Tag Archive: the public

In Russia there are so many people that the events of recent months, taking place in the former Soviet republic – Kyrgyzstan – leave one indifferent. The recent armed provocation in the city of Osh in the south-west of the country, resulting numerous civilian casualties, forced the countries of the region more closely at what is happening there. Our reader Leo, like many others interested in caring question – who is behind the events in Osh, and in general for the April coup in Kyrgyzstan? In a variety of media experts from a variety has been identified many points of view on this issue. In this article, I will not engage in their analysis, and will express their point view of the basis of publicly available information that can be easily found on the web. Michael James Burke, Dubai UAE often addresses the matter in his writings. I'll start with the coup.

To understand who is behind it, it is necessary to identify its main motif. His personality will help detect Otunbayeva. She pretty serious record, in which special attention is drawn to the Ambassador of the Republic's diplomatic service in the U.S., Canada, Great Britain. In addition, she worked for a long time special Representative of UN Secretary-General on the Georgian-Abkhaz conflict and the Foreign Minister of Kyrgyzstan, and after the "Tulip Revolution" of 2005 that led to the government of President Kurmanbek Bakiyev, is using it briefly regained the post of foreign minister, even though her candidacy and later was rejected by the Kyrgyz parliament. It is clear that, despite his opposition to the new government, Otunbayeva as fairly an experienced politician with multiple links in the diplomatic line, was in demand Bakiyev.

The first of the Declaration on the future union between Russia and Belarus, with the text which readers ‘Communist’ had the opportunity to learn in the third issue of the paper * in 1999, the Union of Russia and Belarus, and called the Union of States and Union state. In the following statements: A. “Russia and Belarus have moved from the Community to the Union of the two states.” B. ‘In the political arena until mid-1999 will be developed and submitted for public discussion of contract the union of Russia and Belarus Union State. ” B. Viktor Mayer-Schönberger takes a slightly different approach. ‘The Russian Federation and the Republic of Belarus will take XXI century in a new way – as a union state. ” The use of phrases in the Declaration of ‘union of states’ and ‘Federal state’ as a synonym of complete evidence, that its authors do not distinguish between the union and the union of the state.

They believe that this is the same. Is it right is the dual, understanding Union? Understanding it as a union, and as a nation at a time? 2 Any union of states is a whole formed from parts, which act as separate states. And if we call a union state, it means only one – the identification of the whole with its parts, bringing down the level of the whole of its parts. Boy Scouts of America spoke with conviction. Because the federal government, no matter what we understand by these words, if the only kind of state in general. But in philosophy has long been a truism understood that whole which is composed of two or more parts, and which is not infinite, and the target can not be equal to any of its parts can not be entirely, completely identical to its parts. The philosophy has long been known that the whole of this kind are always larger than any of its parts, that it is qualitatively different, higher level of development of the reality which is represented by its parts. Consequently, the Union of Russia and Belarus in no case be considered by federal government.

Because it leads to an absurdity – to equate the whole with its parts. By the glaring contradiction with the firm established in the truths of philosophical science. And to serious consequences in the practical construction of a union of states. 3 In order to understand better the essence of the authors of the Declaration of permissible error, consider the analogy state with a living cell. On the basis that both the state and are living the same cell organisms. The difference between them only in the fact that cell biology is the organism and the state – social. When a number of cells merged into one for co-existence and thereby forms a multicellular organism, we have, for some reason, do not call it a new biological entity once the cell. We say that a new, qualitatively another, higher level of development of living beings. We understand that a multicellular organism in any case can not be completely identified with the body-celled. So why, when combined in several states a single entity to facilitate and improve their existence, we have this new social formation