Safe Mode: On
Russia Refuses Route For NATO Supplies

ISLAMABAD – Russia has formally conveyed to NATO that it would not allow its soil to be used for transporting NATO military supplies to Afghanistan while it (Russia) can only allow transportation of the non-military consignments across the border.

Credible diplomatic sources confided to TheNation that after unknown miscreants had torched more than three dozens NATO oil tankers in Quetta last Thursday, the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation had formally contacted the Russian Government to discuss the option of using Russian land as transit route for the transportation of NATO cargoes to Afghanistan.
Russia has reportedly conveyed to NATO that it would only allow the transportation of non-military items like food, medicines, tents and other related usable commodities and that there was not even a slightest possibility for the NATO to transport military consignments to Afghanistan via Russia.

Sources believe that Russia’s adamant stance towards NATO military cargo is embedded with mistrust that thoroughly evolves around Russia-NATO relationship.
Russia has had been accusing NATO of uncalled for interference in Eastern Europe since long. NATO’s presumed military aid to Georgia, Ukraine and Estonia is strongly opposed by Russia.

The Organisation is reportedly instrumental in flaring up Russia over territory row with Georgia as the Western military alliance backs Georgia over its claim on South Ossetia, a disputed territory between Georgia and Russia. Back in 2008, Russian forces had bombarded Georgian cities Tbilisi and Gori and South Ossetian capital Tskhinvali, over the same dispute.

Submitted by Masroor on October 13, 2010


Click to view image: 'Northern Supply Route'

Added: Oct-13-2010 Occurred On: Oct-13-2010
By: khamomil
In:
Afghanistan, Other, Middle East
Tags: Afghanistan, supply route, Russia,
Marked as: approved
Views: 10976 | Comments: 22 | Votes: 1 | Favorites: 1 | Shared: 0 | Updates: 0 | Times used in channels: 1
You need to be registered in order to add comments! Register HERE
Sort by: Newest first | Oldest first | Highest score first
Liveleak opposes racial slurs - if you do spot comments that fall into this category, please report them for us to review.
  • Bush was a god damn idiot to send our troops there and Obama has proven to be an even bigger idiot for continuing this bull shit!!!!!!!!!! I hope that fucker steps down or is ousted in 2 years just for not having the back bone to say enough and stop this crap immediately.

    Posted Oct-13-2010 By 

    (3)

  • NATO means US bought out nations their agenda is Energy,and natural resources in foreign lands. Kinda like proxy armies in foreign lands with no accountability. I don't blame Russia .That is the Same NATO that Bill Clinton and Mad Albright painted US bombers blue and bombed Serbia's civilian population,

    Posted Oct-14-2010 By 

    (3)

  • Messy article with no source and some mistakes, but the basis is true, the Russians will play this one like a fiddle...watching the same people who funded the Muj get bogged down into a war of attrition in Afghan with no sign of a breakthrough will give them the ultimate Schadenfreude...they can thank the US Reps for giving them the pleasure

    Posted Oct-13-2010 By 

    (2)

    • Comment of user 'nurdmyth' has been deleted by author!
    • hey buddy "choice" is better than "no choice" :D

      Posted Oct-14-2010 By 

      (0)

    • Comment of user 'nurdmyth' has been deleted by author!
  • It's to Russia's advantage to keep us fighting in Afghanistan. I don't think they want us to win or leave, just stay there with no end in sight grinding up men and equipment. They were there, and now we are in their shoes.
    Same idea will have the same results. Soviets had even bigger body counts of Afghans, and still left because the body count doesn't really matter, control does.

    Posted Oct-13-2010 By 

    (2)

  • Ya I don't personally give a shit about Iraq or Afghanistan. It's killing more people than it will save. Terrorists are going to be terrorists, we don't need to send the bulk of our military to go fight some costly war for 10 years at a time. It will empty our pockets which are already only full of china's money. Even after we "liberate" these countries they are still going to be radically muslim, fuck em, come home. if they nuke a city of ours, they can kiss their world goodbye.

    Posted Oct-13-2010 By 

    (2)

  • this is russia's way of saying 'i told you so' to the US for supplying the mujs during the afghan soviet war.

    Posted Oct-14-2010 By 

    (2)

  • This is the source to the information:

    http://www.nation.com.pk/pakistan-news-newspaper-daily-english-online/Politics/13-Oct-2010/Russia-refuses-route-for-NATO-supplies

    Posted Oct-13-2010 By 

    (1)

  • Interesting article on this subject:
    > http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-prados/afghanistan-handwriting-o_b_758098.html

    Posted Oct-14-2010 By 

    (1)

  • I hope this doesn't hold up the TAPI pipeline.

    Posted Oct-13-2010 By 

    (0)

  • Comment of user '' has been deleted by moderator!
  • waaaaaaah.

    Posted Oct-14-2010 By 

    (0)

  • Comment of user 'fukthelaw' has been deleted by moderator!
  • Comment of user '' has been deleted by moderator!
  • I dont understand...Russians get killed by afghans each year in the Caucasus but wont allow a route because of politics. Get your fucking priorities right russia.

    Posted Oct-14-2010 By 

    (-2)