Russian oil roulette

g4520Like a big bang yesterday a news spread about still unheard discovery of oil and gas in the Russian territories around the Kara sea. Large quantities of crude oil were found in the basin of the Kara sea in the Arctic, which could make this region to become the largest shell site of crude oil, even bigger than the Gulf of Mexico.  This statement was revealed ​​by Igor Sechin, chief man of the company Rosneft. However, since this only more interesting is that the general partner of Rosneft in this business is American company Exxon. All this happens in a period of creeping “cold war” on the territory of Ukraine and sanctions imposed from USA towards Russia. Although these American sanctions in July were designed to withhold dollars for “Rosneft” and block access to modern technology, they were not designed to stop the joint projects of American and Russian companies. With new sanctions on 12th September, however it is stated that American companies have deadline until 10/10/2014. to end its operations in Arctic.  In the document, titled “Directive 4” from the pages of Department of  Treasury of the United States it is clearly and explicitly written what is the subject of these sanctions, while in the document entitled “Sectoral Sanctons Identification” we see a list of companies that are affected by them.


Like all other events, this story has its stronghold in geopolitical trends and things which happening behind the scenes, and therefore I will try to look over its very beginnings and the start of strategic partnership between Exon and Rosneft since the August 2011. Specifically, these two companies on August 31 st, 2011, signed an agreement on strategic cooperation, including research of the Arctic basin.  This agreement was signed in the presence of the Prime Minister of Russia at that time Vladimir Putin, president of Rosneft Eduard Khudainatov, deputy prime minister of Russia at that time Igor Sechin and President of Exxon company Niel Duffin.  This contract which later is expanded, involves investment of $ 3.2 billion that would be spent on research of 3 blocks in the Kara Sea. The ratio of the joint venture company is 66.7% owned by Rosneft and 33.3% owned by Exxon. Geographical details of the contract can be viewed HERE.  According to Bloomberg “Univerzitetskaja” geological structure is the size of Moscow city and big enough to contain at least 9 billion barrels of oil, or the wealth that is worth about $ 900 billion at today’s prices. Russians already mobilized an army that is sent to the destination in order to protect the sites. They only question now is are they going to be able to exploit and drill this oil without Exxon, and also is Exxon going to respect sanctions, remains to be seen.


One reason is actually indicative of all these analogies and the point that I want to depict in this text. At the time of signing this agreement even before signatures there were required some certain negotiations and guarantees before the exact date of signing. If we put all this in the time frame we come to the conclusion that negotiations on this project in the Kara Sea were lasted from at least the beginning of 2011, if not sooner. That year in the world and geopolitical relations was active only one country, and that country was Libya. The same Libya that today is ruled by anarchy, tribal conflicts and chaos, while members of parliament held its sessions at rented Greek ferry in the port of Torbuk. In all previous thoughts about everything what is happening on the global chessboard, I marked only two milestones important for Russia but with a different outcome. The first such milestone is of course Libya, and the second is Syria. When Libya is in focus for many of us will never actually be clear, why Russia has not vetoed a shameful Resolution 1973 of the UN Security Council, which created a legitimate option for military action. If Russia vetoed at that time this resolution, I believe that today in Libya, people would live much better, and Russians would avoid moving of “military zone” towards Ukraine and tightening the belt around Russia. One of the two decisive vote for this military intervention in Libya was given by Bosnia and Herzegovina, and this was ninth vote, and tenth vote was from Portugal. But before voting the delegation of Portugal firmly insisted that they declare themselves after Bosnia and Herzegovina delegation, because after 9 votes it is not important too much how Portugal will vote, unless any of the permanent members put veto, which has not happened. I don´t know why Bosnia and Herzegovina voted for this resolution, but I guess it´s because we are protectorate, and not a sovereign state, no matter how someone would be annoyed by this observation, but voting for this resolution is an obvious proof.   Once again Bosnia and Herzegovina demonstrated that we are artificial banana creation and not country. Except this at that time we had many of our companies started their jobs and operations in Libya, even from this side we voted against ourselves. From the other permanent members, Russia and China abstained and not vetoed, which in diplomatic terms means that the aggression against Libya is just about to start. How voted permanent and non-permanent members of the UN Security Council you can see in the picture below.

untitled1 (1)

What surprised me personally, and even some more serious geopolitical analysts was certainly the stance of Russia, which in a similar situation some time later made ​​it clear that it will not happen the same thing (mistake) with Syria. As a reason for this Russian decision we can take the geographical proximity of Syria to their boundaries, and the fact that in Tartus, the second largest Syrian port on the Mediterranean sea, is a Russian base, for which from Moscow clarify that it is used only for the overhaul and repair of ships. So, of course we can conclude that these two reasons were enough for Russia to take a tougher stance and to ban potential air strikes on Syria, which was obviously not the case with Libya.  An additional argument and one that I wanted to point in the text, and which goes in favor of the setback voting about Libya is signing of this very lucrative oil contract between Exxon and Rosneft. During the same year of  2011. in the month of May there was a meeting of “Arctic Council” in Nuuk the capital of Greenland. This meeting was primarily driven by the fierce debate between Russia and the United States, about who have right to claim its territories in Arctic. On that meeting some things never get defined and many of the borders in the Arctic remained questionable. Guided by this I believe that the Arctic after latest Russian discoveries, could come back into focus of wrangling and power struggle, even maybe in one kind of shout diplomatic conflict that has never been closed. What emerged from that meeting in Nuuk is that Russia and Norway, which is a NATO member, signed an agreement on areas in the Barents Sea, which solved their mutual long-silent conflict over these territories. Except this in the Arctic region still remain a huge number of unsolved questions, which will in the future, and especially with the research of new crude oils increasingly rise geopolitical focus and tensions.

Spread template

The reason for the signing of this agreement between Rosneft and Exxon could be also of technological nature. Because why would the Russians signed a contract with an American company unless there is not something in mutual interests. In the report from 2007. of the Norwegian green group Belona which declares to protect the natural environment in one part they showed their concerns for hydrocarbon technology that Russia possesses because it was “old and inefficient”. Regarding to this it is easily possible that the contract with Exxon was signed because they possess necessary hydrocarbon technology, which is needed for the exploration and exploitation of the oil and gas sources.  In the latest brochure Exon distinguished that they have experience more than 90 years for working in the areas of the Arctic. There should be added that this is certainly not the first project that Exon works with Russia, and prior to this there is a project “Sakhalin 1“, whose main contractor was Exon, where they broke down many records when it comes to drilling and quantity of oil. Rosneft as younger company certainly has less experience in wells such as these in the Arctic, which have higher technological requirements than Rosneft wells in Siberia from which they currently draws the bulk of their profit.

So, things are pretty clear, while aggression was taking place in Libya because of its regime where guilt has not been proven, on the world stage behind the curtain there were conducted these negotiations about capital cash investments between the most powerful Russian state-owned company and most successful American company. I’m pretty sure that Russia has not vetoed a resolution on Libya, inter alia, because of this agreement between Rosneft and Exxon. Somehow I get the impression that the Russians “swallowed” somehow Libyan resolution regarding to this contract. The presence of the Prime Minister at that time, and now President of Russia, is seen as a legitimate state interest of the Russian Federation which is respected, but Americans as Danaans who bear gifts and do not wait, today they brought a present to Russia named by “Crisis in Ukraine” in front of their own door. I am convinced that Ukraine and Russia, should be defended even in 1999 in Yugoslavia, and not to mention how thy should been defended in Libya in 2011. Russians probably knew very well what they risk, although they was hardly able to predict this really unnecessary war in Ukraine and exhaustion in front of their doorstep.

Today we have what we have. This crisis in Ukraine has brought many innocent lives on both sides, one country is divided, and the ghosts of fascism awakened irremediable and whatever the conflict is over, I believe that in this part of the world the situation will always be unstable. Knowing that Russian capitalism is identical to American, but our Serbian traditional ties with them as Orthodoxy, inverted flag, and that the sun rises in the “East” and on the other side depleted uranium from the “West” will always be an argument that sets them apart. That’s exactly why I want Russia consider us on the same way as we thought of them, because in addition to money and capital around which revolves the world, there is something else, something much deeper, which remains after us, and what we inherited, and capitalism force us to forget… Except my personal motives there are also some rational, which are best described by Mr. Willy Wimmer, a former deputy of the Bundestag and admitted friend of our Serbian people. In one of his texts at the beginning of the Ukrainian crisis he posted three questions which I will paraphrase below and with that I will finish this text.

1. Can there be peace in the world if the only hegemonic force is USA?

2.  Is there possible respect of international law and world power balance if we do not have Russia?

3. When the EU will stop to be like a soap bubble in the hands of the USA?


“Opium economy” from Afghanistan to Kosovo*

Writing my articles about geopolitical position of Kosovo*, an essential thesis that confirms stealing territory from Serbia actually refers to the drug route or so called in Balkans “green transversal”. This itinerary is the way of drugs moving from Afghanistan to Kosovo* and after further to the Europe. Two years ago, one joke appeared on the Internet that the producer of heroin acknowledged the independence of its distributor. It was about Afghanistan, which was officially first acknowledged the independence of Kosovo*. By some estimates, about 65% of the world’s heroin passes through this Serbian province, while 90% of the total amount of drugs coming into Europe from Kosovo*, and all of security for that trade is provided from Bondsteel base. As we can see this is not an ordinary story, and its real foothold we can see in the latest article published by The Economist.



On the other hand, when carried out the intervention in Afghanistan, the U.S.  justified struggle against “world terrorism”. After the intervention and disposition of ISAF troops, apart from terrorism they have found themselves in the fight against drugs. Their focus in this kind of the fight to prevent the production of opium was in the incentives that are set aside for Afghan farmers with a view to grow wheat instead of poppies. Except farmers, they also financially rewarded local politicians on whose territories was registered decline in production. Indeed, in this system of prevention U.S. invested more than $ 10 billion, according to data presented by the Special Inspector for Afghanistan John Sopko, responsible for overseeing of the process.

It would be great if something was really achieved with this huge money, but actually according to official UN report about cultivation of poppy in last year these awarded wheat growing Afghan farmers, actually broke down the record in cultivation of opium. That fact is absurd even more because before the intervention in Afghanistan they did not have so much area planted with opium, while after the intervention production always had an upward trend and now it reached its peak.

To make this worse, the money that was invested in reducing cultivation, primarily was invested in those areas that are less hostile to the United States soldiers because of personnel security reasons. The result of this was counterproductive as it increased production in the provinces that are under the control of the Taliban fighters. With simple economic calculations if they reduce the production, demand remains the same (or increases in drug case), then the price can only grow. This has two economic consequences:

First one is that the manufacturer makes more money because it produces the same as before then but now for a higher price, which means he has more money to reinvest in even greater production of heroin. The second one takes some time, because it encourages higher profits and greater production of both existing manufacturers and new participants. Thus, the global supply of heroin is growing.


Regard this analysis, I participated last year in one seminar in Prague, organized by the Diplomatic Division of NATO. Among other sessions there was one guided by Peter Pelc, former ambassador of the Czech Republic in Afghanistan. He mostly talked about how this country is stabilized by a process of democratization after the fall of the Taliban government.

On my statement in this context addressed to ambassador Pelz,  that Kosovo* is major transit hub for drugs coming from Afghanistan and that is what actually mostly hold the economy  of “west”, and that these are two “countries” that are in the process of democratization and nation-building and in both we can find U.S. bases located under cover and ensuring this commerce, and that there is no much coincidence when Afghanistan was the first country that recognized Kosovo*, later I presented him the following data from  UN report, but then I did not know how much U.S. invested to suppress cultivation. After this statement the question just raised itself.

Does NATO troops protect the interests of the people or provide the drug trade that flows freely? The answer that I received from the ambassador after a few seconds of silence and scratching his head was extremely funny, and boiled down to the fact that Kosovo * and Afghanistan can not be compared in terms of state-building and that good questions cant always give us good answers. For smart person that answer is enough.

This brief analyse in all ways made pointless American principles of fighting in Afghanistan, and possibly also whole their intervention, because after so many years they achieved nothing within their official plans. On the other hand certainly they have reached money interests of the military and other industries. Economically where we have demand, profit will always find its way. But I guess  it is clear to everyone reasonable that the “War on drugs” is just an ordinary “perpetuum mobile” for the trade financed by tax dollars, of which the profit for the most part stays in the hands of powerful individuals.


g3983The latest events in Ukraine really showed us plenty of things, but perhaps most important thesis that stretches from the beginning of demonstration in Kiev, over referendum on Crimea, to the latest developments on the brink of war in Donetsk and Slaviansk the return of a multi-polar world order. Ukraine was accidentally or “intentionally” chosen to be the training ground for modern geopolitical chess game in which we can see the strength, power and influence testing between Russia and the United States. At the beginning of the year in conclusion of the text about  Russian missile diplomacy I mentioned this thesis about return of “multipolarity” and straightening poles on a global scale. As time passed, this thesis become increasingly clear and I think we’re much more in remind of the former Cold War rhetoric.

Barack_Obama_and_Vladmir_Putin_at_G8_summit_2013-1560x690_cReturn of Russia began with blockade of resolution about Syria intervention, and reached its zenith putting Crimea under its control. I think that in Russian case nothing is over yet, and that this is just the beginning. On the other side, the United States began to act like this long time ago and it is needless to enumerate: Yugoslavia, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Ukraine … Sympthomatic things about these events in Ukraine are the methods used for superiority. These methods of taking and putting under control the administrative buildings were used in Kiev, and the same were later used in  Crimea, as well in the Donetsk. Apparent intentions of pro – russian population that they can fight for their status only with the same methods as we saw in Kiev. Although the official position of Russia that are not involved in the events in Donetsk, it is obvious that they are on the territory of Ukraine represented via their secret services, either Russians and USA. The only who suffer in situation like this is Ukrainian people and their economy.

The last time when circumstances were such geopolitically like this, there has been formed “third block”, ie Non-Aligned Movement in 1961. year. This formula, which were first among equals applied by president of Yugoslavia  Josip Broz Tito, president of Egypt  Gamal Abdel Nasser, President of India Jawaharlal Nehru, president of Indonesia Sukarno and president of Ghana Kwame Nkrumah, proved to be very successful in the circumstances that prevailed at that time. Non-Aligned Movement member states were generally overwhelmingly positioned at the margins of the world impacts and the only affirmation within such alliances could bring their joint action to find collective interest and that their voice become honored by the great powers. Yugoslavia was particularly in a very specific situation of a “big gap” between East and West, either geographically and politically. Opting for one or the other completely, would mean economic collapse and political problems. The only logical solution was to remain non-aligned, or “neutral” in some way, and to get legitimacy and regard by others. President Tito of Yugoslavia as an good expert of his chances and “diplomatic fox” performed this maneuver with surgical precision and in the best possible manner in the interest of Yugoslavia.


You don´t need not be so smart to conclude how successful diplomatic formula should be applied to identical political and global circumstances nowadays. I say this primarily referring to today’s awkward diplomatic position of Serbia and even worse position of Bosnia and Herzegovina, which since its establishment in this form there is no consistent diplomacy or foreign policy as a consequence of its internal political relations. To put it mildly, situation in this area is chaotic and could be described as good joke.For Serbia we know that country is officially in the process of accession negotiations with the EU, as well with small steps towards NATO membership. These small steps are reflected especially in the sending of an officer of the Army of Serbia at the headquarter office at NATO Joint Force Command in Naples, as well as few official meetings of officials of NATO and the Serbian Army. This is supported also by the dispatch from Wikileaks, originally sent from the U.S. Embassy in Belgrade to hands of Hillary Clinton. In this dispatch Jovan Ratkovic said that as a former Minister of Defense, President Tadic knows the issue well. Tadic believes that Serbia cannot remain outside of NATO forever, but doesn’t say this often because of the political sensitivity of the issue. Ratkovic explained that after the fall of the Berlin Wall, the citizens of Yugoslavia assumed that they would be among the first to enter both the European Union and NATO. It wasn’t until the wars of the Milosevic era and the 1999 NATO intervention that anti-NATO sentiment developed in Serbia. Ratkovic characterized current public support for Partnership for Peace participation and NATO membership as “surprisingly high” given Serbia’s history.” However, a little further eastern Serbia parallel builds strong ties with Russia, which the most visible evidence is the route of South Stream. In these circumstances, when it comes to complicating of situation in Ukraine and when UN General Assembly vote on the resolution which annexed the Crimea to Russia, inevitably comes up pressure on Serbia and Bosnia and Herzegovina, where both states generally were abstain from the voting.

Criema voting

Bosnia & Herzegovina and Serbia were the only abstain countries in the Balkans, which in general means that you are not declared. All other countries in the Balkans and from former Yugoslavia voted for this resolution. With this “garbled” move Serbia wanted to preserve good relations with the “booth sides” but after a while we can certainly expect this to bring new problems for Government because EU did not expect that, and in these circumstances, “to be abstain” means having position that not coincide with the same position within the EU. In Bosnia & Herzegovina abstain is almost standard story because three members of the Presidency who is in charge of foreign policy in general, could not agree on voting. Because of all the above mentioned, and primarily because of the “neo – multipolarity” and the complexity of the position in which are Serbia and Bosnia and Herzegovina, I am very confident that both countries should clearly and diplomatically bring focus to change the status of observer and gain full membership status in the Non-Aligned Movement. Already in advance within the EU, on the possibility of these idea they did not take it too kindly and even emphasize that Serbia is no longer “non-aligned” and have to decide, although the EU itself is in the same position as the former Yugoslavia once. The attitude of the United States passed by the current Ambassador to Belgrade Michael Kirby showed us other side when he said :

“And for me, it will be interesting to contemplate that Serbia will do it, because it is a successor of Tito’s Yugoslavia, which was the founder of the Non-Aligned Movement. There is some ritual sense about the Non-Aligned Movement that will not take any side. This is something that Serbia has in its history, and perhaps in its future “

Except remark that Serbia is treated as successors of the former Yugoslavia, full membership in Non – Aligned would have greater maneuver space for Serbian nowadays situation. Deeper engagement and mobility in Non – Aligned movement could regain some old traditional friendship and improve economical situation, especially in the countries of growing African economies. On the other hand there would be possible to make ​​legitimate retreat towards NATO and also to confirm neutrality of Serbia declared by its National Assembly in Constitution. Besides this enhanced and a full engagement of Serbia would bring new energy to the Non-Aligned Movement and give more on the scale of importance. This would be also a great opportunity for Bosnia and Herzegovina to include itself seriously in international circles and to become more influent in the outer policy. With its comparative advantages Bosnia & Herzegovina could to accomplish primarily some economic benefits as well as Serbia, and moreover could be placed as partner with stance equally towards all, without any repercussions because all countries are aware of its constitution and complexity. Except this, Bosnia and Herzegovina should be completely demilitarized in the future, but this is not the subject of this analysis. My opinion is that with very quick turnaround to the Non-Aligned Movement, the position of Serbia would be much better, especially at the principles of greater development of economic diplomacy, without major political stories, and the situation at the global level itself brings us to this possible solution. This would also help to some stabilization in the Balkans relations between these two countries, as well as within Bosnia & Herzegovina itself, where there would not be different pressures and ugly methods tore down the position of the Republic of Srpska which guaranteed by the Dayton agreement and the focus should be shifted from political and constitutional questions to and only to economic development. When all is summed up, it seems that an indirect hint from Ambassador Kirby in general does not seem so bad, and how we are going to do, time will tell us in the future.

Ukraine Neo – fascism in service of “western” geostrategy

g3188This violence that we can watch these days on the streets of Kiev is far more than ordinary expression of popular anger against a government. Instead of that I think that this is actually the latest example of most insidious form of fascism rebirth that Europe has seen since the fall of the Third Reich. I will present you here few organisations that fought there for better Ukraine with EU values against regime of Victor  Yanukovych. Maybe his governance was not so good and beside this protest social situation in Ukraine could be better, but can you imagine what would happen in USA if there were scenes like this from Kiev ?

Please watch this short video.

One of the first organisations that took part in ruining and burning of Kiev is called “Right Sector” The organisation believes the current situation is an opportunity “to destroy the state skeleton” and start building a new state, although activists said they do not support the idea of joining the EU, which they consider to be an “oppressor of European nations”. Their founder is  Stephen Bandera. People from western  part of Ukraine consider him as hero, while people from eastern part of Ukraine and Russia consider him as extreme nationalist, terrorist and quisling. Former president of Ukraine Viktor Yushchenko awarded to Bandera the title of Hero of Ukraine in January 2010., but that title was officially annulled by president Victor  Yanukovych in 2011. This is their old logo, a Wolfsangel rune, a common symbol for European neo-Nazi organizations.


g3041                                   Luftwaffe official flag and German SS division helmet.

Next organisation from these demonstrations that remind us on fascistic period is “Svoboda“, the Ukraine’s ultra-nationalist party that capture 10% of the votes at the last elections and entering the legislature for the first time. Their base of support is mainly in the country’s west, while voters in the east and south view them as extremists. The leader of the Svoboda, Oleh Tyahnybok, regularly appears alongside Vitali Klitschko as one of the key protest participants. Svoboda party gain membership as observer at the Alliance of European National Movements, along with France’s National Front, the British National Party. 

g3110                      President of “Svoboda”Oleh Tyahnybok & US senator John McCain

Except this Vice Chairman of the “Svoboda” Pankevych Oleh Ihorovych last year took part with his speech at funeral of Ukrainians who fought for Nazi SS soldiers during WWII. You can watch this from 0:32 on video below.

Another organisation that was represented as opposition is Ukrainian Democratic Alliance for Reforms (Udar) led by the former world heavyweight boxing champion Vitali Klitschko. As we know from the history of demonstrations (UDAR or PUNCH) symbol is “Raised fist” formerly used in Yougoslavia, Libya, Egypt, Syria, these days in Ukraine, Bosnia & Herzegovina and Venezuela. This party also have strong link with EU because they got observer status at European People’s Party. The party won 40 seats in the Ukrainian parliament. At photos below we can see Klitschko at visit to the NATO HQ. On the second photo he is with mentioned senator McCain.


Protesters from Kiev also made their link with Syrian rebels today. They put Syrian rebel flag beside their national Ukraine flag at the main square in Kiev. Most of us are aware of USA perfidious games around Syria, especially about chemical attack for which they accused Assad forces, and  actually that attack was rebel inside job. Fortunately, Russia has seen through this game and stopped the NATO intervention in Syria. So what we can conclude after we saw Syrian rebel and terrorist flag at Kiev main square ?

bv3DkcXqGXEAll what happening these days in Ukraine is actually very simple geostrategical game of special war, very well organised by western intelligence. Goal of special war is to use citizens of home country in this case Ukraine, as their warriors.  USA and NATO lost their chance for false intervention and conquering of Syria but they have managed very fast how to repress Russia. Ukraine was wisely selected for that purpose, because of complex religious situation and invisible division on eastern and western part (blue & orange).  Their goal is to make Russia weaker on geopolitical chessboard. On that board few months ago we had game of “shield & missiles” arround Kaliningrad where Russia showed strength of their missile diplomacy on stage. Of course social situation in Ukraine is not on satisfactory level, but those who organized protests dont care for that, because their purpose and final goal is not to help Ukraine to overcome their social and economic problems. As conclusion to this text I will say that I have few excellent Ukrainian friends and especially for them and all other Ukrainians…  let there firstly be peace.

Russian missile diplomacy in three stages

AP080510141585web_944_1For a long time I wanted to write my first and also quality article about Russia, and now I have finally decided to do it. In a bunch of information from the global scene that come to us about the involvement of Russia about the issue of Syria, Iran, Ukraine and others, I will try to get out what might be important and crucial during 2014,  as well as relations between the United States and NATO – on one hand and Russia on the other. I will start my analysis with the annual press conference held by President of Russia Vladimir Putin on December 19th, 2013. The conference lasted more than 4 hours and topics were various, from Snowden to the Ukrainian issue, but what is important for this text and what I will point out here, is actually the question of Russian ballistic missile systems. This part is important because it applies as a potential answer on the setting of NATO ( U.S. ) missile shield in Europe called EuroPRO. Putin´s conference was very interesting for watching, and from minute 28 in video you can find a question that reporter asked Putin regarding the missile systems Iskander. Video of particularly this part I put below.

The most important moment in Putin´s answer was the information that Moscow has not yet made an official decision about placing those missiles in the Kaliningrad region, and that the “Iskander missiles are not the only means we have at our defense however, and not the only possible response to the threats we see around us. They are just one possible response and certainly not the most effective, though in their particular class they are the most effective weapons system in the world.” Now we ask ourselves which are an additional potential responses and what is the meaning of Putin´s words? I will try to give my opinion and to explain this below, but first something about the operational – tactical missile system called Iskander and its performance.


Iskander system consists of two subsystems Iskander – M and Iskander – E. These are new Russian tactical ballistic missiles on solid fuel and with range from 50-280 km (Iskander M) and 400 km (Iskander E). In addition to this feature there is also modern inertial – optical guidance system, warhead with weight of 480 kg and possibility of use on temperatures between  – 50 and + 50 degrees of Celsius. Rocket is launched from launch carrier military vehicle that can carry one or two Iskander missiles. Accuracy of “Iskander” is two meters shortfall, which is ideal for shooting small targets. Although to its ballistic trajectory, “Iskander” missile is set on vehicle as sloping shot, and it allows missile to remain almost hidden from radar one part of the flight. In the picture below you can see a graphics that explains the features of “Iskander”.


As Putin himself said in response, Iskander is not all that Russia can “offer” and that’s just one of the possible options. The real question is what is the second stage of Russia adequate response to the actions of NATO? The answer was just given by Dmitry Rogozin in his New Year’s greeting card addressed to NATO from his official Twitter profile.

Naturally this was joke from our great and convicted Serbian friend, who also mentioned information about his Serbian ancestry in one interview few years ago. As we know by the Murphy´s law  that “in every joke has a bit of a joke”, and based on it, this image carries a strong diplomatic message. On this photo except Santa Claus, his pretty Claus Lady and soldiers, there is a missile Topol – M or the smartest rocket in the world! I believe that Putin, in his reply at the conference primarily meant exactly on this rocket, as something what Russia can further show or just simply “the second stage of missile diplomacy”. Topol – M rocket is also on solid fuel with static and mobile base. Length of its three stage corpus with the head portion is 22.7 m and diameter is 1.95 m, while the weight of the warhead is 1.2 tons! The range of missile  is greater than 10 000 km and it crosses that distance as shown from rehearsals in 20-25 minutes. According to the level of combat readiness and precision this missile twice exceeds all previously existing intercontinental ballistic rockets  in the world. The missile complex “Topol – M”, in the eyes of its general constructor Yuri Solomon, overcome all other intercontinental ballistic missiles by many parameters, and “fall into the brightest flares that we have today“. To shut down Topol – M someone must use between 5 and 7 interceptors from land. Today United States have 26 installed interceptors at Fort Greely in Alaska and 4 at base Vandenberg in California. At the same line with this info, we should add an interesting report of Chuck Hagel  U.S. Secretary of Defense about installment of additional 14 missile interceptors until 2017. So, from the everything above we can make conclusion that ” Topol – M ” is the second level that comes after “Iskander”.


If putting in readiness of Topol – M system wouldn´t be sufficient for the U.S. and NATO to stop their unilateral hegemony in its own polar world, I believe that Russians will enter into last stage before final and worst stage called global war. That war will be only in case if they are forced to, they will not cause it first, certainly because in the west “Me” is written with the uppercase M, and “me” in the east is written with lowercase letter. By my opinion and research the third phase of the Russian missile diplomacy would be positioning their submarines on the coast of Cuba. That position of Cuba was used earlier in the relationship between the United States and the Soviet Union at the period of “Cuban missile crisis in 1962.” Nowadays, the president of Russia, “probably would not” install missiles directly on the territory of Cuba, but at the Cuban coast there would be at least one Russian submarine. That submarine would be probably  the newest one and most modern that Russia is currently building of the class Borei, called “Vladimir Monomakh“. It is named after one of the best statesmen in medieval Kievan Rus, which participated in 13 successful military battles in the name and honor of his father, and except battles he often participated in diplomatic negotiations, so you have to admit that background of this submarine name fits nicely into the whole story.  The first submarine of this class “Yuriy Dolgorukiy” whose construction began in 1996th, recently completed successfully a program of tests and is already officially in the use. Other submarine of the same class named “Alexander Nevsky” was introduced a few days ago in the composition of the Russian Navy at yearly ceremony. They carry out missile from the system “Bulava” which is actually a naval version of the continental system “Topol – M” with similar performance and range, by this we can clearly imagine their strength and purpose. Apart from these two submarines, Putin announced that Russia will expand its fleet to eight new submarines from the class of Borei by 2020. 


That this story about third stage of Russian missile diplomacy have its value, is also confirmed by news from the August last year about “friendly visit” of Russian military ships to Cuba. All of us who observe the world with the eyes of geopolitics will certainly know that except friendly motives there are also those geostrategical. Beside this, relations between Cuba and Russia are more than friendly and that this visit is not just accidental is shown by the info from December last year. Info was about that Russia wrote off 90% of debt that Cuba had with the former Soviet Union, which amounted to 29 billion $. In addition, at the end of this text in last sentence, there is point about interest of Russian oil companies for drilling in Cuba. Following this sentence, I came up on information about official meeting at the end of last year, between Raul Castro and Igor Sechin CEO of Rosneft, as well as the activities of Zarubezhneft in Cuba in 2013. With all these geostrategic, friendly, diplomatic and economic initiatives Russians are obviously trying to provide support from Castro and to get undisturbed access to Cuban territorial waters. Someone would say, “once partners, always partners.”

With this I would try to finish my strategic text, which slowly introduces us to return of a bipolar world, or if you ask me the better one, because this polar we have on the scene today since the fall of the Berlin Wall, was not proved as successful at all. Many of us in the past 20 years or so, felt that hegemony on our back.  If you are small and weak as it was case with fragmented republics of former Yugoslavia, there was no other option except to stay on your own way and being  hit on your back immediately and now, or join them and also being hit on back during some time but so subtly and with a smile, and finally at least lose yourself even more. Certainly in geopolitics there is one old phrase and rule that only interests are eternal. This rule not exclude either Russia when the interests are at stake. They also showed their “capitalist teeth” even to Serbs, especially with agreements about South Stream ownership. We have choice to be in favor or against, but for the whole world balance and future of the planet, the awakening of Russia and eastward shift of pin scale is generally a positive thing.  The first example of this kind that we have witnessed is the one with Syria issue, and stop of the resolution for the bombing which has proved so far as right decision. And we who are “small and weak” but with a big heart, should slow down a little bit and wait for the pan on a global scale to balance completely. If we put the question of Kosovo* in focus, Russia is the one who will put veto on Kosovo* application for membership in the UN, it will certainly not be done by the European countries in the Security Council, and neither the United States. If we put at that same focus the question of the Republic of Srpska then the presence of Russian companies here will actually ensure strategic compact of Republika Srpska in Brcko as well peace and stability in Bosnia and Herzegovina, because I doubt that the Russians would left their capital to “war junta” if by any chances we maybe experience war again in Bosnia. The third argument is the historical connection and sentimentality which our Serbian people has with Russia or as we call it sometimes (mother Russia). Of course that’s fine and nice, but today at the time of capitalism, big oil companies and global muscle training, I will leave this argument still in third place. These arguments we certainly do not have with a western civilization heritage, unless we exclude the first major export of prunes from Serbia to the U.S. in 1882, and its value of one million $/per year. But as far as I know, those were old better times of some other America, and other Serbia. Большое спасибо!