Russian reindeer conquer Western markets

Reindeer breeding accounts for 90% of the agriculture in the Yamalo-Nenets Autonomous District in northern Russia. The industry’s export markets include Germany, Italy, Greece and Latvia. But producers are facing logistics problems trying to expand.

 

Reindeer have been the main source of income for the Nenets people for centuries. There are 600,000 head of the animals in the region.

But Russia has yet to develop the domestic market for reindeer meat. Today, all the produce is exported. Most of the reindeer are privately owned, with only 28% belonging to agricultural cooperatives.
“We breed reindeers and hand them over to sovkhos or to the factory. We receive salaries twice a year, but we don’t spend it – we buy the food we need, and save the rest of the money,” reindeer breeder Maksim Khudi says.

One meat processing plant was built five years ago – when there was barely any demand for reindeer meat outside the Yamalo-Nenets Autonomous district.

Now the factory has five shops and is receiving orders from other regions. Recently, the first lot of reindeer meat was sent to Germany.

Although producers say there’s more demand outside Russia than inside – expansion is hindered by an age-old problem – transport problems.

According to Yamal Reindeers Plant director, Evgeny Amaltsev, the reindeers are in demand in Germany, Italy, Greece and Latvia, not forgetting some hypermarkets in Moscow and Saint-Petersburg.
“But we can only use helicopters and winter roads. Soon the ice will melt and we won’t be able to work for a month. Logistics is our major problem,” Amaltsev stresses.

But manufacturers here remain optimistic for the future. They’re sure the label ‘Yamal reindeer’ – a sign of high quality and good value – is strong enough to keep the brand competitive on international markets.

 

War games in Chechnya

The largest and only Russian army unit to be permanently located in the Chechen Republic has held large-scale training involving heavy artillery. Situated in the city of Khankala, 10 km from the capital Grozny, the 42nd division is made up of more than 15,000 professional servicemen.Those already drafted can sign a contract for at least three years to stay in the army. But it needs to become their profession if they are to operate in such a dangerous area.

Regiments are located in areas where there is still the threat of possible attack, such as Bashen-Kale near the Russian-Georgian border.
 
During the wars of the 1990s clashes were common there, but over the last five years things have changed dramatically. The city of Khankala was among the places which saw the worst fighting in the 1990s.

Some five years ago there was debris all around in Khankala, the city was severely damaged. Today there’s a division which looks more like a small city where thousands of professional soldiers do their jobs.

Some even bring their families with them. There is infrastructure available for them, including a kindergarten, schools and a hospital, which people say is the best in the area.

The division even has its own bread-baking plant which provides soldiers and their relatives with fresh buns and rolls.

Just a few days ago Tomas Hammarberg, the European commissioner for human rights, visited Chechnya. He said the republic is far from being a top holiday destination and living here could still be dangerous but it’s improving.

Why Ukrainians stand up strongly against NATO

english.pravda.ru

Sociologists consider that the number of Ukrainians who want to see their country in NATO has drastically decreased. Moreover, it happened after the Bucharest summit which the orange revolutionaries put high hopes on. Ukrainians proved to be cleverer than their government. What happened?

On April 24 a Ukrainian social service announced sensational changes in Ukrainians’ preferences in foreign policy. The number of Ukrainians who backed up the country’s entry into NATO dropped ten percent within the past four months. This statement was issued by Ilko Kucheriv, the Democratic Initiatives Fund Director, who presented the results of research conducted by the Ukrainian Sociology Service by order of the fund within the period from March 17 to 31.

“We were shocked by the results. We suddenly discovered that the number of Ukrainians who supported the country’s entry into NATO decreased ten percent,” bewildered Kucheriv said. Indeed, in March public support for Ukraine’s entry into NATO accounted for 21.8 percent, but last December it accounted for 32 percent, the Democratic Initiatives Fund suggested. It is enough to upset those who tried to persuade the world of Ukraine’s long-standing aspirations to join NATO.

The director of the Fund could not but attempt to explain the reasons for it. According to Kucheriv, population support for joining NATO lessened as soon as Ukraine’s striving for the NATO Membership Action Plan (MAP) was actively discussed at the Bucharest summit and after the letter of three leaders had been signed to claim Ukraine’s entry into the MAP.

On the whole, the public opinion poll suggested that about 59.6 percent are against Ukraine’s entry into the alliance, and 18.6 percent gave no answer. According to Kucheriv, NATO membership is mostly supported by inhabitants of Western Ukraine and Kiev. The Democratic Initiatives Fund director did not give further details and mentioned only the western part of the country and the capital, but his estimation does not arouse suspicion.

The attitude of Kievans is more pro-Western; it differed significantly from that of inhabitants from neighbouring regions and even from the Kievan region. To all appearances, there is provincial aspiration to feel like an inhabitant of a European capital, which is possible only with the help of external force. As to Western Ukraine, there are no questions at all. Over many years it was the only region where pros and cons of joining NATO were positively balanced.

So was it a sensation? There are several assumptions, but there is no sensation in any case. Until spring of 1999 there were quite a number of Ukrainian citizens (about 40-60 percent) who did not take a determined attitude to Ukraine’s entry into NATO. There are various reasons for this, but there is no need to mention them right now.

NATO’s aggression towards Yugoslavia caused unease. The Orange Revolution that has a clear geopolitical aspect made some ‘hesitating’ people to make up their mind. As a result, this situation did not change for three-four years. About 50 percent of adults (over 50 percent as a rule) are against Ukraine’s entry into NATO, about 15-25 percent are for the entry (about 30 percent said “more likely yes, than no”).

Probably, the announced sensation is the result of erroneous methods of research. The known Ukrainian inequality from the viewpoint of world outlook causes serious mistakes with insignificant sampling. Two thousand respondents (a standard choice in most public opinion polls in Ukraine) are not enough to obtain trustworthy results. In fact, most public opinion polls in the country evidence this.

The data yielded the Democratic Initiatives research can also serve as evidence. Thus, if there were a Sunday referendum over Ukraine’s EU membership, most Ukrainians (56 percent) would vote for the entry, the fund suggested. Twenty five percent would be against the country’s entry into the EU, 19 percent did not decide yet. The results are quite plausible and they coincide with the results presented three years ago.

However, wonders never cease with a dynamic. Thus, Kucheriv marked that there is a negative dynamic of public opinion in comparison with December of 2007 when 64 percent would vote for Ukraine’s entry into the EU, but there is a positive dynamic in comparison with 2005 when 47 percent were ready to vote for Ukraine’s entry into the EU. It is likely to be the result of insignificant sampling (2000 respondents) or some erroneous method of research.

However, there is another version. Ilko Kucheriv complained that this change in Ukrainians’ attitude to NATO is rather irrelevant – when the USA and New Europe urged Ukraine to join the MAP. It is not to be ruled out that if Ukraine had joined the MAP at the Bucharest summit, some public services would have changed the public poll results later. The same was done with the “rising dynamic.” But it did not happen, that is why they released plausible results.

“I cannot suspect rigging anyway. Maybe, my presumptions are wrong and undoubtedly offensive for honest sociologists. The topic of NATO is unpopular in Ukraine and all Ukrainian politicians know that. So does Yulia Timoshenko who struggles against Viktor Yushchenko, tries to gain Western support and to preserve her popularity in Ukraine. This causes such unexpected statements like NATO membership is “still up in the air”, that “the question will take a decade” or “it will be clear after the referendum”, etc.

However, while the letter of three leaders was first sent secretly, now public discussion of the MAP membership was inevitable. People awoke and understood that they may be ignored when taking serious decisions, which the orange government had already attempted to do. As a result, hesitating people come to their senses and had their say. There might be a grain of sense in these discussions.

If we have a look at the results revealed by the Democratic Initiatives Fund director, we will see that 32 percent of Ukrainians wanted to join NATO at the end of last year, but by late March ten percent of them changed their mind. How can we account for such indecision? Research methods must be wrong…

In any case, it should be noted that the results did not meet expectations of Atlantic (both overseas and local) integrators, that Russia’s clear-cut position will urge on Ukraine to join NATO. Yushchenko was right to say that “Ukrainians are not dumber than Bulgarians or Romanians.” However, he comes to discrepant conclusions. Ukrainians are much cleverer than Kiev, Washington and Brussels think. Unlike its government.

Putin in Time magazine’s list of Top 100 influential people

Russian President Vladimir Putin has been included in Time Magazine’s annual list of the world’s one hundred most influential people.

The list was broken up into five categories. Putin was included in the U.S. magazine’s ‘Leaders and Revolutionaries’ section. The other categories were ‘Heroes and Pioneers,’ ‘Scientists and Thinkers,’ ‘Artists and Entertainers,’ and ‘Builders and Titans.’

Although the list was not ranked in order of importance, Putin’s name was second in the list after the Dalai Lama, the Tibetan spiritual leader. Other names in the ‘Leaders and Revolutionaries’ section included Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, George W. Bush and Hu Jintao.

Putin, who was named Time’s Person of the Year at the end of 2007, is to step down as Russian president on May 7. He has already agreed to become Russia’s premier and head the ruling United Russia party.

Former U.S. secretary of state, Madeleine Albright, wrote in an accompanying piece in Time that it was unlikely that Putin would “wear out his welcome at home anytime soon, as he has nearly done with many democracies abroad. In the meantime, he will remain an irritant to NATO, a source of division within Europe and yet another reason for the West to reduce its reliance on fossil fuels.”

The outgoing Russia president was portrayed as Peter the Great in a ‘portrait’ that accompanied the list.

Tanks in Moscow

 

Rehearsal for 9 mai 

 

 

Russian peacekeepers heading for deployment site in Abkhazia

 

Russian peacekeepers who recently arrived in the zone of the Georgian-Abkhaz conflict zone are heading for areas where they will be stationed, the Russian Defense Ministry said Saturday.

Moscow has increased the number of Russian peacekeepers in Abkhazia to 3,000 from 2,000, but has said that this is within the limits envisioned by earlier agreements on the number of peacekeeping troops signed by the Georgian leadership.

Abkhazia, alongside another Georgian breakaway republic, South Ossetia, broke away from Georgia in the early 1990s following the collapse of the Soviet Union. Between 10,000 and 30,000 people were killed in the Georgian-Abkhazian conflict and some 3,000 in Georgian-South Ossetian hostilities. Georgia is looking to regain control over the two de facto independent republics.

Tensions between Moscow and Tbilisi have been escalating rapidly since Russia’s outgoing President Vladimir Putin called for closer ties between Moscow and the two breakaway republics in mid-April. Tbilisi also accused Russia of shooting down a drone on April 20 – a claim Russia flatly denied, calling Georgia’s video footage fake.

Russia has threatened to use force if Georgia employs “violent measures,” against its peacekeepers or Russian nationals living in Abkhazia or South Ossetia.

Russia’s Foreign Ministry released a statement on Wednesday defending the increase in peacekeepers, saying it was “aimed at ensuring the basic rights of Abkhazia and South Ossetia’s residents.”

NATO spokesman James Appathurai said on Wednesday that NATO believed that while Russia may technically have the right to do increase troop numbers, “in the political reality, this is not easing tensions, it is raising tensions.”

 

Zenit hammer Bayern to reach UEFA Cup final

 

            RIA Novosti

Russian champions Zenit turned on the style in St. Petersburg on Thursday evening to crush the German giants Bayern Munich 4-0 and progress to the final of the UEFA Cup.

After drawing 1-1 in Munich a week ago, Zenit went into second leg the favorites, but nothing could have prepared the side’s fans for either the performance or the result at Petrovsky stadium on Russia’s Spring and Labor public holiday.

Despite having lost a number of key players to either injury or suspension, including their captain and star, Andrey Arshavin, Zenit left the four times champions of Europe and current Bundesliga leaders with little chance, opening the scoring as early as the 4th minute, Pavel Pogrebnyak cracking a free kick past veteran German keeper Oliver Kahn.

A star-studded Bayern side boasting Luca Toni, Miroslav Klose and Franck Ribery fought back, but Zenit’s defense held out, and in the 39th minute a moment of Brazilian-like genius by Konstantin Zyrianov set the Russian international free in Bayern’s box and he slotted the ball home for goal number two.

The second half again saw Bayern unable to make progress in the Zenit box, and the Russian under 21 star Viktor Fayzulin headed home goal number three in the 54th minute. The already scarcely believable score entered the realms of fantasy football with just 17 minutes left to play, Pogrebnyak casually booting home Zenit’s fourth following some fine build up play by his teammates. The goal was his tenth of the tournament, and brought him level with Toni as the 2007/08 UEFA Cup top scorer.

Zenit kept the pressure on, and threatened to get a fifth against a clearly shell-shocked Bayern. In fact, they may have tried just a little too hard, Pogrebnyak earning a needless yellow card that will rule him out of the final in Manchester against Zenit manager Dick Advocaat’s former club, Glasgow Rangers, on May 14.

Russian football, backed by oligarchs and energy giants, has been enjoying something of a boom of late, and Zenit’s mauling of Bayern on Thursday night is sure to raise its profile even more.

Aside from Bayern, Zenit have beaten Bayer Leverkusen, Marseille, and Villarreal in the knock- out stages. “We’ve come so far, gone through against such strong teams, and this shows we can win in the final,” said Advocaat after the victory over Bayern, adding that, “We were unbelievable today. I’ve never seen anything like it before.”

The side’s fans, not to mention Russian energy giant Gazprom, which finances the club, will be hoping that he is right and that Zenit can become the second Russian team, after CSKA Moscow in 2005, to lift the UEFA Cup in the last four years.

Even before the identity of Zenit’s opponents was settled, Bayern’s manager, Ottmar Hitzfield, was sure that Zenit would be the favorites going into the final.

“Any side that beats Bayern 4-0 is always going to be the favorite,” he commented after the game.