What's new

Russia Steps Back From Afghanistan Transit Threat

Sher Malang

SENIOR MEMBER
Joined
Aug 3, 2010
Messages
2,800
Reaction score
-2
Country
Afghanistan
Location
Afghanistan
When firebrand Russian politician and ambassador to NATO Dmitry Rogozin last week appeared to threaten to cut off NATO and U.S. military transit to Afghanistan, it was seen as another sign of the recently deteriorating relations between Washington and Moscow, and got a lot of attention. But now, apparently, Rogozin is saying he was misquoted.

NATO's foreign ministers are meeting now in Brussels, and a State Department official, speaking on background, says Rogozin has told them he never said he would cut off the Northern Distribution Network:

On the NDN, it’s actually – there was no confirmation. Even Rogozin, who was the one who was quoted, has said – he told us today, but he said all along his was misquoted and they are not linking the NDN to our disagreement on missile defense.

Indeed, if you look at the original story from Interfax (in Russian) Rogozin doesn't exactly spell the threat out, and it seems that Interfax could have put the words in his mouth.

But Rogozin apparently didn't talk to NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen who, in a press conference at the meeting, said Russian talk of the NDN was "an empty threat":

I think, honestly speaking, that it’s an empty threat because it is clearly in Russia’s self-interest to contribute to a success in Afghanistan. Russia knows from bitter experience that instability in Afghanistan have negative repercussions in Russia as well.

And obviously, that’s also the reason why Russia has embarked on a cooperation with NATO and with ISAF by providing a transit arrangement. Actually one year ago in Lisbon, we decided to expand that transit to be a reverse transit. So I would be very surprised if Russia took a step that is in direct contradiction with what is Russia’s self-interest.

However, Rogozin (as far as I know) hasn't publicly disavowed those comments, and so they'll likely continue to be breathlessly quoted by hardliners in both Moscow and Washington. And knowing Rogozin, he'll likely say several far more outrageous things in the next few hours, so he'll continue to keep bloggers busy.

Source: Russia Steps Back From Afghanistan Transit Threat | EurasiaNet.org
 
. .
This puts to rest certain pakistani members claim that Russia said this to support them against NATO !

More over If at all Dmitry Rogozin had indeed threatened to cut off NATO and U.S. military transit to Afghanistan , it was more in response for upcoming Missile shield in Europe than anything to do with Pakistan , Afterall Russia too is a observer member of NATO :coffee:
 
.
This puts to rest certain pakistani members claim that Russia said this to support them against NATO !

More over If at all Dmitry Rogozin had indeed threatened to cut off NATO and U.S. military transit to Afghanistan , it was more in response for upcoming Missile shield in Europe than anything to do with Pakistan , Afterall Russia too is a observer member of NATO :coffee:

heh heh.. and a lot of Pakistanis were dreaming up a strategic alliance of Russia, China and Pakistan against USA :lol:
 
. .
Russia signed up for the NATO shield...it needs to take what it's got so far and chill. It is silly to expect the shield wont be EVER used against them. well it won't in one way- don't fire off missiles on NATO countries... there is your guarantee, simple.
 
.
Pretty natural, when Pakistani P.M. and his team is lobbying to open the transit route via Pakistan than why would USSR keep it blocked!
 
.
Pretty natural, when Pakistani P.M. and his team is lobbying to open the transit route via Pakistan than why would USSR keep it blocked!

Oh now we get it , Russia is opening up the transit route to NATO because Pakistan PM is lobbying to open the transit route via Pak too , how enlightening :angel:
 
.
typical russkies, i knew if pak closed russia would infact demand more money and become an opportunist :lol:
 
. .
The entire orientation of Russian foreign policy is towards Europe and not Asia. Integration with Europe and joining the EU are its prime motivations. Likewise the low density of Russian population and its industrial workforce is a huge incentive for European states reeling under high unemployment rates to export surplus workforce to Russia. Russia already has close ties with Germany and France. Moreover, Russia stands to benefit financially from granting land access to Afghanistan to NATO. With the steady decline of US - Pak relations, dependence of NATO on Russian route will only increase and with this will increase Russian influence and clout. Russia knows how to drive a hard bargain and all this drama is a part of that, like the drama over Russian gas. Russia will try to maximise its advantage, stopping the land access to Nato is akin to killing the goose that laid the ............
 
.
It's windfall for Russia.


Why would they even think of blocking it ? Doesn't make sense to me.
 
.
bow to the west, what a coward nation.

anyway, never trust Russians, as always being said.
 
. .
The entire orientation of Russian foreign policy is towards Europe and not Asia. Integration with Europe and joining the EU are its prime motivations. Likewise the low density of Russian population and its industrial workforce is a huge incentive for European states reeling under high unemployment rates to export surplus workforce to Russia. Russia already has close ties with Germany and France. Moreover, Russia stands to benefit financially from granting land access to Afghanistan to NATO. With the steady decline of US - Pak relations, dependence of NATO on Russian route will only increase and with this will increase Russian influence and clout. Russia knows how to drive a hard bargain and all this drama is a part of that, like the drama over Russian gas. Russia will try to maximise its advantage, stopping the land access to Nato is akin to killing the goose that laid the ............

You are right about Russia's focus on Europe. However, the term NATO is deceptive here, since most NATO countries will vacate Afghanistan shortly. Only the US (and maybe UK) are interested in a long term presence.

Russian calculations towards the US/UK are decidedly different from their relationship with continental Europe.
 
.

Latest posts

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom