CALDEIRÃO DE BOLSA

Putin critic Alexei Navalny jailed after calling for Moscow protests
Anti-corruption campaigner imprisoned for 30 days after calling on protesters to gatecrash a Russia Day event

The Guardian | Monday 12 June 2017 19.50 BST |Shaun Walker in Moscow

More than 1,000 protesters were detained across Russia on Monday after the opposition leader Alexei Navalny raised the stakes in his battle with the Kremlin by calling on Muscovites to gatecrash a historical re-enactment fair being held on the Russian capital’s central street.

As the president, Vladimir Putin, spoke of national unity at a ceremony in the Kremlin, a few hundred metres away on Tverskaya Street cordons of riot police moved against protesters.

As of early evening, nearly 700 people had been detained in Moscow and as many as 900 in St Petersburg, according to rights groups. Police confirmed 650 detentions in the two cities. Smaller numbers of protesters were detained in other cities.

Navalny was arrested at his block of flats before he could even make his way to the protest. His Twitter account posted a photograph of two police cars and at least seven officers outside the building just before his arrest, along with the words: “Happy Russia Day!” (...)

THE MOSCOW SCHOOL OF HARD KNOCKS: KEY PILLARS OF RUSSIAN STRATEGY
MICHAEL KOFMAN | JANUARY 17, 2017
(...)

to get to an analysis of the strategic level competition, we have to briefly clear up the confusing terminology used to describe Russian doctrine and strategy, from the Gerasimov doctrine and non-linear warfare to hybrid warfare, new generation warfare, and cross-domain coercion.(...)

“Hybrid warfare” is the preferred term in the West to describe some elements of new generation warfare. It focuses on the information domain and political subversion, but it’s basically the parts of new generation warfare that made it into Western PowerPoint presentations and proved politically salient. “Cross-domain coercion” is rather buzzwordy and reeks of Pentagonese, but conceptually it’s probably the best way to understand new generation warfare, particularly at the strategic level. It loses the least in translation from Russian to English and is not abused, as “hybrid warfare” is, to the point of being rendered meaningless — at least not yet. (...)

New generation warfare is not a playbook. Russian thinking continues to evolve based on the experiences of the last two years. If you’re a senior leader in the U.S. military, your question should be: What does Russia actually do well versus what does Russia wish it did well? Our confrontation is strategic, playing across several conflicts, and we should compare notes on how effectively Russia is using this toolkit — or not — to advance its interests.

(...)

Russia Beefing up Military Ties With the Philippines

By Associated Press | January 04, 2017
MANILA, Philippines (AP) — Russia is eyeing naval exercises with the Philippines and deployed two navy ships for a goodwill visit to Manila on Tuesday as Moscow moves to expand defense ties with a Filipino president known for being hostile to the U.S.

Rear Adm. Eduard Mikhailov, deputy commander of Russia's Pacific Fleet, led the five-day visit of vessels including an anti-submarine ship and showcased what his country can offer to a Southeast Asian nation that's long been a staunch American treaty ally.

"You can choose ... to cooperate with United States of America or to cooperate with Russia," Mikhailov told reporters through an interpreter at the Manila harbor after a welcoming ceremony. "But from our side we can help you in every way that you need." "We are sure that in the future we'll have exercises with you. Maybe, just maneuvering or maybe use of combat systems and so on," he said. (...)

After Russian and Philippine officials met in Manila in August, the two countries began drafting a proposed defense cooperation accord that could be signed during a planned visit by President Rodrigo Duterte to Russia in April. (...)

Donald Trump tweets on expanding U.S. nuclear capabilities
CBSNews | Last Updated Dec 22, 2016 1:04 PM EST

Donald Trump fired off a tweet Thursday on toughening up the country’s nuclear weapons capabilities, saying the United States must “greatly strengthen and expand” them -- at least until the rest of the world “comes to its senses.” (...)

The president-elect has also pushed to use nuclear weapons during the campaign trail, even suggesting earlier this year that nukes could be fair game in the fight against terrorist organizations in the Middle East. In an interview with MSNBC in March, Mr. Trump asked, “Somebody hits us within ISIS, you wouldn’t fight back with a nuke?” (...)

Mr. Trump’s tweet follows Russian President Vladimir Putin’s own urging of his country to beef up its nuclear arsenal. On Thursday, according to Agence France-Presse news service, Putin gave a speech saying “we need to strengthen the military potential of strategic nuclear forces, especially with missile complexes that can reliably penetrate any existing and prospective missile defence systems.” (...)

The Cold War Isn’t Back. So Don’t Think Like It Is.
The New York Times Opinion section | Ivan Krastev DEC. 21, 2016
(...)

First, it confuses more than it clarifies. In the 1970s and ‘80s a number of third-world nationalists were caricatured by the West as Communists, despite the fact that they were focused on fighting for independence, not Soviet Communism. The United States and its allies wasted energy warring with them. But misrecognizing nationalists as Communists sometimes became a self-fulfilling prophecy: After being labeled Communist, many of the third-world revolutionary governments indeed became pro-Soviet. The moral is that we should not be surprised if the constant labeling of populist parties and leaders in Europe as “pro-Russian” turns them into the Kremlin’s friends.

Second, the return of the Cold War narrative is becoming a factor in Russia’s growing international influence. The West’s current obsession with Mr. Putin is at the heart of the Russian president’s newly discovered soft power. If Moscow, as so much of the news media suggest, can really rig the American elections, how could a small Bulgaria, or for that matter even France, trust that anybody but the Kremlin would decide who the next president would be? Russia’s power of attraction today is rooted not in its ideology but in its powerful image. If you believe Mr. Putin’s most zealous opponents, he is winning all the time.


Finally, in a globalized world, foreign interference in elections is unavoidable. Private citizens — and not only governments — hack email accounts, spread fake news and conspiracy theories, and try to destroy the reputation of foreign leaders. Lone hackers and tiny rogue political groups can easily crash the servers of electoral commissions around the world. We are entering a period in which disruption is becoming an international contest, and many seek money and glory by demonstrating their ability to sow chaos beyond their borders. The Cold War narrative ignores this new reality because it tends to see any subversive activity as the work of states. A result is a growing risk of overreaction and conflict. In the world of mutually assured disruption, more than ever before what matters is the capacity to distinguish between state-inspired and state-run subversion.

So if we do not want 2017 to become, like 1917, a Russian year in history, the news media would be wise to shy away from grand, continentwide story lines that explain everything and look instead for the details that at least explain something. In the end, even in the age of global media, politics remains local.

U.S. reshaping budget to account for Russian military threat
Reuters |WORLD NEWS | Sun Dec 4, 2016 | 11:45pm EST

Russia's increasing military activities around the world have unsettled top U.S. military officials, who say they are reshaping their budget plans to better address what they now consider to be the most pressing threat to U.S. security. (...)
Marine Corps General Joseph Dunford, chairman of the Joint Chiefs, told the conference that Russia's goal was to counter NATO, undermine its credibility and limit the ability of the U.S. military to project power around the world.

"They are operating with a frequency and in places that we haven't seen for decades," he said, adding that the buildup should be viewed in the context of its actions in Ukraine, Crimea and Syria, where they have already stepped up air attacks on eastern Aleppo.

Richardson said the Navy was seeing increased Russian naval activities around the globe, including its unprecedented deployment of a carrier strike group to the Mediterranean, the firing of missiles from ships in the Caspian Sea, increased submarine activities in the north Atlantic, and a growing naval presence in the Pacific.

He said there were continuing incidents involving Russian aircraft buzzing U.S. vessels, with some coming as close as 30 feet, and other cases where ships were behaving "erratically."

"It's all for public consumption," Richardson said, noting that Russian ships often filmed such encounters and edited them to make it appear as if U.S. ships were at fault.

Russia and the United States have an agreement to limit and discuss incidents at sea, but the accord appeared to be having little impact on curbing such incidents, he said.
Dialogue between U.S. and Russian navy officers has ceased since Russia's annexation of the Crimea region of Ukraine in 2014, in contrast to the days of the Cold War, when U.S. and Russian officials were in more regular contact, he said.(...)

James echoed his concerns, citing what she called "very worrying" incidents of "very dangerous airmanship" and cyber attacks by Russian hackers on U.S. institutions.

Richardson also said he was concerned about a report by Norwegian Defense Minister Ine Eriksen Soereide that Russia now had the ability to cut off resupply routes to Europe through its activities in the Arctic region. (...)

Dr Tretas Escreveu:Eu respondo às perguntas que me apetece, como me apetece.
Coloco aqui os vídeos que quiser.
Faço considerações sobre os outros foristas, como já têm sido feitas muitas sobre mim.

Quimporta Escreveu:
Que o Putin "não dá valor a esses lados" já tínhamos percebido.
Mas que tal se, em vez de vídeos do YouTube e das conciderações sobre quem não conheces, respondesses à pergunta?

Porque é que de uma embirração antiga (dizes tu que de antes de 2006) com os EUA nunca o Putin se lembrou de ameaçar a única fronteira que tem em comum, em vez de "azucrinar" a Polónia, os Balticos, etc.?

Não tem valor estratégico? Não tem riquezas? Não pertence à NATO? A Rússia não gosta do frio?!

Dr Tretas Escreveu:Acho que a Rússia não dá grande valor a esses lados, afinal até venderam o Alaska aos EUA. Mas já vi que ficas um bocado azucrinado com isto, sem necessidade. Tens convicções fortes sobre quem são os "bons" e os "maus" da fita. Eu não.

Dr Tretas Escreveu:

Quimporta Escreveu:Do tempo do Napoleão, da 1 guerra da Crimeia e do tratado Molotov-Ribbentrop não sou, realmente.
Mas sei o que foi a "cassete". Contaram-me os meus avós enquanto cuidavam das cabras na aldeia remota onde nasci, DrTretas.
Sei do discurso redondo e repetitivo, e do modo de fugir às questões dando ao mesmo tempo a ideia de que se é dono da verdade e de que os outros não estão ao nível.

Se calhar até sei distinguir argumentos da "propaganda".

Mas voltando às ideias filhas do Putin, gostava também de perceber porque é que se o que o povocou foram os EUA antes de 2006 (segundo o disseste) o que é que o impede de expulsar a NATO das fronteiras com o Alaska?! Tens algum filme do YouTube que responda também a isso, DrTreta?

Acho que a Rússia não dá grande valor a esses lados, afinal até venderam o Alaska aos EUA. Mas já vi que ficas um bocado azucrinado com isto, sem necessidade. Tens convicções fortes sobre quem são os "bons" e os "maus" da fita. Eu não.

Quimporta Escreveu:Do tempo do Napoleão, da 1 guerra da Crimeia e do tratado Molotov-Ribbentrop não sou, realmente.
Mas sei o que foi a "cassete". Contaram-me os meus avós enquanto cuidavam das cabras na aldeia remota onde nasci, DrTretas.
Sei do discurso redondo e repetitivo, e do modo de fugir às questões dando ao mesmo tempo a ideia de que se é dono da verdade e de que os outros não estão ao nível.

Se calhar até sei distinguir argumentos da "propaganda".

Mas voltando às ideias filhas do Putin, gostava também de perceber porque é que se o que o povocou foram os EUA antes de 2006 (segundo o disseste) o que é que o impede de expulsar a NATO das fronteiras com o Alaska?! Tens algum filme do YouTube que responda também a isso, DrTreta?

Dr Tretas Escreveu:

Quimporta Escreveu:Bastaria perguntar a opinião à Polónia sobre a tradição pacífica da Rússia e já estaríamos esclarecidos.
Mas para não alimentar mais a confusão, vou dar de barato todos esses exemplos anteriores a 1945.

Recoloco a pergunta noutros termos, já que na primeira tentativa não tive sucesso: quais dos países do dito "ocidente", a que agora a Rússia (porque tem recursos, dizes tu) resolve apontar os mísseis nucleares de Kaliningrado, são para a Rússia a tal ameaça militar a que te referes?

Todos os que fazem parte da NATO, obviamente. Não é que sejam cada um deles uma ameaça, mas é necessário, para a política de destruição assegurada, que também sejam alvos. Já te mostrei que foram os EUA que tomaram a iniciativa de tentar obter a supremacia nuclear absoluta, e isso para a Rússia é inaceitável.

Ainda és jovem, não?

Quimporta Escreveu:Bastaria perguntar a opinião à Polónia sobre a tradição pacífica da Rússia e já estaríamos esclarecidos.
Mas para não alimentar mais a confusão, vou dar de barato todos esses exemplos anteriores a 1945.

Recoloco a pergunta noutros termos, já que na primeira tentativa não tive sucesso: quais dos países do dito "ocidente", a que agora a Rússia (porque tem recursos, dizes tu) resolve apontar os mísseis nucleares de Kaliningrado, são para a Rússia a tal ameaça militar a que te referes?

Dr Tretas Escreveu: Para perceber os Russos, é necessário entender que eles se sentem ameaçados pelo ocidente, por motivos históricos. Nada acontece num vácuo.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_invasion_of_Russia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Barbarossa
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crimean_War
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Great_Game

Achas que isto enche os russos de confiança nas intenções pacíficas da NATO:

Quimporta Escreveu:

Dr Tretas Escreveu:Foram certas elites nos EUA que quiseram por este equilíbrio em causa, despoletando a agressividade que hoje se observa por parte da Rússia.
Leitura recomendada: https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/united-states/2006-03-01/rise-us-nuclear-primacy

Deixando de lado pormenores como o de que nessa tese a Rússia está a retaliar agora relativamente a factos já descritos num artigo de 2006.

Fica aqui a pergunta: porque está a Rússia a apontar mísseis nucleares a países vizinhos que nos últimos anos (e bem, pelo menos na visão dos seus cidadãos), estiveram a desinvestir sucessivamente da defesa, confiantes que a Rússia se tinha tornado um vizinho estável e pacífico?

Dr Tretas Escreveu:Foram certas elites nos EUA que quiseram por este equilíbrio em causa, despoletando a agressividade que hoje se observa por parte da Rússia.
Leitura recomendada: https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/united-states/2006-03-01/rise-us-nuclear-primacy

Today, for the first time in almost 50 years, the United States stands on the verge of attaining nuclear primacy. It will probably soon be possible for the United States to destroy the long-range nuclear arsenals of Russia or China with a first strike. This dramatic shift in the nuclear balance of power stems from a series of improvements in the United States' nuclear systems, the precipitous decline of Russia's arsenal, and the glacial pace of modernization of China's nuclear forces. Unless Washington's policies change or Moscow and Beijing take steps to increase the size and readiness of their forces, Russia and China -- and the rest of the world -- will live in the shadow of U.S. nuclear primacy for many years to come.

These maps show how Russia has Europe spooked
Washinton Post| By David Filipov November 23 2016

MOSCOW — The Kremlin has brushed off Western concerns about its deployment of cutting-edge missile systems in its Kaliningrad enclave, saying that the North Atlantic Treaty Organization was the one disrupting the strategic balance with its plans to put antimissile defenses on Russia's borders. But the Russian arsenal on the Baltic, some of which has been tested in Syria, is potentially a game-changer.

Which weapons has Russia moved to Kaliningrad?

Bastion land-based coastal-defense missile launchers: In October, Russia beefed up its anti-shipping defenses in Kaliningrad with these launchers. Since then, it has used them as an offensive weapons against rebel positions in Syria. According to IHS Jane's 360, the supersonic missiles fired from the Bastion have a range approaching 200 miles. In a conflict, they could be used against NATO ships trying to reach the Baltic states.

S-400 land-based air-defense missiles: Russia has already installed these state-of-the-art missile systems to protect its air base in Syria. The S-400 can simultaneously track and strike a number of aerial targets at once at ranges of up to 250 miles. In Kaliningrad, S-400s would be capable of targeting NATO aircraft and missiles over most of the Baltic region.

Kalibr nuclear-capable ship-based cruise missiles: In October, Russia sent two missile frigates to Kaliningrad equipped with launchers that can fire these missiles more than 900 miles. A Russian missile frigate based off Syria has launched Kalibr missiles at rebel forces.

Iskander-M mobile nuclear-capable land-based ballistic missile system: The Iskander-M is a mobile short-range ballistic missile system with an official range of just more than 300 miles. That complies with the limits set by the landmark 1987 Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces Treaty signed by the United States and the Soviet Union. Iskander is extremely mobile and hard to detect and has superior accuracy.

That sounds bad. What could be worse?

Longer-range, nuclear-capable land-based ballistic missiles: The United States accuses Russia of developing land-based ballistic missiles with a range much greater than allowed by the INF treaty — some military estimates suggest that Russia has tested a missile that could reach major European capitals. The whole point of the INF treaty was to eliminate the threat of rapid nuclear escalation posed by hidden launchers carrying devastating weapons a short flight time. But Moscow denies the allegation and says that it is the United States that is breaking the treaty with illegal intermediate missiles of its own.

http://www.jornaldenegocios.pt/economia ... ltimasSite

Russia Deploys Missiles On Disputed Islands, Tells Japan Not To Worry
Daily Caller News Foundation |12:55 PM 11/23/2016

Russia has deployed advanced missiles to contested islands claimed by Japan, but the Kremlin says there is no reason this should derail peace talks.
The Russian Pacific Fleet has installed Bal and Bastion missile systems at a naval base in the Kuril Islands, territories at the heart of a 70-year dispute between Russia and Japan, Russian media outlets reported Tuesday.

The Kurils are volcanic islands situated between Russia’s Kamchatka peninsula and Japan’s Hokkaido Island.
Japan and Russia have been working to resolve the dispute, and a breakthrough was expected during Russian President Vladimir Putin’s planned visit to Japan next month. The deployment of missiles is not exactly conducive to peace talks though. (...)
“It should not in any way influence the centripetal trend which exists in our bilateral relations with Tokyo,” explained Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov, who noted that Russia was well within its rights to dispatch weaponry to the disputed islands.

The trend Peskov was referring to includes “negotiations on the peace deal issue.”
Putin met with Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe at the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) summit earlier in November. Afterwards, Putin said the two leaders were ready “to move forward in the development of bilateral relations.”
The missile systems deployed to the Kurils are advanced weapons systems. The Bastion missile system is a mobile-launch system equipped with supersonic Onyx missiles, which can eliminate ships at sea and land-based targets. The Bal complex is armed with X-35 anti-ship missiles.

Tensions over the Kurils, which Japan refers to as the Northern Territories, have complicated Russo-Japanese relations since World War II. In fact, Moscow and Tokyo reportedly never signed a formal peace treaty ending WWII hostilities due to this particular dispute.

Following Russia’s deployment of anti-ship missiles to the Kurils, Japan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs said that it is considering an “appropriate response” but is still committed to the peace process.