghanistan-Tajikistan-Kyrgyzstan-Kazakhstan

      The normal channel of drug trafficking.
      1. Trailer
        4 May 2013 07: 46 New
        +6
        Quote: Delink
        The normal channel of drug trafficking.
        So, Russia itself proposes to expand this route, so to speak.
        1. djon3volta
          djon3volta 4 May 2013 08: 27 New
          +2
          Quote: Karavan
          So, Russia itself proposes to expand this route, so to speak.

          tell me how it looks? Americans bring gerych, Russian soldiers unload, send to Russian hucksters, Russian hucksters sell to Russian nariks, is this the case?
          1. SASCHAmIXEEW
            SASCHAmIXEEW 4 May 2013 13: 53 New
            0
            And the "top" and that and this fat removes something like this ...
        2. SASCHAmIXEEW
          SASCHAmIXEEW 4 May 2013 13: 51 New
          +1
          Not RUSSIA, but those who rule !!! And this is a big DIFFERENCE !!!
      2. SASCHAmIXEEW
        SASCHAmIXEEW 4 May 2013 13: 49 New
        +1
        And in proportion those who signed the paper !!!
  8. DPN
    DPN 4 May 2013 07: 55 New
    +5
    After the collapse of the USSR. of our common MOTHERLAND, every former republic survives as best it can. Russia was more fortunate than others in terms of geographical location and natural resources. The truth is now these resources and power work mainly for those in power. But Russia was the first to start flirting with NATO, the former republics also have no choice but to follow Russia. So the article is correct. Of course, in our hearts, we still continue to be patriots of our country, but money does its job WE became different, divided into Very rich, just rich, medium, poor and poor and just homeless. On TV they often show how people are driven out of their homes. EVERYONE OWN, was written on the gates of paradise in 1944. The people received this, to each his own. SO it’s a sin to be offended by Kazakhstan.
    1. igort5883
      igort5883 4 May 2013 08: 19 New
      +2
      Everything is right! We have those who ... have us! A completely informed choice!
      1. SASCHAmIXEEW
        SASCHAmIXEEW 4 May 2013 13: 55 New
        0
        I did not choose them !!! They chose money and who bought it !!!
  9. nemec55
    nemec55 4 May 2013 08: 52 New
    +5
    Duc here life there is such a proverb ... all of us are all alone, we are handsome ... Journalists and journalists are different words as well as the inhabitants of Russia and the people who covet them.
  10. knn54
    knn54 4 May 2013 09: 03 New
    +4
    We will consider the provision of transit bases as the contribution of the Russian Federation and Kazakhstan in the fight against terrorism. And ...
    The contract for the supply of 21 Mi-17V-5 helicopters in the amount of $ 367,5 million for Afghanistan was signed by Rosoboronexport and the Pentagon, which paid for them. The next stage is the establishment of direct contacts with Kabul, with the Northern Alliance ... This will counter the dangers of strengthening American influence in Central Asia. Today, what the Americans and NATO are doing in terms of combating the Taliban in Afghanistan is in the best interests both the Russian Federation and the whole of Central Asia.
    1. Trailer
      4 May 2013 09: 16 New
      +4
      Quote: knn54
      and TODAY what the Americans and NATO are doing in terms of combating the Taliban in Afghanistan is fully in the interests of both the Russian Federation and all of Central Asia.


      Yeah, for me, the Americans are hovering around aimlessly, while drug trafficking is growing, and is already 40 times higher than in the 2001 year.
      1. knn54
        knn54 4 May 2013 15: 30 New
        +2
        Trailer
        The ban on the cultivation of poppies, introduced in connection with falling opiate prices and under pressure from the international community, has not been implemented in practice. Only a demonstrative destruction of a number of crops was made, and often after harvesting. (A. A. Kurtov. Drug business in Central Asia: medical history and treatment options.) Taliban income from drug production consisted of: 10% tax on poppy seeds and 20% tax on trade in opium and its derivatives. (http://www.imemo.ru/df/publ/2005/drug%20business)
        The ban on poppy cultivation announced by the Taliban in July 2000 was based on the following motives:
        • Taliban hoped to use this ban as an argument in international negotiations
        • this could help ease international sanctions that were detrimental to more profitable than poppy transit trade
        • reduced need to finance military operations against internal opponents
        The ban resulted in a sharp drop in poppy and opium production in 2001.
        PS Even 15 years ago, the armed Taliban detachments raided the mountains of Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan. The Ferghana Valley (Uzbekistan) waited for these detachments ... .. Yes, the Taliban banned drugs, but not out of pity for their people, but so that their own soldiers would be healthy.
        PPS And drugs began to flow into Russia from there in the sealed coffins of our killed soldiers. Do not forget about it.
  11. lilit.193
    lilit.193 4 May 2013 10: 04 New
    +7
    Well, you didn’t like the reaction of our journalists. But we don’t like the politics of the heads of some of the former republics of the USSR, who are trying to sit with one seat on two chairs and pursue the policy of both our and yours and a little neighbor from above. But then I noticed such a thing - after that, all sorts of unrest in the country happen. If you do not believe, remember Kyrgyzstan. At first, their president also behaved like a servant of two masters, then an American base appeared, also a type of transshipment, and then a coup occurred. So let Mr. Nazarbayev think well about what such advances lead to. And they end with color and flower revolutions.
    Have a nice day everyone. smile
    1. Alibekulu
      Alibekulu 4 May 2013 22: 10 New
      +2
      Quote: lilit.193
      Well, you didn’t like the reaction of our journalists.
      Hmm .. I didn’t like the reaction of your journalists, but the reaction of your Magazines!?! Do not confuse the concept ..
      Quote: lilit.193
      But we do not like the politics of the heads of some former republics of the USSR
      Well ett, your problems. Do not like it, do not like it. The head of Kazakhstan will continue to be guided by the interests of the Republic of Kazakhstan and its people .. So get used to it ..
      By the way, when discussing one topic, they poked me:
      Quote: Nicholas N
      We don’t have to tell us what to do at home. Dig your ditch at your village and do not go along with advice. We can do without you

      Consider that this quote by dear Nicholas N, redirected - to you personally love
      Quote: lilit.193
      so I noticed such a thing - after that, all sorts of unrest in the country happen. If you do not believe, remember Kyrgyzstan.

      Kyrgyzstan, why so far ?! request
      There is an example and closer ..
      You have riots on Bolotnaya, by chance not because of the NATO base in Ulyanovsk ???
      Quote: lilit.193
      So let Mr. Nazarbayev think well about what such advances lead to.

      Baby .. and how old are you to teach Nazarbayev ??!
      Quote: lilit.193
      Have a nice day everyone. smile

      Same to you...
  12. vadson
    vadson 4 May 2013 10: 17 New
    +7
    for me it is so necessary for the Russian Federation to take and spray poppy fields in Afghanistan with poison without looking back to the west, you look amers are stuck there for another ten years. as they say, and will be their death at the end of the needle. there it will begin, it will not seem amer
    1. zvereok
      zvereok 4 May 2013 11: 09 New
      +2
      Quote: vadson
      for me it is so necessary for the Russian Federation to take and spray poppy fields in Afghanistan with poison without looking back to the west, you look amers are stuck there for another ten years. as they say, and will be their death at the end of the needle. there it will begin, it will not seem amer


      And if our fields in the same year, "unexpectedly" hit an unknown disease? It is not for nothing that the United States holds a military bio laboratory in Georgia. Will we bomb the USA? No evidence? But they will not be. And if they do, no one will take them seriously, like 08.08.08
      1. vadson
        vadson 4 May 2013 13: 35 New
        +1
        I hope they will not have time after the Taliban, and we have order with grain reserves, we will not die of hunger. and their Taliban and local peasants will bring down. there will be less money on opium because of illnesses; amers will shoot and undermine amernies.
        Yes, and how much territory in Russia with crops. hedgehogs are swallowed if they try. in the first ten fields they burn - do they need it? and we fight with drugs, everything is legal, and for humane reasons
      2. SASCHAmIXEEW
        SASCHAmIXEEW 4 May 2013 14: 01 New
        0
        So amers in the ear to warn that if something happens in our direction, then kerdyk .......
    2. SASCHAmIXEEW
      SASCHAmIXEEW 4 May 2013 13: 58 New
      0
      1000000000 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ +++++++++++ !!!!!!
  13. Kyrgyz
    Kyrgyz 4 May 2013 10: 22 New
    +4
    Keep your friends close and your enemies even closer - I don’t remember who said it, but this is true, as long as there is no war, you need to collect information about the enemy, in cooperation in observations, it is easier when the enemy is nearby than when he is closed.
    Someone from the ardent opponents of the transit point can clearly tell how NATO uses a warehouse inside Russia isolated from borders against Russia? It turns out like with a Chinese invasion through the Far East - it seems easy on the map, but the fact that there is not a single road and a fair airfield for many worthless trifles
  14. shinobi
    shinobi 4 May 2013 10: 30 New
    +7
    Journalists are screaming because it’s their bread. There should be more transshipment bases, amers are still not planted enough in wars. The Golden Pit plan, our response to their “controlled chaos”, is in action. The more the US Army is involved in the greater number of conflicts, the greater burden on their economy. The faster it collapses. America got used to correcting its affairs due to wars, forgetting a simple rule: to sell weapons to warring people is +, and to fight it is bold. Unfortunately, competent analysts haven’t gotten over them yet and the Yusovites are slowly fishing rods in most conflicts, preparing a not-so-weak war against Iran. It is inevitable otherwise the oil monarchies will remain on the beans. Having united together with Israel, they will make porridge and in this war the amers will raise their economy according to the model as they did in the Second World War, remaining as if aside .
  15. smsk
    smsk 4 May 2013 10: 33 New
    0
    Quote: djon3volta
    Quote: Karavan
    So, Russia itself proposes to expand this route, so to speak.

    tell me how it looks? Americans bring gerych, Russian soldiers unload, send to Russian hucksters, Russian hucksters sell to Russian nariks, is this the case?


    Do you think something different is happening now?
  16. Scandinavian
    Scandinavian 4 May 2013 10: 36 New
    +5
    To: Author Doroshenko Evgeniy (Karavan)

    Dear author, I am asking you this question. I will personally verify your opinion after a year or a year and a half has passed regarding your next quote [b] "[b] that there will be only a transshipment point for NATO troops in the Aktau seaport." [/ B]. As the practice of basing the American contingent under the guise of a “transfer point” shows, such a proposal is purely formal in order to gain a foothold in any strategically important region of interest to them for a very long time. Thus, I would be interested to watch and laugh at the fact that you are stating "There’s nothing personal here - just business." I’m afraid that business will not be limited to one, and only time will judge your claim that the Americans will leave the port of Aktau at the end of the withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan. Horseradish with butter, I’ll tell you, and I think a good half of the people registered on this site will tell you the same thing. Therefore, only business under the symbol we live in wild capitalism, this "American shop" is not limited. After a year or a year and a half, which is not a long enough time, we will already become witnesses of such a spectacle whether the Americans will get out of this region i.e. from the port of Aktau or to be fixed in it by more thorough forces.
    1. Trailer
      4 May 2013 11: 19 New
      +4
      Quote: Scandinavian
      this only business under the symbol we live in wild capitalism, this "American shop" is not limited.


      Well, how would I play in the article that we are all one-oiled in the same world. About the fact that it is better to take a closer look where this equipment will be in the future - it was also indicated! The essence of the article is do not shout “Red” when we are all “Red” today. And drowning in this even deeper.
      1. Scandinavian
        Scandinavian 4 May 2013 12: 59 New
        +3
        The context of your article is of such a nature: “Hara people shout over the fact that in the Republic of Kazakhstan there will be a transshipment base of the USA and NATO, and a military base may appear behind it - don’t worry, we’ll cut down the bush and the Americans will leave.” So, our friends will not leave a damn thing, but will begin exporting their democracy to Central Asia.
        1. Alibekulu
          Alibekulu 4 May 2013 13: 18 New
          +6
          Quote: Scandinavian
          The context of your article is of such a nature: “Hara people shout over the fact that in the Republic of Kazakhstan there will be a transshipment base of the USA and NATO, and a military base may appear behind it - don’t worry, we’ll cut down the bush and the Americans will leave.”

          Varyag calm down .. As they decide in Kazakhstan, it will be so. It is beneficial for us that the Americans will be in Aktau, so they will be. Unprofitable, then it will be "Yankee-go home" ..
          So, our friends will not leave a damn thing, but will begin exporting their democracy to Central Asia

          Give an example?! In Uzbekistan, the NATO base was !! And then what happened ?? !!
          And, Americans, did Islam Karimov do anything ?! They left and did not squeak.
          .
          Or do you have other information ??! So, enlighten us - the ignorant ??!
          A little bit off topic, but nonetheless: in 2011, I don’t know what exactly happened there, but American volunteers were expelled from Kazakhstan during 2 days (if it’s wrong somewhere, correct ..). So what if, what ...
          1. Scandinavian
            Scandinavian 4 May 2013 13: 54 New
            -1
            Dear in the debate, I do not want to enter with you. If you don’t know how to analyze obvious things, then your problems. Times dictate their own terms and conditions, and what happened several years ago will not work today. I have already said that time will put everything in check and we will see after a while whether the Americans will leave the Central Asian region or arrange a new Zhanaozen, where the thread is in the vast expanses of the Central Asian republics, otherwise it may be with us again.

            PS if you have poor eyesight and do not know how to read commentators nicknames. Order a new diopter for lenses in optics.
            1. Alibekulu
              Alibekulu 4 May 2013 22: 40 New
              +1
              Quote: Scandinavian
              Dear in the debate, I do not want to enter with you.

              No problem good Do not enter .. I did not start it ..
              Quote: Scandinavian
              If you don’t know how to analyze obvious things, then your problems.

              Wow belay dear onaliteg .. As I understand it, analytics is "the burden of a white man ?? !!" As I understand your example, the NATO base in Kyrgyzstan (I understood correctly ?!) is more obvious than the situation I cited with the same base in Uzbekistan ?! request Kyrgyzstan, a relatively poor country, and rent for the base is a significant source of income to its budget. This is, the main reason why it is there, until now comes down ..
              In the Republic of Kazakhstan, I think you know very well that there is no such problem ..
              And really, that allowed herself to do RUwill not be able to do RK?!
              Yes, by the way, and I, unlike you, brought a specific FACT, and was not guided by slogans ..
              Quote: Scandinavian
              let's see ... will the Americans go away

              Let's see .. For me, if the presence of the Americans meets the state interests of Kazakhstan, then let them not leave ..
              Quote: Scandinavian
              arrange a new Zhanaozen

              Huh soldier That's the pike, so that the crucian would not doze off.
              The problem of the appearance of Zhanaozenov is not in the hands of the Americans, but depends on the actions of the authorities of Kazakhstan .. and nothing else.
              Quote: Scandinavian
              PS if you have poor eyesight and do not know how to read commentators nicknames. Order a new diopter for lenses in optics.

              Thank you for the advice ..
              And, in response, I advise - do not read the Soviet (Russian) newspapers ..
  17. fenix57
    fenix57 4 May 2013 10: 50 New
    0
    Quote: Strashila
    "The official explained that the agreement signed by NATO plans to transport ground cargo ISAF on the transit route Afghanistan-Tajikistan-Kyrgyzstan-Kazakhstan
  18. Semurg
    Semurg 4 May 2013 10: 59 New
    +4
    While the amers leave Afghanistan, it is possible and necessary to earn money on this using their geographical and transit opportunities. The Taliban will decide this as the winners on the account of the base in Afghanistan, if the amers offer them good bakshish they can allow them to remain, but not as hosts and winners, but as hostages (they will sit behind a thorn in eternal fear, pretending that they won the war) But by mentality the Afghans do not tolerate other people's troops on their territory, they convinced many of the conquerors that the Amers are not the first and probably not the last to try to capture Afghanistan.
    1. lilit.193
      lilit.193 4 May 2013 12: 19 New
      0
      Quote: Semurg
      While amers come out of Afghanistan, you can and should earn money

      No matter how much money you would have to pay in triple size! wink
      Quote: Semurg
      using its geographical and transit opportunities

      These possibilities will easily then be used by the amers themselves. And they will no longer ask permission. wink
      Quote: Semurg
      mentally, Afghans do not tolerate foreign troops on their territory

      Afghans will not tolerate. And it turns out that the Kazakhstanis will tolerate. This is not what I came up with, it was Nazarbayev who decided so. wink
      1. Semurg
        Semurg 4 May 2013 12: 33 New
        +1
        Afghans will not tolerate. And it turns out that the Kazakhstanis will tolerate. This is not what I came up with, it was Nazarbayev who decided so. wink[/ Quote]
        Yes, he and Putin are two boots of steam (or what is allowed to Jupiter is not allowed to the bull wink )
        1. lilit.193
          lilit.193 4 May 2013 13: 40 New
          +1
          Quote: Semurg
          what is allowed to jupiter is not allowed to bull

          Sagat, I didn’t pull you by the tongue.
          1. Semurg
            Semurg 4 May 2013 18: 27 New
            +2
            Quote: lilit.193
            Quote: Semurg
            what is allowed to jupiter is not allowed to bull

            Sagat, I didn’t pull you by the tongue.

            Well then double standards? Lilith.
            1. lilit.193
              lilit.193 4 May 2013 20: 14 New
              +3
              Quote: Semurg
              Well then double standards?

              They are already so well.
              Quote: Semurg
              Lilith.

              You can just Lily.
              Quote: Semurg
              Well then double standards?

              Sagat, I will not reveal a big secret if I tell you that not all countries can afford what others can afford. Like do not like it, call it what you want, but this is an objective reality. Germany can afford much more than Austria or Switzerland. And in international politics too. And whether you want it or not, Russia has more opportunities than Kazakhstan. So, Putin has more opportunities than Nazarbayev. Or do you say that I'm wrong here?
              1. Semurg
                Semurg 4 May 2013 21: 47 New
                +2
                So, Putin has more opportunities than Nazarbayev. Or do you say that I'm wrong here? [/ Quote]
                Yes, Lily Putin has more opportunities to create transit points on the territory of Russia, and Nazarbayev has more opportunities to create the same transit points on the territory of Kazakhstan, and I write that they are two pairs of boots. If you create transit points at home, do not let others do the same at home (or again, what is allowed to Jupiter is not allowed to a bull). Well, at the expense of the difference of opportunities in the international politics of Russia and Kazakhstan, who argues?
                1. lilit.193
                  lilit.193 6 May 2013 10: 25 New
                  +1
                  Quote: Semurg
                  If you create transit points at home, do not let others do the same at home.

                  Do you think I like it and I love it?
                  Quote: Semurg
                  Well, on the difference of opportunities in the international politics of Russia and Kazakhstan, who argues?

                  That's exactly what I had in mind when speaking about the bull and Jupiter. Although sometimes, if necessary, Jupiter became a bull. wink
  19. fenix57
    fenix57 4 May 2013 12: 10 New
    +6
    Quote: Kaa
    THEREFORE THERE ARE ALWAYS THE POSSIBILITY OF TERMINATION OF TRANSIT OF IT TO BE BLACKABLE AS HOW PAKISTAN DOES IT.

    On this issue in Russia, it is necessary to turn to the department of G. Onishchenko, the most effective option (no kidding!). TESTED - NO FAILURES! yes
  20. Avenger711
    Avenger711 4 May 2013 13: 25 New
    +3
    I still do not understand, what is hysteria about? If the NATO troops are going to bring down from Afghanistan and are ready to pay for it, then we must use it, but there will be no base on the territory of the Russian Federation, simply because the plane landed, the plane refueled, drove farther, there could be hundreds of NATO representatives there, pieces of paper with to coordinate with ours.
    1. Anton Russian
      Anton Russian 4 May 2013 16: 16 New
      +2
      Why are you, the evil guys from NATO will be able to transfer an entire army to the Volga region and go straight to tear Russia from the runway) It’s obvious) Putin is to blame) And the Jews.
  21. Captain45
    Captain45 4 May 2013 13: 57 New
    +1
    But what about the NATO bases was said a year ago:
    "In 2003, the then US Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld launched a cardinal reform of the US global military presence under the directive of President Bush, the essence of which was the transition from large and expensive base towns to small points-nodes of the network necessary for the rapid deployment and rear support of the armed forces in the conflict region through the "pumping" of network nodes with the necessary manpower and equipment. The general slogan of the reform is: "Capability and efficiency, not size."
    For this, an extensive new classification of military facilities of the US Armed Forces was developed at the same time when deploying networks of the global military presence. Of the 12 types of such objects, only 2 in the strict sense, by name, are the bases - the capital operating base (Main Operating Base, MOB) and the forward-operating base (Forward Operating Base, FOB), but from this military objects of the planetary network in no cases do not become less military or non-military, but in essence they are all classic "bases", that is, points of foreign military presence on the territory of states that allow these military facilities to be housed.
    According to the US-NATO classification, the “transshipment point” in Ulyanovsk can belong to both the Aerial Port of Debarkation (APOD), the Logistics Base or the Logistics Base, or the Cooperative Security Points Security Location (CSL), which, by the way, do not require any “sleep” mode at all, until the hour “H”, no NATO personnel would be in constant readiness for instant use at the right time.
    But the main thing is not what to call this “point”, but that the striking military power of the USA and NATO abroad does not have a separate “base” or “point”, but the entire infrastructure-network of presence, since it’s "And rockets, and space weapons, and air traffic control, and satellites." Extract from an article by Krupnov Yu.V. link: http: //www.km.ru/v-rossii/2012/04/11/ministerstvo-inostrannykh -del-rf / rossiiski
    i-mid-zavralsya-po-povodu-bazy-nato-v
  22. APOCALIPTIC
    APOCALIPTIC 4 May 2013 14: 05 New
    -1
    Quote: SASCHAmIXEEW
    Those who signed an agreement with NATO on bases on our territory betrayed both their homeland and our people !!! Such things only through a referendum !!! And these s..ki for the money, over the head, in tikhara, and I am sure that there are not one such agreements to the detriment of RUSSIA !!! If the DUMA approves such agreements, then it must be dispersed immediately !!!!


    Well, say hto signed there or are you afraid that they will come for you? winked
  23. T-100
    T-100 4 May 2013 14: 09 New
    +2
    Why did you go broke, you see, it reminds of something like Lend-Lease when the Americans fought with our hands, by and large. We give you equipment, food, raw materials, and you fight, die. Here it’s our turn to recoup. Because if the amers leave Afghanistan, then we will have to come there to pacify the Taliban. Let them transport their goods at their own expense and let them die there too, let’s just help them in this))))
  24. Anton Russian
    Anton Russian 4 May 2013 15: 51 New
    0
    The military base and the transit point are not the same thing. Is this not obvious? If not, then this is sad. For the transit point, the guys from the North Atlantic Alliance pay money. In addition, the provision of a transit corridor can be used as a political lever. A pragmatic and sober partnership is on the face. What are the disadvantages of a transit point? Anyone say that? Only without populism and hysterical emotional cries of pseudo patriotic.
    1. lilit.193
      lilit.193 4 May 2013 16: 46 New
      0
      But at the household level can I explain? Tell me, Anton, why be friends with a person who is eager to make you a scumbag? At the same time, he also tells all sorts of nasty things about you to others. That is gossiping. Will you communicate with such people? Or, for his money, will you become sober and pragmatic to lick his snot and say that this is a mutually beneficial cooperation?
      And now you answer me the question - what is there other prospects for us besides money in this transit?
      1. Anton Russian
        Anton Russian 4 May 2013 18: 09 New
        +1
        We are talking about partnerships between countries, not about friendships between people. Each country wants to make a different trick for its own benefit. This is politics. There was no friendship in her, no, and she didn’t wake her. Everyone wants their own benefits and just like that nobody wakes up anything. Do you need any other prospects? I wrote above about this. We are partners, not enemies. The earth is round.
        1. lilit.193
          lilit.193 4 May 2013 19: 37 New
          0
          Quote: Anton Russian
          We are talking about partnership of countries, not about friendship of people

          The word friendship can be replaced by cooperation or partnership.
          Quote: Anton Russian
          Each country wants to make a different trick for its own benefit. This is politics. There was no friendship in her, no, and she didn’t wake her up. Everyone wants their own benefits and just like that nobody wakes up anything.

          Well said. Only money does not solve everything. Even in politics. And here, besides money, there is no benefit.
          Quote: Anton Russian
          We are partners, not enemies

          And since when did we become partners with amers? After they adopted the “Magnetic Act”?
          Quote: Anton Russian
          The earth is round.

          As my good friend says, the Earth is not round, it is square. Here you go, and here again, and I'm around the corner! wink
          Quote: Anton Russian
          Do you need any other prospects?

          I need good prospects. And here I do not see them.
          1. Anton Russian
            Anton Russian 5 May 2013 13: 33 New
            +2
            Quote: lilit.193
            As my good friend says, the Earth is not round, it is square. Here you go, and here again, and I'm around the corner!

            Well, I’m talking about the same thing) In the same boat we are.
            Quote: lilit.193
            I need good prospects. And here I do not see them.

            Well, you take a closer look, start thinking, then maybe you will notice "good" prospects.
            Quote: lilit.193
            Well said. Only money does not solve everything. Even in politics. And here, besides money, there is no benefit.

            From this we have political benefits that are more expensive than money, in this case.

            Quote: lilit.193
            And since when did we become partners with amers?

            We have always been partners, even managed to win the most terrible war, we were partners even in the midst of the Cold War. If we were enemies, we would hardly have the happiness of living now. Remember the 20th century, what was there. We always agreed. Our enemy is inside the country, in our heads, in our system of social, economic, etc. A "amer" is only an incentive to improve)
  25. Ilya Mikhalych
    Ilya Mikhalych 4 May 2013 16: 41 New
    +1
    Everything is not as clear as it seems at first glance. Politics is a subtle thing.
  26. RUkola
    RUkola 4 May 2013 18: 24 New
    0
    In Ulyanovsk, there will be in Kazakhstan. It’s like, I came home to your neighbors from the third floor, but to go back, I need to use the pantry in your apartment on the 7th floor and one of your neighbors on the fifth-dressing room, Only this way I I can leave.
    1. Anton Russian
      Anton Russian 4 May 2013 18: 34 New
      0
      The fact of the matter is that the point was opened when Pakistan closed its transfer point there, because the states crumbled civilians from an unmanned aerial vehicle, as far as I remember. It’s like a fire started in the building, the fire enveloped the entrance. And to get out, you need to pay money. A person who saves is in control of the situation and may at any time refuse to save and throw)
  27. Vtel
    Vtel 4 May 2013 19: 07 New
    +1
    And this is not the first time Russia has literally asked itself to act as a transshipment point for NATO.

    And to listen to this truth is bitter, but it is true. Our Liberals with Western shura-moors twist, twist, rub on our ears, sho it is useful to us right up to tears. So from others to ask as it is not in Russian. That's when the real Russians will manage Russia, it will be possible to ask from them, and the liberals Russia will just be a feeding trough, where they will feed, and they will stretch to that - you understand genetic crap.
  28. AleksUkr
    AleksUkr 5 May 2013 09: 57 New
    +1
    For the information of all who still do not know:

    In Russia, TWO existing federal laws have been adopted with the same numbers, but different in essence and scope. Something unthinkable. They were adopted by United Russia with an interval of two years, signed by Presidents Putin and Medvedev with the consent of the Federation Council.

    The first law in question is dated June 7, 2007 N 99-ФЗ On Ratification of the Agreement between the States Parties to the North Atlantic Treaty and other States participating in the Partnership for Peace program, on the status of their Forces of June 19, 1995 and its Additional Protocol. ” Adopted by the State Duma on May 23, 2007, approved by the Federation Council on May 25, 2007. Sorry for the dry data.
    The Second Federal Law of May 4, 2011 N 99-ФЗ “On Licensing of Certain Types of Activities”. Adopted by the State Duma on April 22, 2011, approved by the Federation Council on April 27, 2011.
    Both laws N 99-ФЗ are published in Rossiyskaya Gazeta, which means their entry into force. The first is June 16, 2007 http://www.rg.ru/2007/06/16/partnesrstvo-doc.html. The second is May 6, 2011 http://www.rg.ru/2011/05/06/license-dok.html. Moreover, the second law does not cancel the first and does not even mention it. Something from the realm of unrealistic, contempt for civil norms of behavior or special operation. The first law in question is dated June 7, 2007 N 99-ФЗ “On ratification of the Agreement between the states parties to the North Atlantic Treaty and other states participating in the program "Partnership for Peace", on the status of their Forces of June 19, 1995 and its Additional Protocol. " Adopted by the State Duma on May 23, 2007, approved by the Federation Council on May 25, 2007. Sorry for the dry data.
    The Second Federal Law of May 4, 2011 N 99-ФЗ “On Licensing of Certain Types of Activities”. Adopted by the State Duma on April 22, 2011, approved by the Federation Council on April 27, 2011.
    Both laws N 99-ФЗ are published in Rossiyskaya Gazeta, which means their entry into force. The first is June 16, 2007 http://www.rg.ru/2007/06/16/partnesrstvo-doc.html. The second is May 6, 2011 http://www.rg.ru/2011/05/06/license-dok.html. Moreover, the second law does not cancel the first and does not even mention it. Something from the realm of unreal, disdain for civil norms of behavior or special operations.
    It is interesting that today it is practically impossible to find evidence of the existence of the first law N 99-ФЗ on NATO on the Russian Internet, except for the archive of the newspaper. All references to it, including the State Duma websites, were cleared a year ago. This only confirms the version of his willful concealment. The publication in the Rossiyskaya Gazeta is the only confirmation of the existence of this law. And that’s good - it means that the NATO law still exists.
    It is significant that the second law N 99-ФЗ (On Licensing) appeared when assessments of the treacherous nature of the first law N 99-ФЗ ratifying the agreement with NATO were heard. They sounded on the Internet and from really opposition to Putin persons. In particular, General Leonid Ivashov, Colonel Vladimir Kvachkov and the late Victor Ilyukhin spoke about this in particular. Whether this was the reason for Putin’s great fright and desire to hide “ends in the water” in any way, let's figure it out.
  29. AleksUkr
    AleksUkr 5 May 2013 10: 03 New
    +1
    CONTINUED: After all, the bill on NATO was introduced precisely by Vladimir Putin. He was received by a faction from the United Russia party, whose leader is Putin. The law was approved by the Federation Council, consisting of senators actually appointed by Putin. Putin himself signed the law. Only in Putin’s hands is there the possibility of a duplicate law with the same number appearing as a cover. This is in the spirit of his fsbeshnyh tricks. A considerable number of service trolls, including Nikolai Starikov, suddenly began to assert that the law on NATO does not exist in nature, which clearly indicates a special operation from Putin. These FSB contemptuously continue to regard the people as cattle and at the same time spread out in front of NATO for the sake of security, one must understand.

    The oddities of adopting a NATO law
    By the way, even the text, which is published in Rossiyskaya Gazeta, does not allow us to understand the true meaning of the law on NATO N 99-ФЗ, since it only enters into force some previously adopted NATO documents. There are no such documents in RG. Although they reveal the true essence of the law.
    I will say more, neither the deputies saw these documents when the law was passed, nor the senators, when it was approved. It is strange to say, but the genuine fundamental documents of NATO with their translation did not show even to the legal departments of the State Duma and the Federation Council, which they especially emphasized in their conclusions. Here the very suspicious nature of its adoption is manifested. "United Russia" took a pig in a poke? Or not a cat, but a larger predatory beast?
    The adoption of the law in the State Duma was postponed several times. It was adopted by Chokh among other minor initiatives, seventy-second in a day - as if in between. Surely at this time the meeting room was almost empty. The bill was not signed by the leaders of the relevant committees and legal departments of the Federation Council.
    Documents confirming this are still available when typing the phrase “Electronic Registration Card for Bill No. 410940-4”. Preserved copies of documents of the State Duma also make it possible to judge this. Fortunately, those who understood or suspected the danger of this law, and guessed about the unprecedented meanness and corruption of the current rulers, kept these copies. By the way, restricting access to electronic references does not mean at all that the NATO law does not work.
    How so? Why was Vladimir Putin very persistently pushing this law with NATO, and after its adoption he suddenly began to convulsively hide everything? After all, there is no one to do this except him. What are the reasons for this? And in general, are we dealing with a normal person? Or does his arrogance and contempt have no boundaries? Does he need unlimited power and monopoly again for just that?
    Putin, of course, used to show courtyard depth when signing international treaties, as was the case with Gazprom and Naftogaz, which led to the well-known confrontation with Ukraine three years ago and the recent condemnation of Yulia Tymoshenko (which, by the way, he betrayed). But here the case is still different - the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Government of the Russian Federation, the State Duma, the Federation Council, with their legal departments were involved. And the counterpart here was the whole of NATO.
  30. AleksUkr
    AleksUkr 5 May 2013 10: 29 New
    0
    CONTINUED:
    What preceded the adoption of the law on NATO

    Meanwhile, the adoption of the law on NATO N 99-ФЗ was only the final stage in the actions of Vladimir Putin, and before him Boris Yeltsin in this direction. That is, the action was not a one-time action - a clear sequence of their common steps is visible. Especially Putin. So, this was preceded by the signing in Vilnius on April 21, 2005 on behalf of the Russian Federation of the Agreement between the states parties to the North Atlantic Treaty and other states participating in the Partnership for Peace program, on the status of their Forces of June 19, 1995. Additional Protocol to it was signed in Sofia on April 28, 2006.
    The formal meaning of these NATO documents is that the 1995 Agreement regulates the legal status of military personnel, civilian personnel and members of their families of one of the Parties located on the territory of the other Party with its consent by applying to them the provisions of the Agreement between the NATO Parties on their status Forces of June 19, 1951. Some of the documents can be viewed here - http://www.nato.int/docu/other/ru/sofa.htm

    The NATO agreement of June 19, 1951 provides for equal rights between all its Parties, and with respect to Russia, it seems, there is no such equality. Already in the explanatory note to the law on NATO N 99-ФЗ it is said: "Measures in the field of military cooperation between Russia and NATO take place both on Russian territory and beyond." But what does “beyond” mean? The document does not say that military events can take place on the territory of NATO countries, as explained by Putin’s representative in the Duma. So, only in Russia. Perhaps also Ukraine, Belarus and other CIS countries. In any case, it is impossible to assume that NATO will allow Russia to deploy its troops with weapons on its territory. Not for this, NATO expanded.
    Let the words “cooperation” and “partnership for peace” also not confuse you. They, as you will see, involve military action. NATO itself is a military organization, and the most powerful and aggressive in the world of the existing ones. Yugoslavia, Iraq and Libya convincingly felt this on themselves. And Putin signed law N 99-FZ after Iraq.
    Moreover, the draft law on NATO N 99-ФЗ was introduced by Putin to the Duma just a month (!) After his sensational Munich speech on 27.10.2007, which many regarded as the start of a new cold war between Russia and NATO. In it, Putin accused NATO and the United States of aggression against other countries of the world and the desire to rule the world, which was very inspiring at that time the supporters of the "national leader" and the FSB. And then suddenly such a quiet and inconspicuous initiative under the law on NATO N 99-FZ. Obviously, this Putin’s speech was a performance and a banal deception for averting eyes. Lies, hypocrisy and meanness there really have no boundaries.
    So, the Agreement provides for the location of the very NATO forces, as well as their civilian personnel and family members in Russia. I note that this is not required for the May 9 parades or joint exercises, which end quickly. An agreement to come to us with families and service staff is needed only if NATO has been in Russia for a very long time. And Putin agreed to this. Moreover, the import of weapons, military equipment, vehicles and fuel by the Western Alliance is envisaged. Not just provided, but as it is said “without paying customs duties and taxes” - that is, on preferential terms, directly, bluntly and without delay.


    From an article dated January 12.01.2012, XNUMX, “REVIVAL OF RUSSIA: Is Putin hiding an agreement with NATO?”

    Source

    The permanent address of the article is http://ru-an.info/news_content.php?id=1323
  31. Scandinavian
    Scandinavian 5 May 2013 22: 05 New
    0
    Quote: Alibekulu
    The problem of the appearance of Zhanaozenov is not in the hands of the Americans, but depends on the actions of the authorities of Kazakhstan .. and nothing else.


    I see that you are not well informed that Zhanaozen, Arkan Kergen and Askaysky incident, the death of border guards, the shooting of the Academy generals of one story, foreign policy, drugs, arms smuggling, and everything goes under the slogan of the Americans and it’s not for me to teach you. You want Syria in Kazakhstan ... you will get it. Only how will we fight with sticks or stones?