[Debate] Russia's Communists: NATO 'base' worse than 'Orange Revolution' threat

[Yoshie Furuhashi]

Meanwhile, Russia's ruling party, wishing to beat back Taliban, wants
to build a NATO transit hub in Ulyanovsk, Lenin's birthplace.  Russia
tells NATO _not_ to leave Afghanistan before defeating Taliban _but_
to leave Afghanistan and Central Asia promptly once the mission is
accomplished.  :-0

<http://bit.ly/I3pcPC>
NATO ‘base’ worse than ‘Orange Revolution’ threat - Communists
Published: 18 April, 2012, 16:31

The Communist Party of the Russian Federation (KPRF) has stated that
the creation of a NATO transit hub in the city of Ulyanovsk is more
dangerous for stability in Russia than the threat of a so-called
“Orange Revolution”.
“The alliance skillfully disguises its military interventions as
humanitarian and its military bases as purely civil facilities,” the
KPRF press service stated in an open letter to Dmitry Rogozin,
Moscow’s former envoy to NATO, now a deputy prime minister.
“Brushing aside concerns of an increasing part of our compatriots
regarding a NATO base in Ulyanovsk, you state that this base is a
‘phantasmagoria’, ‘provocation’, ‘nonsense’ and in general not a
serious reason for protest actions,” the Communists told Rogozin.
“The patriotic rhetoric that we used to hear from you in Brussels, has
suddenly changed to statements that are in line with NATO policies,”
they stated.
The appearance of foreign military bases on territories of sovereign
states has always caused harsh protests among the population, the KPRF
said.
The Communists stated that NATO has always “extorted unilateral
concessions” from Russia.
“In 2001, the Russian leadership [closed] its strategically important
military bases in Cuba and Vietnam. Then, it actively furthered the
creation of NATO bases in Central Asia and did not hamper the process
of drawing the Baltic States into NATO. Russia got nothing in
exchange,” the letter reads.
The party also urged Rogozin to stop lecturing them on what
corresponds with Russia’s national interests and what does not. In
Soviet times, the appearance of a NATO facility on the country’s
territory would be impossible, as would be the alliance’s
“intervention” in the Balkans, the Middle East and North Africa.
The KPRF stressed that the Volga Region (where Ulyanovsk is located)
is a large center for Russia’s defense industry.
“We believe that as deputy premier in charge of the defense industry
you must protect the national military-industrial complex rather than
give your assessment of the reasonableness of the NATO base
establishment. If we are correct, that is in the competence of the
Foreign and Defense Ministries,” the KPRF stated.
Earlier, it was reported that Moscow and Brussels were finalizing
negotiations over the deal that would allow NATO to use Ulyanovsk Air
Base for deliveries of non-military cargo to and from Afghanistan.
The planned agreement stirred a wave of criticism in Russia. However,
high-ranking Moscow officials, including Rogozin, insist that no NATO
military bases or the presence of the alliance’s civil and military
personnel are intended, only civilian logistics facilities.

<https://twitter.com/#!/MFA_Russia/status/193028224186462209>
MFA Russia
‏@MFA_Russia

#Lavrov:Until the Afghans can ensure security in Afghanistan,
artificial deadlines for international contingent withdrawal are
inappropriate

<https://twitter.com/#!/MFA_Russia/status/193028397545422851>
MFA Russia
‏@MFA_Russia

#Lavrov: Upon fulfillment of the UNAMA mandate, there will be no
reasons for preserving foreign presence in Afghanistan and Central
Asia
-- 
Yoshie Furuhashi
<http://mrzine.org/>