Putin: Russia’s Military Strength Has No Match In The World

According to reports, Russian President Vladimir Putin has warned other nations that they will not gain military superiority over Russia.

Putin spoke out on the strength of Russia’s armed forces during a ceremony for World War II veterans, and his statements come at a sensitive time for international relations. The ongoing conflict in eastern Ukraine has seen U.S.-Russia relations deteriorate to their lowest point since the Cold War, and his latest statements do not make for encouraging reading.

Russia continues to arm rebels

Ukrainian officials have accused Russia of increasing their military presence in the east of the country with the addition of more tanks and troops. The Russians would appear to be enforcing pro-Russian rebels in the area near Novoazovsk, which many predict will be the next battlefront.

Novoazovsk is just 25 miles east of the strategic port city of Mariupol. If the rebels can succeed in taking it from Ukrainian government forces it could provide a route through which to link up with the Russian-held Crimean peninsula further south.

The latest developments do not bode well for the survival of a recent peace deal negotiated in Minsk. It is already hanging by a thread after rebels roundly ignored its terms in order to take Debaltseve, a vital railway hub.

Strategic militarization

Moscow has extensive plans for the upgrading of its armed forces and the militarization of three spheres of Russian influence. According to Moscow, the Crimean peninsula, the port of Kaliningrad and the Arctic region are all of vital importance to counterbalance the growth of NATO power in the region.

So far the Arctic has seen the construction of 16 deepwater ports, 13 airfields and 10 air-defense radar stations, underlining the importance of a region which is estimated to contain around 15% of Earth’s remaining oil, 30% of its natural gas and 20% of its liquefied natural gas.

Russia plans to carry out a massive wave of military modernization, including the construction of 12 ballistic missile submarines and 8 nuclear attack submarines. They could also be joined by a huge new aircraft carrier capable of carrying 100 planes.

However Russia’s plans could be thrown off by country’s economic situation. Economic sanctions and low oil prices have ravaged its coffers, and even before the ruble crash some senior figures were worried.

Russian Finance Minister Anton Siluanov expressed his misgivings back in October, and the situation has become a lot worse since then, however Putin seems set on expanding Russia’s sphere of influence using military force.

Revealed: Why China Would Lose a War against America

Let’s not mince words: a U.S.-China war would be hell on earth. It would likely start World War III. Millions— maybe billions— of people would die if nuclear weapons were ever used in such a conflict. The global economy would likely face ruin— that’s what happens when the world’s biggest economic powers start shooting at each other. Thankfully the chances are remote it will ever happen. Yet, the threat of such a conflict remains thanks to the many different pressure points in the U.S.-China relationship. Forget the challenge of ISIS, Ukraine, Syria or whatever the flavor of the moment is. The U.S.-China relationship— and whether it remains peaceful or not— is the most important challenge of our time. Period.

Several days ago I examined in a short piece on these digital pages how China could do great damage to U.S. and allied military forces in a war. Thanks to over twenty years of large scale investments, the PRC has gone from being a third-rate military that could project very little offensive punch to arguably the second most powerful military machine on the planet. And with an emphasis on weapons systems that embrace anti-access/area-denial military doctrine (A2/AD), China seems to be developing the tools it needs if war with America did ever come to pass. Beijing’s motto these days: be prepared.

This article examines the challenges China would face against the U.S. in a conflict--but in a very broad, top-down, and practical sort of way. This time I will avoid the fun but sometimes easy to pick apart scenario-style type of analysis. While Beijing certainly has the tools to get the job done when it comes to a war with Washington, the challenges China would face in such a conflict would be immense— and many of them could be quite basic. The PRC would be going to war against the premier military power on the planet— some would argue the most lethal fighting machine of all time. In this essay we will review some of the important foundational reasons why many argue, quite convincingly, that the U.S. would very well defeat China in a war.

(Recommended: Exposed: China's Super Strategy to Crush America in a War)

A Great Mystery: Just How Good Is China’s Military Anyway?

Yes, Beijing keeps cranking out those whizz-bang high-tech weapons of war like sausages. China has those shiny, new carrier-killer missiles that everyone is always fretting about (including yours truly.) Its building aircraft carriers, 5th generation fighters, multiple types of cruise missiles, nuclear and ultra quiet diesel submarines, drones, mines and so on.

It all looks really good— at least on paper.

When it comes to a war with the U.S. how well would Beijing be able to use all that stuff? The real question seems pretty simple: yes, China is certainly developing all the military and technology goodies to field a potent force. However, how well can it operate all that equipment in the pressure filled situation of a war? Sure, Beijing is certainly developing a world-class military, but can its soldiers operate all that equipment competently? Just how well trained are they? You can have the best military in the world but if you don’t know how to use it, well, you get the idea.

Opinions are mixed on this for sure. Ian Easton from Project 2049, in a piece for The Diplomat, reminds us of the possible capabilities, nature, and mission of the PLA— and its certainly not all about America:

The state of “software” (military training and readiness) is truly astounding. At one military exercise in the summer of 2012, a strategic PLA unit, stressed out by the hard work of handling warheads in an underground bunker complex, actually had to take time out of a 15-day wartime simulation for movie nights and karaoke parties. In fact, by day nine of the exercise, a “cultural performance troupe” (common PLA euphemism for song-and-dance girls) had to be brought into the otherwise sealed facility to entertain the homesick soldiers…

Israel's Netanyahu: 'What is there to hide' in Iran deal

JERUSALEM (AP) — Israel's prime minister said Thursday that he knows the details of the deal being forged with Iran over its nuclear program and asked "what is there to hide" after the U.S. said it was withholding some information on the talks.

"We know that Tehran knows the details of the talks. Now I tell you that Israel also knows the details of the proposed agreement," Netanyahu said.Benjamin Netanyahu's remarks come a day after the Obama administration said it is keeping some specifics from Israel because it fears the close U.S. ally has leaked sensitive information to try to scuttle the talks — and will continue to do so.

"I think this is a bad agreement that is dangerous for the state of Israel, and not just for it. If anyone thinks otherwise what is there to hide here?" he said.

Netanyahu has angered the White House with his open opposition to a deal he believes threatens Israel's existence, and by accepting a Republican invitation to address Congress about Iran in early March without consulting the White House, a breach of diplomatic protocol.

The planned speech has caused an uproar in Israel as well, coming just two weeks before national elections. Netanyahu has rejected the criticism, saying it is his duty to lobby against the nuclear deal.

U.S. State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki questioned Netanyahu's claim to knowing the details of the deal. "Then the fact is that he knows more than the negotiators, in that there is no deal yet," she said.

"Obviously, if there's a deal we'll be explaining the deal and explaining why and how it prevents Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon. And if that's the case and we come to a deal, it's hard to see how anyone wouldn't see that's to the benefit of the international community," she said.

Israel views a nuclear-armed Iran as a threat to its very existence, citing Tehran's repeated calls for Israel's destruction, its long-range missile program and its support for anti-Israel militant groups like Lebanon's Hezbollah.

Iran insists that its nuclear program is for purely civilian purposes.

Saudis Grow Increasingly Critical Of The Campaign Against ISIS

Saudi Arabia's Prince Turki al-Faisal, shown in 2013 in Bahrain, says the 'pinpricks' against the Islamic State have not been effective. The former intelligence chief also says the campaign needs to be better coordinated.

Mohammed Al-Shaikh/AFP/Getty

The strategy against the self-declared Islamic State was on display this week: In Saudi Arabia, there were two days of closed-door military meetings, and in Washington, a White House summit on combating extremism.

Meanwhile, the Pentagon announced that training programs for Syrian rebels begins next month. So far, so good, in public.

But privately, the Saudi view is that the air campaign against ISIS, now more than six months old, is not working. 

"Having simply these pinprick attacks on certain areas is not going to resolve the issue," says Prince Turki al-Faisal, a former Saudi intelligence chief who also served as the ambassador to the U.S. from 2005-7.

An outspoken member of the royal family, Faisal, 70, no longer holds a senior post. But his views are considered to reflect the general thinking of the Saudi leadership.

He says the air strikes against ISIS are too limited and not well coordinated. In addition, he insists the coalition effort is undermined by politics in Europe and mistrust in the Middle East.

As evidence, he notes the U.S. Air Force is hitting ISIS in both Iraq and Syria, countries — but the other Western allies stick to targets in Iraq.

"Because those guys [the Europeans] refuse to operate in Syria. Totally insane," he says. "It's the same target, but because this is Syria and this is Iraq, the Europeans don't want to hit Syria."

At the same time, Gulf countries that are part of the coalition hit only targets in Syria and are not active in Iraq, Faisal notes.

"Because the Iraqis haven't asked us to. How can we meet this vicious situation if our effort is so disjointed," he says. 

Iraq's intelligence on ISIS is not shared with Arab partners in the coalition, he adds.

In Washington, the Pentagon insists there has been progress since the air campaign began in August.

"You really have two air force coalitions – one operating in Syria, not crossing the border into Iraq. The other operating in Iraq, not crossing the border into Syria," he says.

But Dr. Theodore Karasik, a military analyist based in Dubai, says the core militants of ISIS are battle-hardened strategists who can survive airstrikes and still attack.

"They also have libraries of U.S. army field manuals," he says of ISIS, which has captured extensive U.S. military equipment and supplies from the Iraqi military. "They know exactly how air strikes work – and they are able to succeed because they have this knowledge."

ISIS also knows how to thrive in chaos, playing on local grievences of Sunni Arabs. The Saudis insist one way to address those grievance is the removal of President Bashar Assad in Syria, an ally of Iran, the main Saudi rival.

The Saudis and the U.S. agree on the goal – but not the timing – and that has led to rifts. 

"The disease is in the failing states," he says. "In Iraq, some steps have been taken to rectify this. But in Syria, nothing has been done."

Enough Already! It's Time for the West to Arm Ukraine

MUNICH (The World Post) -- It has become something of a mantra among diplomats and other foreign policy analysts that there is no military solution to the conflict between Russia and Ukraine. The only viable path to peace and stability, observers almost unanimously proclaim, is a diplomatic one. But, despite the recent ceasefire agreement announced in Minsk, ongoing violence -- reflected in the violent expulsion of Ukrainian forces from the town of Debaltseve -- strongly suggests that it is time to consider what is needed to block any Kremlin-imposed military solution.

Three influential American think tanks have already done so, and arrived at the conclusion that the United States should begin supplying Ukraine not only with more non-lethal aid -- such as drones, armored Humvees, and medical equipment -- but also with "lethal defensive military assistance," in the form of light anti-armor missiles. European governments, however, remain unwilling to reconsider their position on supplying defensive equipment to Ukraine, and have instead reiterated that a diplomatic solution is the only option.

Of course, from Ukraine's perspective, a one-on-one military confrontation with Russia is not a viable option. Last year, when separatist forces in the Donbas region appeared to be crumbling under the weight of Ukraine's counter-offensive, it seemed possible that Ukraine would be able to reassert its sovereignty over the area. But the Kremlin quickly deployed battalion-size tactical groups from the Russian army to support the rebels. Ukraine's relatively weak forces did not stand a chance.

The move exemplifies Russia's commitment to do whatever it takes to prevent a military defeat of the separatist entities that it has incited and forged into fighting units -- a determination that has endured, even as the conflict has placed considerable strain on its armed forces. Given this, the prospects for Ukraine to reassert control over the Donbas region militarily are so slim that even trying to do so would be foolish.

If one considers the strategic ambitions of the separatists and their Russian patrons, Ukraine's prospects are even bleaker. Beyond supplying the separatist groups with heavy and advanced weapons, and deploying special units and forces to support them, Russia now appears to be sending in "volunteers" to train a separatist army that could ultimately go on the offensive.

Such an army, separatist leaders hope, will enable them -- at the very least -- to secure control over the Donbas region. They would then be positioned to secure a "Novorossiya" statelet extending along the entire Black Sea coast, up to and including Odessa. And, in all likelihood, some would even dream of an eventual march into Kyiv.

To prevent this scenario from unfolding, a robust political dialogue with the Kremlin is clearly vital, as are continued economic sanctions to make clear that Russia will pay a rising price for ongoing aggression. But trusting solely in a diplomatic dialogue and sanctions to bring about a lasting peace may be excessively optimistic.

A more comprehensive approach would focus on strengthening Ukraine in every respect. To this end, political and diplomatic support is essential. But perhaps even more important is backing for reforms aimed at eliminating corruption and promoting growth. The recent agreement with the International Monetary Fund is of immediate importance in this respect, and the agreement with the European Union on a Deep and Comprehensive Free-Trade Area is crucial to the country's long-term transformation.

But if separatist groups, with support from Russia, believe that they can control Donbas and the Black Sea coast, efforts to rebuild Ukraine's society and economy will amount to little. That is why Ukraine's external partners must also help to strengthen the country's defensive capabilities.

In such a charged situation, there will always be hotheads, eager to pursue military options. But the greater concern is the behavior of pragmatists, who identify weaknesses that can be exploited. If the Russian-backed separatists view Ukraine's defensive capacity as a serious weakness, there will be little to compel them not to push forward in pursuit of their ambitions. A political or diplomatic solution would be next to impossible.

Security experts should identify which actions powers like the U.S. and Europe could take to improve Ukraine's defensive capabilities. The requests for non-lethal equipment made by Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko at the recent Munich Security Conference could provide some guidance.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel and others are clearly right when they say that there is no purely military solution to the conflict in Ukraine. But a year of talks and failed agreements has demonstrated that there is no purely diplomatic solution either. Only by eliminating -- or at least seriously diminishing -- the potential for the separatists and their Russian backers to continue their military campaign can Ukraine and its partners hope for a lasting political solution.

Turkey eyes deal with China on missile defence despite NATO concern

(Adds comments from Raytheon)

By Tulay Karadeniz

ANKARA, (Reuters) - Turkey's defence minister said on Thursday the country does not plan to integrate a new missile defence system with NATO infrastructure and officials said a $3.4 billion deal with China was still under consideration.

NATO member Turkey chose China Precision Machinery Import and Export Corp as a preferred bidder in 2013, prompting U.S. and Western concern about security and the compatibility of the weaponry with NATO systems.

Defence Minister Ismet Yilmaz, in a written response to a parliamentary question, indicated Ankara planned to go ahead with the Chinese system, saying the evaluation of bids had been completed and no new offers received.

"The system in question will be integrated with the national system for Turkey's defence and will be used without integrating with NATO," Yilmaz said.

"We are continuing discussions with all the bidders," the under secretariat for defence industries said in a statement.However, other government officials later made clear that did not mean a final decision had yet been reached.

U.S. and NATO officials are unhappy with Turkey's choice of the China Precision Machinery, which has been under U.S. sanctions for selling items to Iran, Syria or North Korea that are banned under U.S. laws to curb the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction.

Eurosam, which is owned by Franco-Italian missile maker MBDA and France's Thales, came second in the tender. U.S.-listed Raytheon Co also put in an offer with its Patriot missile defense system, which is now operated by 13 countries around the world.

Tim Glaeser, vice president with Raytheon's Integrated Defense Systems business, said that Turkey had recently asked for additional clarifications about Raytheon's proposal.

"It's our understanding that they are continuing to evaluate proposals from the French and the United States," Glaeser said. "There's renewed interest. We're still in the game." (Additional reporting by Orhan Coskun and Humeyra Pamuk, and Andrea Shalal in Washington; Writing by Daren Butler; Editing by David Dolan, Angus MacSwan and Lisa Shumaker)

South Africa's Julius Malema gets apology for 'cockroach' insult

Baleka Mbete has apologised for her "cockroach" insult

Continue reading the main story

Related Stories

• New low for SA parliament
• Punches at South Africa parliament
• Is South Africa's EFF one-issue party?

South Africa's parliamentary speaker has apologised for calling an opposition MP "a cockroach".

Baleka Mbete made the remarks about Julius Malema at an ANC rally, after ordering him and other Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) MPs out of parliament.

Mr Malema was protesting during Jacob Zuma's State of the Nation address.

The EFF leader claims that the remark was a threat, saying: "We know what happened to people called cockroaches in Rwanda."

The term "cockroach" was used in Rwandan radio broadcasts to urge ethnic Hutus to kill Tutsis in the 1994 genocide, in which 800,000 people were slaughtered.

Julius Malema, the leader of the Economic Freedom Fighters was called a "cockroach"

President Zuma was giving his State of the Nation speech during the scuffles that sparked the controversy

The red-shirted EFF MPs brawled with white-shirted security officers

The main opposition party, Democratic Alliance, has called for Ms Mbete to step down. Their MPs walked out of parliament after security forces clashed with and expelled EFF members, on the speaker's orders last week.

Two days later, Ms Mbete, chairwoman of the governing African National Congress (ANC), told a party rally that Mr Malema was a "cockroach", adding that President Zuma's speech was a "beautiful opportunity" to "deal with those irritants".

Ms Mbete said she was now withdrawing her remarks "unreservedly".

"I apologise unconditionally, to South Africans, to Parliament and Honourable Julius Malema for any hurt or harm I may have caused," she said.

The EFF used President Zuma's annual State of the Nation speech to question him about a state-funded, multi-million dollar upgrade to his private residence.

Mr Malema was ordered to leave when he demanded the president "pay back the money" from the upgrade to his home.

The F-22's Belated Combat Debut Against Islamic State Earns Praise

(Bloomberg) -- Lockheed Martin Corp.’s F-22 fighter jet, making its debut in warfare more than nine years after it was deemed combat-ready, has flown at least 112 missions against Islamic State positions in Syria and Iraq, the U.S. Air Force’s commander of combat forces said.

More from Bloomberg.com: Find Our Style DirectorThe stealth fighter known as the Raptor has guided airstrikes into Syria, disseminated large volumes of data to fellow fliers and attacked Islamic State’s oil facilities, General Herb “Hawk” Carlisle, said in a telephone interview.

“If at all possible, they try to have F-22s on as many missions as they can because” the jets play the role of an aerial quarterback, Carlisle said.

“The F-22 can suck up information from everybody,” such as other fighters, air and ground surveillance aircraft, and then direct aircrews where to fly and locate targets, he said.

What the F-22 is doing “extraordinarily well is making sure other airplanes are aware of what’s around them and, in cases where they need to, direct them so they stay out of any potential threat,” Carlisle said of the plane’s first wartime role since it was initially declared combat-ready in December 2005.

The Air Force is touting the F-22’s role as vindication for a plane long criticized for its cost and the service’s failure to use it. The Pentagon has spent $67 billion to buy 187 of the supersonic jets, and on the Senate floor in 2011, Republican Senator John McCain of Arizona famously called it an “expensive, corroding hangar queen.”

More from Bloomberg.com: Employees Poached, Apple Sued by A123 Systems

The F-22’s production was curtailed in April 2009 at 187 planes instead of a potential 243 by then-Defense Secretary Robert Gates, who questioned its expense and relevance.

Dizzy Pilots

Its reputation was further marred during a yearlong mystery in 2012 over why at least a dozen pilots became dizzy and disoriented, a condition called hypoxia. The issue was traced to a faulty valve in the pilots’ vest oxygen system that’s been remedied.

The jet’s performance in Syria and Iraq may make it easier for the Air Force and Bethesda, Maryland-based Lockheed to get congressional support for an estimated $3.58 billion in software, sensor and weapons-carrying upgrades through 2020. Of that, the Pentagon is requesting $606 million for the fiscal year starting Oct. 1. Boeing Co. is a subcontractor.

More from Bloomberg.com: Why Wal-Mart Is Raising Its Everyday Low Wages

On a per-plane basis, the F-22 is the costliest fighter aircraft ever, with a program acquisition cost, including research, estimated in 2010 at $358 million apiece. It drops GPS-guided direct-attack munitions and 250-pound Small Diameter Bombs, both made by Chicago-based Boeing.

More Data Requested

One longtime F-22 critic said the Air Force needs to release more data on its performance, including the cost to operate it while deployed, before a judgment can be made as to its effectiveness.

“From Air Force data in 2013, we know the cost to operate an F-22 per hour in the U.S. is $68,262,” said Winslow Wheeler, a former Government Accountability Office analyst who assessed weapons programs and recently retired from the Project on Government Oversight, a Washington-based watchdog group. “Foreign deployments will be more.”

F-15 and F-16 aircraft flying missions in Iraq and Syria are “certainly doing it at an operating cost that is a fraction of the F-22’s according to official Air Force data,” Wheeler said.

He said the Air Force has a track record of releasing data on its favored weapons programs that are “usually incomplete, often to the point of being misleading.”

Carlisle called ridiculous any notion that using F-22s against Islamic State targets is overkill or unwarranted.

Night Raid

Until now, Pentagon and Air Force officials have declined to discuss the aircraft’s missions beyond disclosing its first foray into Syria against an Islamic State command facility when those strikes commenced in mid-September.

On one mission, mostly at night, two Raptors flew for 12 hours, including flights over Syria and Iraq and several aerial refuelings, Carlisle said. The jets dropped bombs, returned to strike targets again, directed coalition fighters and passed information in real time to the primary air operations center.

Through Feb. 2, F-22s flew 112 Syria and Iraq combat missions, or sorties. They’ve dropped 132 munitions, mostly on Islamic State-controlled buildings and oil refining and transportation infrastructure, according to Air Force data.

Altogether, U.S. aircraft conducted 1,919 airstrikes dropping 8,194 munitions through Jan. 30, according to the latest summary by U.S. Central Command.

Upgraded Tools

The F-22s flying missions over Iraq and Syria are equipped with “Increment 3.1” software and sensors that provide enhanced air-to-ground capability such as geolocation of selected ground electronics emitters and ground-mapping synthetic aperture radar made by Northrop Grumman Corp., according to the Pentagon’s test office.

So far, President Bashar al-Assad hasn’t operated Syria’s air defenses against U.S. airstrikes targeting Islamic State, a mutual enemy, but Carlisle said the Air Force recognizes the threat they pose.

“There are parts of Syria that are higher or lower threats” and “frankly, we never know for sure what” the Syrians potentially might do “with their fairly highly capable systems”, he said.

“We are very cognizant of Syrian air defenses” and also are still gathering information about the full extent of Islamic State air defenses, he said.

To contact the reporter on this story: Tony Capaccio in Washington at acapaccio@bloomberg.net

To contact the editors responsible for this story: John Walcott at jwalcott9@bloomberg.net Larry Liebert

Europe Chickens Out Over Putin’s Ceasefire Violations

Three days after the guns were supposed to go silent in Ukraine, and hours after thousands of Ukrainian soldiers launched a desperate and bloody retreat from the besieged town of Debaltseve, the most senior official of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization got around to calling on Russian President Vladimir Putin to stop providing men, supplies and advanced weaponry to rebels there. 

NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg stopped to speak to the press on his way into a meeting of European Union defense ministers in the Latvian capital of Riga Wednesday. “We see a very difficult situation and deteriorating situation in eastern Ukraine,” he said. “We have seen that the ceasefire has not been respected.” 

To which the 8,000 Ukrainian soldiers who spent three days under bombardment from rebel and reportedly Russian forces — even after the ceasefire was supposed to take effect — could really only have replied, “You don’t say?” 

Stoltenberg went on to admit what almost every respected news organization in the world has been reporting for days. 

“We have seen the separatists in eastern Ukraine making advances, especially in and around the Debaltseve and they have used advanced weapons to attack the Ukrainian forces in Debaltseve,” he continued. “Russia provides support for the separatists, providing them with heavy equipment, advanced weapons, forces and training. And the ceasefire is also undermined by the fact that the [Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe] monitors are not allowed access to be able to do their job to monitor the ceasefire.” 

Stoltenberg urged Russia to “withdraw all its forces from eastern Ukraine, to stop all its support for the separatists and to respect the Minsk agreement and to also use all its influence on the separatists to make them respect the ceasefire.” 

The rebels in Ukraine, after the ceasefire agreement was signed last week, unilaterally declared that it did not apply to Debaltseve, and received relatively little pushback from leaders in Europe, who tut-tutted about “ceasefire violations” but took little or no action to let Putin know his country would pay an increased price for continued aggression. 

In a Tuesday press conference in Hungary, Putin casually told the Ukrainian people, and the besieged soldiers, to move on. “Life is life; it just goes on,” he said. “No need to dwell on it.” 

Georgia condemns Russia, South Ossetia deal as step toward annexation

By Margarita Antidze

.TBILISI (Reuters) - Georgia condemned on Thursday the signing of a border agreement between its breakaway region of South Ossetia and Russia, accusing Moscow of moving closer to annexing a territory it supported in a five-day conflict in 2008.

Georgia, which has ambitions to join NATO, and Russia fought that war over South Ossetia and another separatist region, Abkhazia. After it ended, Moscow recognized both regions as independent countries

Moscow went further by signing a "strategic partnership" agreement with Abkhazia last November, seven months after annexing Ukraine's Crimea peninsula and throwing its weight behind separatists battling in eastern Ukraine.

Russia says it wants to sign a similar document to integrate its security forces and military with South Ossetia's, and Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov signed a preliminary agreement with his counterpart in the separatist region on Wednesday.

"It's yet another action directed against the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Georgia and an attempt to artificially redraw internationally recognized borders," the Georgian foreign ministry said.

The foreign ministry in Moscow had no immediate comment on the remarks.

Abkhazia and South Ossetia survive on financial support from Russia, and Moscow has promised not to cut aid for Abkhazia this year.

Lavrov also said on Wednesday that Russia would "take measures to prevent the negative effect of attempts to drag Tbilisi into NATO."

Georgia, a South Caucasus country crossed by pipelines that carry Caspian oil and gas from Azerbaijan to Europe, said on Thursday that Russia was a threat to stability in the region and had no influence on the process of Georgia's integration into NATO.

Tbilisi's government has long hoped to join the military alliance, and NATO has agreed in principle that it should one day become a member and plans to open a training center in Georgia by the end of the year.

Analysts say the integration process has been delayed by member countries' reluctance to further provoke Russia.

($1 = 62.3030 rubles)

(Editing by John Stonestreet)

U.K. Jets Escort Russian Military Planes Off Britain

(Bloomberg) -- The U.K. scrambled fighter jets to intercept and escort two Russian military aircraft flying close to the British coastline amid tensions between NATO countries and Russia over the conflict in Ukraine.

Royal Air Force Typhoons operating under North Atlantic Treaty Organization command were deployed Wednesday from an air base at Coningsby in eastern England, the U.K. Ministry of Defence said in an e-mailed statement. The incident took place at about 6:30 p.m. off the coast of Cornwall in southwest England, the ministry said.

“I suspect what’s happening here is the Russians are trying to make some sort of a point and I don’t think we should dignify it with too much of a response,” Prime Minister David Cameron said Thursday in Felixstowe, eastern England, where he was campaigning for May 7 elections. “At no time did the Russian military aircraft cross into U.K. sovereign airspace.”

Violence has continued between Ukrainian government forces and pro-Russian separatists in eastern Ukraine, in breach of a cease-fire that’s been in place since Sunday. Cameron has been one of the firmest proponents of sanctions against Russia.

The Russian planes were escorted until they were out of the U.K. area of interest, according to the MoD statement.

Russia may test NATO resolve using propaganda, cyber attacks and covert forces to stir ethnic tensions in Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, U.K. Defence Secretary Michael Fallon was cited as saying by the Daily Telegraph newspaper Thursday.

Russian President Vladimir Putin is “in effect annexing vast swathes of territory” in Ukraine, U.K. Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg said on his weekly LBC Radio phone-in show. “There is no evidence right now that he is doing or seeking to do the same in the Baltic states, but of course we should be vigilant.”

To contact the reporter on this story: Alex Morales in London atamorales2@bloomberg.net

To contact the editors responsible for this story: Alan Crawford atacrawford6@bloomberg.net Eddie Buckle, Leon Mangasarian

Russia starts gas supplies to rebel-held east Ukraine

MOSCOW/KIEV (Reuters) - Russia started supplying gas to rebel-held eastern Ukraine on Thursday after Kiev had temporarily suspended deliveries because of damage to the networks from heavy fighting, which is continuing despite a ceasefire.

Responding to an order from Russian Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev to supply gas to east Ukraine as humanitarian aid, gas company Gazprom said it had started supplies via the Prokhorovka and Platovo pumping stations on the border with east Ukraine.The spat over Russian gas supplies and pricing for Ukraine had been at the heart of the broader standoff between the two former Soviet states, which spilled over into a chill in Moscow's relations with the West.

Gazprom's Chief Executive Officer Alexei Miller said gas deliveries were reaching 12 million cubic meters of gas per day (cm/d).

Sergei Kupriyanov, a Gazprom spokesman, said the 12 million cm/d was in addition to the 30 million cm/d Ukraine was already receiving, taking total deliveries to 42 million cm/d.

He declined to comment further, saying the additional supplies were being shipped under an existing contract with Ukrainian state company Naftogaz.

Naftogaz said it had suspended supplies on Feb. 18 "due to the extensive damage of the gas transport networks".

Later on Thursday Naftogaz CEO Andriy Kobolev said the firm had resumed gas supply, but with smaller volumes. The firm has also said Russian gas exports via Ukraine has not been hampered.

Relations between Russian and Ukraine have soured since Moscow annexed the Crimea peninsula and Kiev accused the Kremlin of supporting rebels fighting government troops in east Ukraine. Russia denies arming the rebels.

Russian supplies of gas to Ukraine have further complicated relations after Moscow cut supplies last year over unpaid bills. Supplies resumed in December but Gazprom says Ukraine still owes $2.44 billion - a figure Kiev disputes.

(Reporting by Pavel Polityuk, Vladimir Soldatkin, Denis Pinchuk and Maria Kiselyova; writing by Katya Golubkova; editing by Elizabeth Piper and David Evans)

China is projecting serious power in the South China Sea

Airbus Defence and Space imagery dated 14 November 2014 shows Chinese land reclamation operations under way at Fiery Cross Reef in the South China Sea. Multiple operating dredgers provide the ability to generate terrain rapidly. Operating from a harbour area, dredgers deliver sediment via a network of piping.

HONG KONG (Reuters) - China's creation of artificial islands in the South China Sea is happening so fast that Beijing will be able to extend the range of its navy, air force, coastguard and fishing fleets before long, much to the alarm of rival claimants to the contested waters.

Reclamation work is well advanced on six reefs in the Spratly archipelago, according to recently published satellite photographs and Philippine officials. In addition, Manila said this month that Chinese dredgers had started reclaiming a seventh.

While the new islands won't overturn U.S. military superiority in the region, Chinese workers are building ports and fuel storage depots as well as possibly two airstrips that experts said would allow Beijing to project power deep into the maritime heart of Southeast Asia.

"These reclamations are bigger and more ambitious than we all thought," said one Western diplomat. "On many different levels it's going to be exceptionally difficult to counter China in the South China Sea as this develops."

China claims most of the potentially energy rich South China Sea, through which $5 trillion in ship-borne trade passes every year. The Philippines, Vietnam, Malaysia, Brunei and Taiwan also have overlapping claims.

All but Brunei have fortified bases in the Spratlys, which lie roughly 1,300 km (810 miles) from the Chinese mainland but much closer to the Southeast Asian claimants.

Beijing has rejected diplomatic protests by Manila and Hanoi and criticism from Washington over the reclamation, saying the work falls "within the scope of China's sovereignty".

The Philippines began expressing growing concern in mid-2014, in particular, accusing Beijing of building an airstrip on Johnson South Reef.

Satellite analysis published by IHS Jane's Defence Weekly this week showed a new installation being built on Hughes Reef. It described a "large facility" having been constructed on 75,000 square meters of sand reclaimed since August.

It also published images of Fiery Cross Reef, which now includes a reclaimed island more than 3 km (1.8 miles) long that experts said would likely become a runway.

Work is also well established on Gaven, Cuarteron and Eldad Reefs, with the new dredging taking place on Mischief Reef.

Boon for fisherman

While the prospect of China using the artificial islands to refuel warplanes in any conflict was a possibility, some experts highlighted significant non-military benefits.

China could keep its fishing fleets and coastguard working in Southeast Asia more effectively, with crews able to re-supply and rest, said Carl Thayer, a South China Sea expert at Canberra's Australian Defence Force Academy. Oil explorers would similarly benefit.

Reuters reported in July that Chinese authorities were encouraging fishermen to sail to the Spratlys, often providing fuel subsidies to help.

Before the reclamation, China's facilities were limited to squat buildings and radar domes built on rocky outcrops, with limited berthing and storage facilities, a contrast to natural islands occupied by Taiwan and the Philippines.

"Even before you factor in military questions, the expansion of Chinese fishing and coastguard fleets is going to be a strategic shift that is going to be very hard for anyone to counter," said Thayer.

"And then you will have the navy just over the horizon."

REUTERS/China DailyA Chinese navy sailor (R) guides a helicopter to land on Chinese destroyer Harbin during the Joint Sea-2014 naval drill outside Shanghai on the East China Sea, May 24, 2014. Chinese and Russian navies staged exercises on the East China Sea on Saturday to simulate anti-submarine and search-and-rescue operations. A total of 14 surface ships, two submarines, nine fixed-wing warplanes, six shipboard helicopters and two operational detachments are taking part in this year's week-long drill, state media reported. Picture taken May 24, 2014.

Thayer noted that while no legal claim could be extended from an artificial island, China would effectively move to force rival countries from the surrounding seas.

Chinese strategic analysts said the build-up was being driven by what Beijing sees as security threats, especially the need to check Vietnam, which has had up until now the most holdings in the Spratlys, with 25 bases on shoals and reefs. Vietnam is also quietly building up its submarine fleet to counter China.

The two Communist Party-ruled neighbors clashed at sea in 1988 when China took its first Spratly holdings, including Fiery Cross Reef, from Vietnam.

Some regional military attaches believe China may eventually use helicopter facilities on the new islands to run anti-submarine operations.

"This is less about politics and legal issues and more about security, from China's perspective," said Zhang Baohui, a mainland defense specialist at Hong Kong's Lingnan University.

Strategic Gap

Gary Li, an independent security analyst in Beijing, said he believed any military pay-off would be relatively small from the new islands, given their distance from the Chinese mainland.

"I suspect these reclamations would only ever have localized tactical uses in military terms," Li said.

AFPA Chinese vessel works on a building project in the Spratly Islands in 2014.

China's lack of offshore military bases and friendly ports to call on was apparent last year when Chinese naval supply vessels sailed to Australia to replenish warships helping look for a missing Malaysian airliner in the Indian Ocean.

Naval planners know they will have to fill this strategic gap to meet Beijing's desire for a fully operational blue-water navy by 2050.

More immediately, some analysts said they believed the islands would give China the reach to create and police an air defense identification zone (ADIZ) above the South China Sea.

China sparked condemnation from Japan and the United States when it imposed an ADIZ, where aircraft are supposed to identify themselves to Chinese authorities, above the East China Sea in late 2013. China has denied speculation it would follow suit in the South China Sea.

Roilo Golez, a former Philippine national security adviser, predicted China would complete its reclamation work by early next year and announce an ADIZ within three years.

"They are connecting the dots. They're putting real muscle into this," Golez said.

(Additional reporting by Manny Mogato in MANILA and Michael Martina in BEIJING; Editing by Dean Yates)