Stop NATO News: April 30, 2011

====

U.S. And NATO Allies Initiate Libyan Scenario For Syria

Updates on Libyan war and Syria: April 30

====

Report: NATO Strike Kills Gaddafi’s Son, Three Grandchildren

Libya: NATO Bombs School For Down’s Syndrome Children, Orphanage

EU Support Of Georgian Claims May Trigger New War: South Ossetia

U.S. Criticizes Russian Foreign Minister’s Visit To “Separatist Regions”

Saakashvili: Georgia To Continue To Modernize Armed Forces

U.S.’s Pet Despot Saakashvili: No Illusion About Who Real Enemy Is

Georgia’s Deputy Prime Minister Meets With NATO Advisers

Karabakh Soldiers Killed: Another New Caucasus War Looms

Commando Units, Air Strikes No Solution For Unrest In Arab World

Pakistan: NATO Oil Tanker Destroyed

Roundtable: World War III Scenarios

====

Report: NATO Strike Kills Gaddafi’s Son, Three Grandchildren

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-13251570

BBC News
April 30, 2011

Nato strike ‘kills Saif al-Arab Gaddafi’, Libya says

A Nato air strike in the Libyan capital, Tripoli, has killed the son of the Libyan leader, Colonel Gaddafi, a government spokesman has said.

Colonel Gaddafi himself was in the large residential villa which was hit by the strike, the spokesman added, but he was unharmed.

His son Saif al-Arab was killed, as well as three of his grandsons.

Journalists say the building was extensively damaged and one unexploded bomb remains at the site.

Saif al-Arab was the youngest of Col Gaddafi’s sons, with a lower profile than his brother Saif al-Islam.

He had been studying in Germany and returned to Libya recently.

Government spokesman Moussa Ibrahim said the villa was attacked “with full power.”

“The attack resulted in the martyrdom of brother Saif al-Arab Gaddafi, 29 years old, and three of the leader’s grandchildren,” he said.

“The leader with his wife was there in the house with other friends and relatives, the leader himself is in good health, he wasn’t harmed.”

“This was a direct operation to assassinate the leader of this country,” the spokesman added.

====

Libya: NATO Bombs School For Down’s Syndrome Children, Orphanage

http://af.reuters.com/article/libyaNews/idAFLDE73T0AG20110430

Reuters
April 30, 2011

Libya disabled children school hit in NATO strike
By Lin Noueihed

TRIPOLI: Shattered glass litters the carpet at the Libyan Down’s Syndrome Society, and dust covers pictures of grinning children that adorn the hallway, thrown into darkness by a NATO strike early on Saturday.

It was unclear what the target of the strike was, though Libyan officials said it was Muammar Gaddafi himself, who was giving a live television address at the time.

“They maybe wanted to hit the television. This is a non-military, non-governmental building,” said Mohammed al-Mehdi, head of the civil societies council, which licenses and oversees civil groups in Libya.

The missile completely destroyed an adjoining office in the compound that houses the government’s commission for children.

The force of the blast blew in windows and doors in the parent-funded school for children with Down’s Syndrome and officials said it damaged an orphanage on the floor above.

“I felt sad really. I kept thinking, what are we going to do with these children?” said Ismail Seddigh, who set up the school 17 years ago after his own daughter was born with Down’s.

“This is not the place we left on Thursday afternoon.”

There were no children at the school when the missiles hit early on Saturday morning, since Friday begins the weekend in Libya. Children had been due to come in on Saturday morning.

A mound of rubble was all that remained of one wing of the main building that adjoined the school, though an antenna of some kind protruded from the ruins.

Both Mehdi and Seddigh said they had assumed that the antenna on the building was there to strengthen mobile phone signals and were not aware of any other use.

In the rubble of the main building, a shredding machine packed with sliced up documents lay on its side. A fax and phone were nearby and shelves of files could be seen.

The Libyan government has repeatedly said that NATO airstrikes have hurt and killed civilians….

NATO has hit inside or near Gaddafi’s compound before, or struck military or logisitical sites. Saturday’s government-organised visit was the first to bring journalists…to a civilian site.

Inside the school, the power had been knocked out by the strikes, the floor was wet because of a leaking pipe and desks were covered in glass and debris.

Seddigh’s school prepared children with Down’s Syndrome up to the age of 6 to go to normal schools, giving them speech therapy, handicrafts and sports sessions and teaching them to read and write. It handles 50 to 60 children a day.

(Reporting by Lin Noueihed)

====

EU Support Of Georgian Claims May Trigger New War: South Ossetia

http://en.rian.ru/world/20110430/163796323.html

Russian Information Agency Novosti
April 30, 2011

EU support of Georgian claims may trigger new conflict – South Ossetia

Mowcow: Comments by EU’s top diplomat Catherine Ashton which has backed Georgia’s groundless territorial claims to South Ossetia may incite Georgia into new acts of aggression, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of South Ossetia said on Saturday.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov was visiting the breakaway Georgian regions of South Ossetia and Abkhazia earlier this week without the permission of Georgian authorities. The European Union on Thursday condemned the visit.

“The European Union notes with concern that Minister of Foreign Affairs, Sergey Lavrov, has paid a visit to the Georgian regions of Abkhazia and South Ossetia without prior consent of the Georgian authorities,” Ashton said.

“Signs of support from the West, like Mrs. Ashton’s ones, which are addressed to the ‘fighters for Georgia’s territorial integrity’ in fact incite them to a new conflict,” the South Ossetian comment said.

“The time is ripe for the West to draw lessons from the realities which arose more than twenty years ago, and stop deceiving themselves,” the document said.

“Only owing to Russia the people of South Ossetia have preserved and are now building and developing their country. Russia recognized the Republic of South Ossetia and is now developing relations with it on an internationally accepted base. The development of bilateral ties stipulates close cooperation, including reciprocal official and working visits,” Ossetia’s ministry said.

Moscow recognized the independence of South Ossetia and Abkhazia after a five-day war in 2008 and has since been the guarantor of their security, deploying thousands of troops and border guards to the tiny republics.

====

U.S. Criticizes Russian Foreign Minister’s Visit To “Separatist Regions”

http://en.trend.az/regions/scaucasus/georgia/1869359.html

Deutsche Presse-Agentur
April 30, 2011

US criticizes Russian FM’s visit to Abkhazia, South Ossetia

The United States on Saturday criticized Russia’s recent efforts to conclude formal state-to-state agreements with the “de facto” authorities in Abkhazia and South Ossetia, dpa reported.

The visits by Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov during the week to “those separatist regions are inconsistent with the principle of territorial integrity and Georgias internationally recognized borders,” the US Department of State said in a statement.

“The United States remains committed to a peaceful resolution to the conflict in Georgias separatist regions and the restoration of Georgias sovereignty and territorial integrity within its internationally recognized borders,” said Mark Toner, a State Department spokesman.

“We further call upon all parties to the conflict to fully implement their commitments pursuant to the 2008 Ceasefire Agreement,” Toner said.

Lavrov signed bilateral agreements on transport, rescue operations and cultural centres, according to Russian media.

The two territories were at the centre of a brief war in 2008 between Russia and Georgia. Russia now recognizes the two South Caucasus regions as independent, while the West considers them to be part of Georgia.

On Thursday, the European Union also denounced the foreign minister’s visit.

“The EU does not consider these visits compatible with the principle of territorial integrity,” said a statement from the EU’s foreign policy chief.

====

Saakashvili: Georgia To Continue To Modernize Armed Forces

http://en.trend.az/regions/scaucasus/georgia/1869323.html

Trend News Agency
April 30, 2011

Georgian President: Georgia to continue modernizing its armed forces
N. Kirtskhalia

Tbilisi: Georgia will continue to modernize and equip its army with modern materiel, Georgian President Mikhail Saakashvili said at the training ground in Vaziani.

Field exercises of all kinds by the Georgian armed forces at battalion level were held in honor of the 20th anniversary of the Georgian army. The exercises were commanded by the Georgian land forces commander Giorgi Kalandadze. About 79 units of materiel – tanks, infantry fighting vehicles, helicopters and airplanes – were used.

“Every day we think about how to strengthen the army, which is the main protection of our homeland,” the president said.

After the exercises, about 200 servicemen were awarded with various medals by the president and defense minister Bacho Akhalaia.

The minister said that these exercises are held regularly.

====

U.S.’s Pet Despot Saakashvili: No Illusion About Who Real Enemy Is

http://www.civil.ge/eng/article.php?id=23394

Civil Georgia
April 30, 2011

Military Drills in Vaziani

-President Saakashvili, who watched the drills together with his five-year old son dressed in a military uniform, said that although during exercises the enemy “is hypothetical”, there was “no illusion” about who Georgia’s real enemy was.

Tbilisi: Despite “the enemy’s attempts to demoralize” the Georgian army, “we have managed not only to maintain a combat spirit, but also to accelerate the pace of modernization,” President Saakashvili said after attending military exercises in Vaziani, outside Tbilisi on April 30.

The Georgian Ministry of Defense said up to 680 soldiers, 14 battle tanks, 15 armored personnel carriers, six BM-21 Grad multiple rocket launchers, 18 DANA self-propelled howitzers, 10 SU-25 (Frogfoot) ground attack aircraft, four Mi-24 (Hind) helicopter gunships, six Mi-8 and three UH-1H helicopters, and one Hermes unmanned aerial vehicle were involved in the exercises.

The MoD said the goal of the exercises, which coincided with the Day of the Georgian Armed Forces, was to enhance interoperability and coordination between various military units during “defensive battles.” Defense Minister, Bacho Akhalaia, said that the drills in Vaziani were “routine exercises”.

President Saakashvili, who watched the drills together with his five-year old son dressed in a military uniform, said that although during exercises the enemy “is hypothetical”, there was “no illusion” about who Georgia’s real enemy was.

“We know very well who has intruded into Georgia, who is occupying our territories and who has further aggressive plans in respect to Georgia,” Saakashvili said.

He said that “very serious reforms” had been carried out in the armed forces.

“Of course when the country faces problems and when the country is attacked, each of its citizens becomes a soldier,” he told soldiers. “But you are in a forefront of our defense and a major guarantor of our future.”

“Because of that we will continue providing all kinds of assistance to the armed forces, its modernization with maximum pace, and we will achieve a situation wherein the Georgian armed forces will be very well prepared, equipped to accomplish all those tasks – including those which are almost impossible to accomplish – which will be put upon us by history,” Saakashvili said.

====

Georgia’s Deputy Prime Minister Meets With NATO Advisers

http://en.trend.az/news/politics/1869025.html

Trend News Agency
April 29, 2011

Georgian vice prime minister, NATO advisers hold discussions
N. Kirtskhalia

Tbilisi: Vice Prime Minister of Georgia Giorgi Baramidze met with members of the NATO Office of the Legal Adviser.

The efforts of the NATO-Georgia Commission and ongoing reforms in Georgia were discussed at the meeting, Baramidze said.

According to Baramidze, they also talked about the visit of the North Atlantic Council scheduled for November.

In addition, results of the last NDI survey were considered at the meeting. As for the results, the number of those wishing to affiliate with NATO has increased in Georgia compared to previous years.

According to Baramidze, constant consultations and relations are necessary not only with NGOs and the political majority but also with the opposition.

===

Karabakh Soldiers Killed: Another New Caucasus War Looms

http://www.interfax.com/newsinf.asp?id=240862

Interfax
April 30, 2011

Armenia urges world to condemn Azerbaijan for killing N. Karabakh servicemen

Yerevan: The international community should strictly condemn Azerbaijan’s actions, the Armenian Foreign Ministry said in a statement on Saturday, referring to reports that three servicemen from the armed forces of the self-proclaimed Nagorno-Karabakh republic were killed and one more wounded by sniper fire from the Azeri side.

“The situation that has taken shape as a result of Azerbaijan’s actions is causing additional tension and negatively affecting the negotiating process. Azerbaijan shows that it can ignore calls by various international organizations and countries to promote the armistice regime, withdraw snipers from the frontline, improve the atmosphere of confidence, and solve the problem in a purely peaceful way,” the ministry said.

“Azerbaijan’s conduct should be strictly condemned by the international community,” it said.

====

Commando Units, Air Strikes No Solution For Unrest In Arab World

http://english.ruvr.ru/2011/04/30/49679660.html

Voice of Russia
April 30, 2011

Arab revolutions rage on

-”Foreign interference in a settlement of Syria’s internal problems is very dangerous. Any country has an opposition that may cause mayhem on the assumption that it will gain the support of other countries that seek instability or the coming to power of people who would pursue a policy that would suit these countries. But this is no way to guarantee peace and security. If we follow that path, we are in for a period of chaos. That is why Russia’s stand on Syria is based on international law provisions and commonsense.”
-Experts point out that the Egyptian or Tunisian scenario of a peaceful presidential resignation is unfeasible for other regional nations. That is why the international community should jointly look for new, non-standard ways to settle the chain of conflicts in North Africa and the Middle East. Commando units and/or airstrikes are clearly insufficient to be seen as a solution.

Expectations that mass-scale unrest in North African and Middle East countries are over have proved short-lived. This past week the situation remained tense in Libya, Syria, Yemen, Bahrain and other regional nations.

The case of Libya has proved that the West’s military interference in internal conflicts invariably leads to an impasse. The oft-repeated promise of aid to the civilian population that is allegedly being massacred by “criminal regimes” proves empty words. It is civilians who suffer the worst from military operations. But experts believe that efforts should be made to improve the situation in North Africa, or else things will grow still worse. But the mechanisms of influence have still failed to be agreed.

Libya’s so-called “peaceful population” that western politicians and the military decided to take care of a month ago are more often than not well armed and equipped rebels, while the obvious exceeding of the UN Security Council mandate that only authorized the imposition of a no-fly zone over Libya served to further destabilize the situation. Russian politicians have repeatedly (and with good reason) warned against the use of force that would run counter to the letter and spirit of relevant Security Council resolutions. The armed standoff between the supporters and opponents of Muammar Gaddafi is continuing, while the Libyan leader remains out of reach of western allies’ bombs and is not about to lay down arms.

Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin levelled scathing criticism at the coalition’s moves during his visit to Denmark earlier this week. He said the western countries seem to be acting on the assumption that they will get away with whatever harm they may do in Libya, while their plans are increasingly at variance with the substance of the relevant Security Council resolution.

Vladimir Putin says that the internal contradictions that have arisen in Libya have spilt over into an armed conflict: “Why should there be any outside interference in the armed conflict? There’s a world of a difference between the imposition of a no-fly zone and daily airstrikes at Gaddafi palaces. Besides, Gaddafi has long since left his palaces. So, the strikes kill civilians. What’s more, some western officials admit that the West does seek to kill Gaddafi. By what right, may I ask? Was Gaddafi tried and sentenced?”

The threat of a ground operation in Libya looms large, with the Russian Ambassador to NATO Dmitry Rogozin claiming that the European Union is prepared to send up to 1,500 troops to the North African country. This may cause a full-scale humanitarian disaster and push Libya dozens of years back, Moscow warns.

But the interest in Libyan oil, as well as the need to dictate their will to other countries, clearly outweighs the risk of this kind of consequence in the western countries’ eyes. But then, the coalition is not at one about interference in the internal Libyan conflict. An Italian government Minister, Umberto Bossi, who is an ally of Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi, warns that Rome’s decision to join NATO airstrikes on Libyan military facilities may split Italy’s ruling coalition.

And now for Yemen. The road map plan that the ruling General People’s Congress party has adopted to settle the drawn-out conflict has been called into question. Earlier this week, the foreign ministers of the Cooperation Council for the Arab States of the Persian Gulf came out with a plan, whereby President Ali Abdullah Saleh of Yemen should, within 30 days, step down in a move that would be followed by a democratic election of a new president.
….
But blood was again shed in the Yemeni capital Sana’a on the 27th of April, which again gave cause for talking about an escalation rather than a settlement of the conflict. 11 people died in Sana’a, while more than a 100 others were wounded when an antigovernment demonstration was dispersed there. Unrest in Yemen has been on since January this year. Hundreds of people have already died as a result.

Nor is the situation calm in Syria. The opposition continues calling for the now traditional Days of Anger to protest against the brutal suppression of antigovernment protests. Dozens of people have died in the city of Deraa in recent days. The outlawed Muslim Brotherhood movement also calls for civil disobedience. Protests in Syria have been going on unabated for a month and a half now.

Meanwhile the UN Security Council has failed to agree on a statement denouncing the Syrian authorities’ violence against the opposition. Russia voted down the draft for a number of reasons, specifically because it grows increasingly clear that some people in Syria, as well as in other countries, say openly that it is their cherished hope that an aggravation of the situation will cause the international community to interfere under the pretext of rendering assistance and to side with one of the parties to the conflict. That this is true is borne out by the example of Libya. But this actually amounts to a chain of violence and to a sort of invitation to civil war, says the Deputy Director of the Institute for the US and Canada Studies Pavel Zolotarev, and elaborates.

“Foreign interference in a settlement of Syria’s internal problems is very dangerous,” Pavel Zolotarev says. “Any country has an opposition that may cause mayhem on the assumption that it will gain the support of other countries that seek instability or the coming to power of people who would pursue a policy that would suit these countries. But this is no way to guarantee peace and security. If we follow that path, we are in for a period of chaos. That is why Russia’s stand on Syria is based on international law provisions and commonsense.”

In Bahrain, too, the situation remains tense. Bahrain’s Military Tribunal has sentenced four antigovernment protesters to death. According to an official of Bahrain’s opposition Shia party Al Wefaq, another three participants in the unrest that occurred in the kingdom in February and March of this year have been sentenced to life in prison. Mass protests erupted in Bahrain in the middle of February, with the participants being mostly Shia Muslims pressing for more rights in the country that’s being ruled by a Sunni minority. The Tribunal decisions may serve to fuel the conflict.

Experts point out that the Egyptian or Tunisian scenario of a peaceful presidential resignation is unfeasible for other regional nations. That is why the international community should jointly look for new, non-standard ways to settle the chain of conflicts in North Africa and the Middle East. Commando units and/or airstrikes are clearly insufficient to be seen as a solution.

====

Pakistan: NATO Oil Tanker Destroyed

http://nation.com.pk/pakistan-news-newspaper-daily-english-online/Politics/30-Apr-2011/NATO-Oil-tanker-destroyed

The Nation
April 30, 2011

NATO Oil tanker destroyed

A NATO oil tanker used to transport oil to NATO forces caught fire after an explosion although no loss of life was reported here in Peshawar on Saturday.

The NATO oil tanker caught fire and exploded. The flame engulfed and destroyed trucks that were parked nearby….The crew of the oil tanker was not present at the time of the accident.

The oil tanker on its way to Afghanistan via Tourkham exploded near the Karkhano market area. According to eyewitnesses, the oil tanker was stationary due to a technical problem when it suddenly caught fire at 4:30am on Saturday….

===

Roundtable: World War III Scenarios

http://en.rian.ru/analysis/20110428/163758009.html

Russian Information Agency Novosti
April 28, 2011

WWIII scenarios

-Experts cannot rule out that the United States will opt for a military strike against Iran, although most likely it would not initiate the war but rather would be part of a NATO peacekeeping force operating in highly probable conflicts between Iran and Israel or Iran and Saudi Arabia. “In any event there will be a showdown between Iran and the United States sooner or later.”
-[T]he situation in Transdnestria could escalate. “It is difficult to predict the consequences of the current Romanization of Moldova. For instance, the EU is already willing to introduce its peacekeepers in Transdnestria…It is very hard to say whether they will cope with a possible escalation in Transdnestria.”
-”No doubt, Nagorno-Karabakh may become a bone of contention. Azerbaijan is actively developing its foreign policy concepts and building up troops. Armenia, where we have a military base, is acting in the same manner.”
-”There is no case in history of a new world order taking shape without a war. A new world order came into being twice – in the early 20th century as a result of WWI and in mid-century as a result of WWII.”
-[T]here is the division between the “financial bubble” and the real economy. “This division played a significant role in Hitler’s rise to power in 1933. This is why Henry Ford kept a small bust of Hitler on his desk.”
-[A] new world war could last from 6-7 to 25-30 years and involve more than 100 million people on both sides. The aggregate human losses could exceed several hundred million.

The Caucasus, the Middle East, Central Asia, Asia-Pacific – these regions command the attention of military experts and diplomats. Where are the geopolitical fault lines in today’s world, and where can we expect military conflict tomorrow? How likely is a third world war, and will it be a nuclear war? How can we prevent the destruction of civilization? These were among the questions addressed by experts at the round table discussion “Military Concepts and Challenges of the 21st Century,” organized by the magazine Mezhdunarodnaya Zhizn (International Affairs), and held at the Moscow State Institute of International Relations on April 26.

Classifying wars

Before one can talk about the likelihood of armed conflict, one should define what armed conflict consists of in today’s world. The average person thinks war is tanks and airplanes. But wars come in all shapes and sizes.

At the round table, First Vice President of the Academy of Geopolitical Problems Konstantin Sivkov said that armed conflicts are classified by Russia’s Institute of Military-Strategic Studies according to causes, geography, duration and the number of troops involved.

At the low end of the classification system are border conflicts that last from a week to a month, requiring about 10,000-50,000 troops.

Next come armed conflicts involving about 100,000 and lasting from a month to several years.

This is followed by local wars, which involve at least one million troops (incidentally, this is the projected size of the Russian armed forces after the reform process) and last from several months to several years.

A regional war involves 5-6 million people. The Great Patriotic War (i.e. the Eastern Front of WWII) falls into this category.

Finally, at the other extreme of the classification system is a world war. “In terms of its structure, a world war can involve a number of regional and local wars and armed conflicts, or simply local wars and armed conflicts in a considerable portion of the world’s territory,” Sivkov explained.

Future hot spots

Based on a similar taxonomy of armed conflicts and existing disputes in the world, military experts predict probable threats. It is important to emphasize that this is just a long-term forecast. There are no predictions about exact dates or any guarantees that these events will come to pass.

“Existing disputes show that there is potential for war,” Sivkov said. In his opinion, there is a fifty-fifty chance of a local war in the Middle East (the military operation in Libya being a vivid example). Experts cannot rule out that the United States will opt for a military strike against Iran, although most likely it would not initiate the war but rather would be part of a NATO peacekeeping force operating in highly probable conflicts between Iran and Israel or Iran and Saudi Arabia. “In any event there will be a showdown between Iran and the United States sooner or later,” said Grigory Tishchenko, head of the defense policy department at the Russian Institute of Strategic Studies.

Armed conflicts could break out in Central Asia, drawing in Russia, who will act in support of its allies in the region.

Head of the Military Forecast Center Anatoly Tsyganok believes that “a conflict over water is possible in the region in the next three to five years.” Tishchenko noted that “a change in the region’s leaders” is just around the corner. “It is quite possible that this process will not be peaceful, all the more so since Central Asian countries already find themselves in a conflict over the Fergana Valley, which is the region’s only bread basket,” he explained, adding that “the Afghan conflict could also spread to Central Asia.”

Speaking about Russia’s neighbors, Tishchenko noted that the situation in Transdnestria could escalate. “It is difficult to predict the consequences of the current Romanization of Moldova. For instance, the EU is already willing to introduce its peacekeepers in Transdnestria but its troops have not yet proven themselves anywhere. It is very hard to say whether they will cope with a possible escalation in Transdnestria,” he explained.

Armed conflict is also likely in the Caucasus. “No doubt, Nagorno-Karabakh may become a bone of contention,” Tishchenko said. “Azerbaijan is actively developing its foreign policy concepts and building up troops. Armenia, where we have a military base, is acting in the same manner.” Tsyganok added: “The most interesting aspect to this is that Russia has no dispute with either Azerbaijan or Armenia, and we don’t have a clue as to what we will do if tensions in Nagorno-Karabakh spill over.”

Sivkov believes that an armed conflict or local war is also likely in Asia-Pacific, in particular between Cambodia and Thailand.

In his opinion, similar local conflicts in different parts of the world are the result of a changing world and the formation of a new world order. “There is no case in history of a new world order taking shape without a war,” Sivkov said. “A new world order came into being twice – in the early 20th century as a result of WWI and in mid-century as a result of WWII,” he explained.

Is war inevitable?

With time, humanity has learned how to resolve conflicts more or less peacefully. But a conflict-free world is a utopia. Disputes between countries are inevitable, just as they are between people. Now experts identify three types of disputes or divisions that can provoke armed conflicts at different levels.

First there are internal divisions within a state, which are primarily caused by two factors. The first is socio-economic in nature (divisions between the upper and lower classes over the distribution of material wealth). This division becomes acute when the incomes of the wealthiest 10% exceed those of the poorest 10% by more than 15 times over,” Sivkov said, adding that in Russia this threshold has long been passed.

The other factor is ethnic, cultural and religious tensions, which can be found in Russia and other countries, particularly in the United States.

Then there are regional disputes, for instance the territorial disputes between Russia and China, China and India, Russia and Japan, India and Pakistan. There are internal divisions in the Arab world, between Iran and the Arabs and between North and South America. Such disputes could easily boil over into regional conflicts.

Finally, there are global divisions, first among them being the division between the scale of production and consumption and the Earth’s resources that are left at the disposal of humanity, which puts at stake the entire direction of civilization’s development,” Sivkov said. He believes that this division is antagonistic because it can only be resolved by one of two options – either by restricting consumption or by changing the social system.

The second division is caused by the disproportionate distribution of production capacity and raw materials. “Some countries have high tech production, whereas others are rich in raw materials. The inadequate exchange between them is enriching some and impoverishing others,” Sivkov explained. “There are two ways of resolving it – either leave some countries in a subordinate position or establish a fair distribution of revenue, which will impoverish other countries without changing their social system.”

The third global division that is playing an increasing role is between “the immorality of the free market and the spiritual values of traditional civilizations – Muslim, Orthodox Christianity and others,” Sivkov said.

“This division gives rise to that volatile mass of future militants and suicide bombers. The current market is incompatible with the spiritual values of traditional civilizations. And the new globalized world is trying to decide whom to join – the free market or the traditional civilizations,” Sivkov said.

Finally, there is the division between the “financial bubble” and the real economy. “This division played a significant role in Hitler’s rise to power in 1933. This is why Henry Ford kept a small bust of Hitler on his desk,” Sivkov said. “This is the division between financial and industrial capital, and to resolve it one form of capital must be subordinate to the other.”

Third global reality

None of the experts at the round table believe that any of the world powers is likely to launch a premeditated aggressive war, including a nuclear attack. Fortunately, not only civilized countries but the rest of the world understands the consequences of such a war.

However, a new world war could start uncontrollably, as a “natural escalation of local or regional conflicts into large-scale hostilities,” Sivkov said, adding that the likelihood of such a war is low. The use of weapons of mass destruction would be the final stage of such a global war.

If unleashed, a new world war would have catastrophic consequences. In his time, Winston Churchill cautioned that “the Stone Age may return on the gleaming wings of science.” Now experts are more specific. They maintain that a new world war could last from 6-7 to 25-30 years and involve more than 100 million people on both sides. The aggregate human losses could exceed several hundred million.

Experts emphasize that the forecast of probable armed conflicts is important not so much as a means of preparing national armies for hostilities. Militaries have long ceased initiating wars. Only politicians or “captains of the economy,” as Sivkov put it, are capable of preventing the unavoidable divisions in the world from escalating into a world war.

====