Category: Authors

  • Trump Administration Cancels Two More International Treaties

    Trump Administration Cancels Two More International Treaties

    I wrote an article in September criticizing the Trump administration’s dismissal of the International Criminal Court. I considered the U.S. action to be a lack of respect for justice and the rule of law.

    Last week, the Trump administration took two more scandalous actions further flouting international law and avoiding the peaceful option of legal recourse to conflict resolution.

    Secretary of State Mike Pompeo announced that the United States was terminating the Treaty of Amity signed in 1955 between the U.S. and Iran, after a unanimous ruling on October 3, 2018, by the International Court of Justice (ICJ), also known as the World Court, that the United States had to resume the export of humanitarian goods and spare parts for civil aviation safety services to Iran, despite U.S. sanctions. This was certainly a victory for Iran as it had sued the United States in the World Court. The U.S. withdrawal from the treaty made it look like a sore loser!

    President Trump renewed the U.S. sanctions after withdrawing this May from the 2015 nuclear deal with Iran and several other major powers. The sanctions covered dollar transactions, food exports and sales of aluminum and steel. In November, the U.S. will add new sanctions against Iran’s oil sales, energy and shipping sectors and foreign financial transactions.

    After the verdict, ICJ President Abdulqawi Yusuf announced that “the court’s order applies to medicines and medical devices; foodstuffs and agricultural commodities; and spare parts, equipment and repair services for civil aviation. The United States must also ensure that licenses and authorizations are granted and that payment for such goods and services are not subject to any restrictions,” the Washington Post reported.

    Although the rulings of the International Court of Justice are binding, they are not enforceable. U.S. National Security Adviser John Bolton, during his appearance at the White House press briefing on Oct. 3, stated that Iran had “made a mockery” of the Amity Treaty. In response, Iran’s Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif called the United States “an outlaw regime.”

    Ironically, the United States files cases against other countries in the International Court of Justice when it suits its interests. Back in 1979, the United States sued the government of Iran after the takeover of the U.S. Embassy in Tehran by Iranian militants. The U.S. won that case and the ICJ ordered Iran to release all American hostages and pay compensation. It is strange that the United States government is now cancelling its treaty with Iran and not in 1979 during the hostage crisis!

    The Washington Post reported that “during meetings at the United Nations last week, Trump, Pompeo and Bolton railed against Iran and berated various other member states and U.N. bodies for not bending to American interests. Their approach elicited an icy reaction. At a Security Council session chaired by President Trump, every other member of the U.N.’s most powerful body scolded Washington for its rejection of the nuclear deal, an agreement the council had endorsed.”

    On Oct. 3, 2018, Bolton also announced that the United States would withdraw from the “optional protocol” under the Vienna Convention of Diplomatic Relations. This decision was prompted by the filing of an ICJ complaint in September 2018 by the Palestinian Authority against the United States for moving the U.S. Embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem.

    The Vienna Convention is an international treaty which sets out diplomatic relations between states and provides immunity to diplomats. Ironically, Bolton stated: “the United States remains a party to the underlying Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations and we expect all other parties to abide by their international obligations under the convention.”

    Bolton further announced that the United States will review all other international agreements to safeguard U.S. sovereignty. In less than two years of Trump’s presidency, the United States has withdrawn from the nuclear agreement with Iran, the global climate agreement, the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, threatened to distance itself from NATO, left the UN Human Rights Council, and cut off funding to UNRWA (United Nations Relief and Works Agency) which has been providing humanitarian aid to millions of Palestinian refugees for the past 70 years!

    Constitutional lawyers may question the legal right of the Trump administration to abrogate international treaties which are ratified by the U.S. Senate. Shouldn’t the Senate give its consent to the White House before it withdraws from such treaties? In the first 189 years of America’s history, 40 treaties were abrogated after both houses of Congress agreed to do so. Just two treaties were abrogated by the Senate only, after a vote by two-thirds of its members. Unfortunately, in recent years, due to congressional ineptitude and historical inactivity, the Executive Branch has taken the initiative of unilaterally abrogating international treaties. This is an issue that the U.S. Congress should review, particularly if Democrats win the majority, in order to restrain Pres. Trump’s arbitrary decisions which embarrass the United States in the eyes of the world.

    Hopefully, the next more responsible U.S. President will reverse Trump’s deeply flawed decisions on international agreements and other vital issues.

  • Armenia Needs Both Charity & Investments, Not Only Investments!

    Armenia Needs Both Charity & Investments, Not Only Investments!

    Throughout the years, since Armenia’s independence in 1991, I have had the unique opportunity of spending hundreds of hours with the country’s three previous Presidents, discussing privately with them Armenia’s many problems. I offered them my professional assessments and frequently my criticisms of the way they were running the country. Although the Presidents were not pleased that I was pointing out their shortcomings and mistakes, they understood that my intent was not to disparage them, but to help them improve the living conditions of the population.

    Ever since the earthquake of 1988, I have been doing charitable work in Armenia and Artsakh, initially as President of the United Armenian Fund (UAF), subsequently the Armenia Artsakh Fund (AAF), and as Vice Chairman of Kirk Kerkorian’s Lincy Foundation, delivering over $800 million of humanitarian aid to Armenia and Artsakh by the UAF and AAF, and managing $242 million of infrastructure projects funded by Lincy. Despite all the corruption prevailing in Armenia during those years, I fought hard to protect the humanitarian supplies and funds, persistently bringing to the attention of the Presidents the abuses by high-rankling officials, and demanding that they be disciplined or fired.

    During my 58 trips to Armenia and Artsakh, I saw firsthand the miserable conditions of most people in our homeland, deprived of money, food, medicines, clothing and other basic needs. Seeing the Presidents’ neglect of the people’s deprivations, I frequently and forcefully brought their dismal situation to the attention of the country’s leadership.

    I was particularly upset when I heard government officials speaking about Armenia needing investments, not charity. I found such remarks to be callous of the people’s suffering. After each such pronouncement, I confronted these officials explaining the negative effect of their statements.

    Consequently, I was surprised when Armenia’s new Prime Minister, Nikol Pashinyan, a man of the people, during his remarks in New York on September 23, 2018, announced that in the context of Armenia-Diaspora relations, work must be encouraged, not charity: “Armenians can assist Armenia only with one option: carry out economic activity in Armenia, establish any business, and work. Today, Armenia’s understanding is the following: It is a country where it is possible to carry out economic activity, establish a business, earn profits, get rich and enrich. Our message to all of you is the following: get rich and enrich. We want Armenia to be known as such a country. Not charitable, but developmental projects must be implemented in Armenia….”

    To be fair to the Prime Minister, in his speech, he also spoke about many other topics which I agree with whole-heartedly. He has tremendous support both in Armenia and around the world! He has practically eliminated corruption in Armenian society and has represented the voice of the people who had remained voiceless for more than a quarter of a century since independence. However, just as I have told the previous Presidents, I would like to provide the following explanations to the new Prime Minister:

    1) I fully support the Prime Minister’s initiative that Armenia needs economic investments in order to create jobs and expand exports. By creating jobs, not only the people will have the income to pay for their daily expenses, but the government will also have the tax revenues to support the country’s and population’s multiple needs.

    2)  However, the Prime Minister’s urging that “work must be encouraged, not charity,” would deprive hundreds of thousands of poor people of their basic necessities. Investments take time to trickle down to the people and produce results. In the meantime, if charitable efforts are discouraged, many poor people will not survive!

    3) Not all Diaspora Armenians can invest in the Armenian Republic. There are dozens of charitable organizations which by law cannot get involved in economic activities, as they can only do charity. Since the earthquake and Armenia’s independence, Armenian and international charities have provided a large amount of aid to Armenia and Artsakh. If it were not for this humanitarian assistance, the standard of living would have been even lower, jeopardizing the survival of many Armenians. By discouraging charity, we are simply asking charitable organizations not to help the needy people of Armenia.

    4) Armenian governments so far have been unable to meet the many needs of their population due to lack of money. Diaspora’s charitable organizations have provided the aid that the government could not. If there were no charitable assistance in Armenia ever since independence, the people’s many needs would not have been taken care of and Armenia would have been a poorer country!

    5) Even if the Diaspora would start investing in Armenia today, that does not mean that the influx of new funds would take care of all the needs of the people overnight. Certainly, a large number of people would eventually be employed, but many others, such as the elderly, would still be left with hardly any income from their negligible pensions. Those who are unaware of the extent of appalling poverty in Armenia should read the Guardian newspaper’s Sept. 29, 2018 article by Nick Danziger, titled: “‘It’s better to die’: the struggle to survive poverty in Armenia.”

    6) There is the mistaken notion that if there were many investments in Armenia, there would be no need for charity. In almost all countries, even in the most advanced ones, there are hundreds of charitable organizations that tend to the needs of the poor people. In the United States alone, billions of dollars are provided annually to needy individuals and families by charitable organizations. If the Americans require charity, Armenians would certainly need charitable assistance for a long time to come!

    Paradoxically, Prime Minister Pashinyan’s wife, Anna Hakopyan, recently launched her own charitable organization “My Step Foundation” to support educational, healthcare, social and cultural projects. She is doing what’s absolutely necessary because the people of Armenia desperately need help!

  • Prominent Pro-Erdogan Istanbul Armenian Engages in Pro-Turkish Propaganda

    Prominent Pro-Erdogan Istanbul Armenian Engages in Pro-Turkish Propaganda

    Despite the many violations of Armenian cultural and religious rights in Turkey, there are some Armenians in Istanbul who praise the Turkish regime and particularly its fascist President Recep Tayyip Erdogan.

    These few pro-Erdogan Armenians, who enjoy special privileges and access to high-ranking Turkish officials, represent themselves as protectors of the local Armenian community’s interests. But in reality, they have selfish motives. They either have personal business interests with corrupt Turkish leaders or seek to maintain their undeserved positions in Armenian community institutions. One such individual is Bedros Sirinoglu, Chairman of the Board of Sourp Prgich Armenian Hospital in Istanbul.

    In a recent interview with journalist Pinar Isik Ardor of Forum USA, a Turkish American newspaper, Sirinoglu made several false statements about the Armenian community in Turkey and distorted the facts of the Armenian Genocide.

    Sirinoglu’s words were “shocking,” according to Istanbul’s Nor Marmara Armenian newspaper. Sirinoglu told Forum USA that Armenians have never lived as comfortably as they have been during Erdogan’s leadership! He also made untrue statements about the Armenian Genocide, stating that “the events of 1915 were organized by outside powers intending to dismantle and overthrow the Ottoman Empire.”

    Furthermore, Sirinoglu told Forum USA: “Before Erdogan’s time, we could not even paint or repair our churches. We could only do it when the state pretended not to notice such actions.” Sirinoglu repeatedly claimed he has done good deeds for the Armenian community in Turkey. Several years ago, he said he had requested a meeting with Erdogan which was immediately granted. He asked Erdogan to permit the placement of a cross on the dome of the Holy Cross Armenian Church in Akhtamar. He reportedly told Erdogan: “Just as you cannot have a mosque without a minaret, similarly you cannot have a church without a cross.” Sirinoglu claimed that “Erdogan had the cross placed overnight on the Akhtamar church.” If Sirinoglu was so influential, why didn’t he ask Erdogan to restore the status of the Akhtamar as a Armenian church instead of designating it a “museum,” allowing religious services to be performed only once a year! Sirinoglu also ignored the fact that Armenians and others worldwide, including the Armenian Patriarch of Istanbul, had demanded the placement of the cross on the dome of the church. Sirinoglu was not the only one to make such a request.

    Calling them “fictional scenarios,” Sirinoglu contradicted the various Western reports that Armenian religious rights are restricted in Turkey. The 67-year-old Sirinoglu told the Turkish newspaper: “Since my childhood days Armenians have not had any problems.”

    When the Turkish journalist reminded Sirinoglu that some Armenians are not pleased with his words, he responded: “If you don’t speak as they wish, they become hostile. I stand by the state. I do not betray my own country. I am an Armenian, but I am a Turkish compatriot. Our faith orders us to be faithful to the state. Our Bible preaches likewise.”

    Sirinoglu’s most controversial remarks pertain to his misinterpretation of the Armenian Genocide. He stated that “he approaches with suspicion the [Armenian victims’] numbers used regarding 1915.” He added that “Armenians, Jews and Greeks were wealthy in that period, which is why there was enmity against them. Now the Armenian population is gradually decreasing. The birth rate is low. The death rate is high. There are also mixed marriages.”

    When the Turkish journalist asked Sirinoglu if the Armenians, Greeks and Jews share the same point of view, Sirinolglu answered affirmatively and added: “We only disagree about the events of 1915. Greek Patriarch Bartholomew has a reserved and principled position, also regarding the government. The Jews also like the state, but they are also men of principle. They do not abandon their principles. The Jews living here do not betray Turkey, but they are tied to Israel.”

    Finally, Sirinoglu responded to a question regarding the recent decrease in the value of the Turkish Lira. Repeating the same answer given by Erdogan, Sirinoglu blamed foreign powers for orchestrating “this game against the Turkish economy.”

    This is not the first time that Sirinoglu has made such false statements on the Armenian Genocide. For example, after meeting with then Prime Minister Erdogan in 2010, he told the Turkish media that “1915 was nothing more than a feud between loving friends, instigated by third parties.” He went on to say that his “grandfather was among the victims, but so were many Turks.”

    Back in 2010, Armenians in Istanbul launched a petition announcing that Sirinoglu is not their leader and does not represent the Armenian community. Angered by Sirinoglu’s statements, the petitioners stressed: “We live in a different Turkey,” not the Turkey described by Sirinoglu!

  • Trump and Bolton Undermine The International Criminal Court

    Trump and Bolton Undermine The International Criminal Court

    Many Americans and others around the world have been following with great concern the irrational statements and destructive decisions made by Pres. Trump ever since his election.

    Some of the President’s policies on national and international issues have made the United States the laughing stock of the world. The latest such example is the announcement by the White House National Security Adviser John Bolton that the United States will not cooperate with the International Criminal Court; will not allow the Court’s judges to travel to the United States; will sanction their funds in American banks; and prosecute them in U.S. courts.

    According to Wikipedia, “the International Criminal Court (ICC) is an intergovernmental organization and international tribunal that sits in The Hague in the Netherlands. The ICC has the jurisdiction to prosecute individuals for the international crimes of genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes. The ICC is intended to complement existing national judicial systems and it may therefore only exercise its jurisdiction when certain conditions are met, such as when national courts are unwilling or unable to prosecute criminals or when the United Nations Security Council or individual states refer situations to the Court. The ICC began functioning on 1 July 2002, the date that the Rome Statute entered into force. The Rome Statute is a multilateral treaty which serves as the ICC’s foundational and governing document. States which become party to the Rome Statute, for example, by ratifying it, become member states of the ICC. Currently, there are 123 states which are party to the Rome Statute and therefore members of the ICC.”

    John Bolton, the National Security Adviser of Pres. Trump, in a highly critical speech on Sept. 10, 2018, rejected the jurisdiction of the ICC, especially in cases involving accusations against the United States and its allies, particularly Israel.

    Bolton and his boss were incensed by ICC’s investigation of possible crimes committed by U.S. soldiers in Afghanistan and charges brought by the Palestinian National Authority against Israel. To prevent any legal action against American forces, the United States has signed binding agreements with 100 countries not to surrender any U.S. personnel to the ICC. Furthermore, the United States shut down the representative office of Palestine in Washington, D.C., because of the latter’s intention to file charges at the ICC for alleged Israeli violations. This comes on the heels of the White House decision to move the U.S. Embassy to Jerusalem, thus eliminating all possibility for the United States to serve as an honest broker between the Palestinian Authorities and Israel.

    Bolton gave five reasons for the U.S. refusal to cooperate with the ICC:

    The first reason is Bolton’s claim that the ICC “threatens American sovereignty and US national security interests. The prosecutor in The Hague claims essentially unfettered discretion to investigate, charge, and prosecute individuals, regardless of whether their countries have acceded to the Rome Statute.” Bolton’s claim is not accurate. First, all international treaties ratified by the United States supersede national sovereignty, such as the Genocide Convention and many others. Secondly, the ICC has jurisdiction over U.S. citizens only in cases where the U.N. Security Council authorizes the Court to do so. While the United States is not a member of the ICC, it is a Permanent Member of the U.N. Security Council and as such it has veto power over its decisions. Thirdly, the ICC does not get involved in cases where the home country takes legal action against its own citizens.

    Bolton’s second objection is that “the International Criminal Court claims jurisdiction over crimes that have disputed and ambiguous definitions, exacerbating the court’s unfettered powers.” Bolton is concerned that ICC judges would bring charges against the United States, in cases such as the U.S. bombing of Syria in 2017 for its alleged use of chemical weapons. As in any other trial, if the evidence proves that the United States acted illegally, there should be an appropriate verdict. No country is above international law. The U.S. is already protected from such Court actions as a non-member of the ICC. It is ironic that the United States, after preaching for decades to the rest of the world about upholding law and order, is now flouting the very principles that America was founded on!

    Bolton’s third concern is that “the International Criminal Court fails in its fundamental objective to deter and punish atrocity crimes. Since its 2002 inception, the court has spent over $1.5 billion while attaining only eight convictions.” Contrary to Bolton’s assertion, the eight convictions prove that the Court is very deliberate in its judgments and does not pursue every little case around the world, allowing member states to charge their own accused citizens.

    Bolton’s fourth complaint is that “the International Criminal Court is superfluous, given that domestic US judicial systems already hold American citizens to the highest legal and ethical standards.” This is an easily dismissible issue. If the ICC finds that U.S. courts have dealt with a particular crime, it will not interfere. The ICC is a court of last resort. This is one of ICC’s main guidelines.

    Bolton’s fifth criticism is that “the International Criminal Court’s authority has been sharply criticized and rejected by most of the world. Today, more than 70 nations…are not members of the ICC.” While 70 countries are not yet members of ICC, 123 countries are members! Over time, more nations will join the ICC, as is the case with other international conventions.

    Rather than argue against the rule of law, the United States should be the first to join such international legal institutions. By rejecting the ICC and considering it to be “dead,” as Bolton described it, the United States is simply encouraging the impunity of brutal regimes and dictators around the world!

  • Congress Must Investigate U.S. Loans To Secretive Azeri Silk Way Airlines

    Congress Must Investigate U.S. Loans To Secretive Azeri Silk Way Airlines

    Last year, I wrote an article reporting that the Silk Way Airlines of Azerbaijan made 350 secret flights to transport hundreds of tons of weapons from Bulgaria to ISIS terrorists in Syria and other Middle Eastern countries between 2014 and 2017.

    We now have a new surprising revelation that Silk Way received $419.5 million of loans from the U.S. Export-Import Bank (EXIM) to buy three 747-8 cargo planes from Boeing to continue its sinister operations.

    The disclosure was made by a reporter for the Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project (OCCRP) by filing a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request with the U.S. government in 2016. It is noteworthy that Silk Way, “owned by a company with past ties to Azerbaijan’s Aliyev family, won some lucrative contracts from the U.S. military,” according to FOIA documents.

    In fact, “Silk Way was given contracts worth more than $400 million with the U.S. Defense Department’s Transportation Command for more than decade,” according to Devansh Mehta of OCCRP. Silk Way transported “ammunition and other non-lethal materials” to Afghanistan as of 2005. “In addition to its relationship with the U.S. government, Silk Way Airlines has also worked as a subcontractor for the Canadian Department of National Defense, the German armed forces, and the French army,” Mehta revealed.

    In April 2017, Silk Way increased its purchases from Boeing, signing a $1 billion deal for 10 new 737 MAX passenger planes, according to reporter Mehta. However, it is not known how the new acquisition was financed. Last October, Silk Way announced plans to buy two more 747-8 cargo planes.

    Mehta disclosed that “the airline is owned by Silk Way Group, which, at least at one point, was closely associated with Azerbaijan’s ruling Aliyev family (which has used its planes for private trips) and has benefited from benevolent state deals. Information obtained through FOIA shows that Silk Way Airlines took steps to conceal its owners’ identity, perhaps to improve its chances of winning the valuable U.S. loan guarantees and military contracts.”

    Mehta added that “Azerbaijan ranks 122nd out of 180 countries in Transparency International’s corruption perception index, while President Ilham Aliyev’s family owns luxury properties around the world worth over $140 million. The Panama Papers and other leaks have implicated the country’s first family as being involved in nearly all sectors of the Azerbaijani economy, from luxury hotels to mining to banking.”

    According to the terms of the Export-Import Bank’s $419.5 million loan to Silk Way, in case of default the loss would be repaid by the state-owned International Bank of Azerbaijan (IBA). The problem is that IBA has been “implicated in the Azerbaijani Laundromat, a massive scheme that pumped nearly $3 billion out of the country through various shell companies,” Mehta wrote. Furthermore, IBA is not in a position to guarantee the Silk Way loan, as the IBA itself declared bankruptcy in 2015, unable to pay its $3.3 billion debt!

    Nate Schenkkan, project director of the Nations in Transit report at Freedom House, a US-based nonprofit that monitors democracy and human rights around the world, questioned the wisdom of EXIM Bank’s loan to Silk Way: “In Azerbaijan, where one family dominates economically and politically, and is then using state institutions to back its economic projects, there’s an obvious conflict of interest.”

    Arzu Aliyeva, Pres. Aliyev’s 21-year-old daughter in 2010, was one of the three owners of Silk Way Bank, the financial arm of Silk Way Holding. Since 2017, her name is no longer mentioned as an owner. “Silk Way Holding, also referred to as Silk Way Group (SW Group) on its website, is a conglomerate that has currently listed 11 companies in its portfolio, including the airline,” according to Mehta.

    Silk Way Holding dominated Azerbaijan’s aviation sector after the state carrier AZAL airlines was privatized in a highly secretive manner without any bids and tenders. Mehta wrote that “a similar privatization of the telecom sector ended up with the [Aliyev] family earning about $1 billion in bribes in cash and share value, according to an earlier OCCRP story. The investigation also found that the money was funneled to the first family through various secret offshore companies. These companies have enabled the Aliyevs to control stakes in gold mines, telecommunications and construction businesses in Azerbaijan.”

    According to a filing in 2006, Silk Way Airlines was owned by IHC (International Handling Company), an offshore entity based in the British Virgin Islands. In a 2017 filing, Silk Way Airlines stated that 40% of the company was owned by IHC, while 60% was owned by SW Holding, “effectively controlled” by Zaur Akhundov, an Azerbaijani citizen. Mehta stated that “IHC is linked to the Aliyev family through its director Jaouad Dbila who reportedly served as a proxy for the first family’s business interests in the past.”

    In 2011, a Russian-born manager, Grigory Yurkov, was given power of attorney for both Silk Way Holding and IHC, according to Luxembourg’s official gazette. This appointment was used as a means to conceal the true owners of IHC.

    Meanwhile, Zaur Akhundov had mysteriously become the 100% owner of the entire Silk Way Group in 2014. By that time, the firm and its many holdings were already worth billions of dollars, Mehta declared, based on the company’s loan guarantee application. Akhundov, 50, had held several official positions in Azerbaijan. “It is unclear how Akhundov became the owner of a billion-dollar conglomerate with more than 10 aircrafts, an insurance company, a construction company and an aircraft maintenance company, to name a few of the enterprises in the Silk Way Group,” Mehta wondered.

    According Schenkkan of Freedom House, “Azerbaijan can be described as a centralized, vertical pyramid where the benefits go to one family that collects rents throughout the economy. This includes all sorts of transactions, not only official state transactions that might involve taxes and public funds, but also things that involve what we normally consider the private sector: import-export, consumer goods, transport — any area of the economy, the family has a stake in it and receives a cut on what takes place.”

    The U.S. Congress should hold a hearing to investigate the appropriateness of EXIM Bank’s $419.5 million loan guarantee to Silk Way Airlines, its arms shipments to terrorist groups in the Middle East, and its hidden ownership by the ruling Aliyev family. After all, why should Azerbaijan, a country with billions of petrodollars, be given a U.S. loan?

  • Russia’s Ekaterinburg joins the final race to host EXPO 2025

    Russia’s Ekaterinburg joins the final race to host EXPO 2025

    ekspo2025

     

     

     

     

     

    In less than 50 days the EXPO-2025 Committee will name the Planet’s Exhibition host city. Among the final candidates are Russia’s Ekaterinburg, Azerbaijan’s Baku and Japan’s Osaka. While demonstration concepts of Baku and Osaka are designed to present the city innovations, the exposition of Ekaterinburg will show the best solutions and technologies of Russia as a whole.

    Why does Russia need EXPO?

    The choice of Russia’s candidate city Ekaterinburg is truly deliberate. Located on the crossroads of Europe and Asia, Ekaterinburg is seen as a geographical center of Russia. As Russia’s political and economic compass is set to the East, hosting the planet’s exhibition in Ekaterinburg will help Moscow strengthen its economic and trade ties with China, Japan and other global economies in the East. Moreover, Russia’s officials say they are going to keep the exposition after the Expo is over and turn Ekaterinburg into a global museum that will attract thousands of tourists. Some experts believe that Ekaterinburg has higher chances to win the Planet’s Expo as it recently showed its capacity and excellent organization to host global events during the World Cup. Due to the city’s compact and convenient infrastructure, Ekaterinburg was able to receive up to 40K tourists a day during the FIFA WC-2018.

    City 4.0

    The EXPO venue will host the Ural Engineering School, e.g. the innovations booths for scientific research and investigation in math, physics, biology and other sciences. “The concept of such booths is attractive both for experienced scientists and small children who are in search of their vocation”, said Ivan Burtnik, the head of the project office of the EXPO-2025 Committee. “There are 17 million people in the world today who live in contaminated areas, 2.4 million do not have access to drinking water, 800 million live in poverty and another 360 million are children who will never have chance to go to school. We must think of it and focus on decreasing these terrific numbers. Today’s global challenge is to keep pace with the industrial development and creating a new formation urban infrastructure, the cities where everyone is healthy and happy. And Ekaterinburg is going to be such model city that will continue its development and growth the World Exhibition”, he added.