Replies

I'm from Kazakhstan, and you're right - i'm Russian-speaking.

She worked for the weekly Novaya Gazeta, Russia's last independent newspaper.
There many the oppositional and independent newspapers in Russia, is simple at them a small rating.
Russians steady immunity to criticism of the West from the moment of disorder of the USSR
and the newspaper (sounding positions of democratic parties) have low demand.

Western policy toward Russia has been an unmitigated failure since Vladimir Putin became president on New Year's Eve 1999.
Every year since then, the Russian government has moved further away from both the United States
and the European Union, and Western influence over Russia has waned.

The West has lost Russia much earlier. Simply there not was a politics in Russia which could sound a position of a greater
part of the population. (Zhirinovsky is not counted.)
" Democracy in Russia has been finally killed by the first bomb fallen to Yugoslavia" (C).
The West has disturbed all arrangements accepted at disintegration of the USSR. Russian have apprehended it as attempt to finish their country.

Western policy toward Russia has been an unmitigated failure since Vladimir Putin became president on New Year's Eve 1999.
Every year since then, the Russian government has moved further away from both the United States and the European Union, and Western influence over Russia has waned.

Leonov expresses exclusively the position. The Kremlin declares daily, that " cold war " is finished and it will not be to return.
Active work on normalization of relations with the EU is conducted.
As if to the USA, the Kremlin simply plays with them in a chess.
There nobody doubts in Russia, that problems of Russian in Georgia are organized by the USA.
(periodic statements of high-ranking officials of Washington confirm it).
In the answer the Kremlin creates the USA problems on other fronts, NK, Iran.... The Vivid example - last exchange of two figures can - the USA have handed over Georgia in the UN, Russia has softened a position on NK.

A year ago, the Kremlin cheered when Uzbekistan evicted a large U.S. air base, and now it is encouraging Kyrgyzstan to do the same.
Uzbekistan has difficult relations with RF, and Kirghizia too poor country to throw out investors.
While Americans pay their base will be in Kirghizia.

Meanwhile, state-controlled Russian media spew out nationalist and anti-Western propaganda.
Every evening after the first state channel's main newscast, one of the Kremlin's foremost propagandists,
Mikhail Leontiev, delivers his daily diatribe against the West.

Nationalist? Russia the multinational country. If the Kremlin has allowed to conduct nationalist propagation on the central channels it would break off the country on a part.
By the way, the author repeats.

The G-8 summit in St. Petersburg in July became a symbol of all that is wrong with Western policy toward Russia. For three days, the Western leaders participated in this televised celebration of Putin's new authoritarian powers, and they got nothing in return. Authoritarian ? Why ? Look at the Putin's rating.
Putin was the DEMOCRATIC CHOSEN LEADER, and people supports him.
It's other question that Putin's actions like Russians instead of the West.

By contrast, in St. Petersburg it was President Bush who endured Putin's insult ("We certainly would not want to have the same kind of democracy as they have in Iraq.").
CanYou tell fairly, would You like to have the same democracy as in Iraq in the Your country ? Good joke.
The fundamental problem of Western policy toward Russia is that it is still based on the idea that the Cold War is over.
Really ?
Why the arrangement with Gorbachev about Baltic has been disturbed?
For what the sanitary cordon is created around of Russia ?
For what the bases of NATO and the USA are created around of Russia?
Why sounds the aggressive rhetoric basically in a direction of Russia during 16 years?
What percent of articles carries in itself the positive information on Russia?

The West has retained the same friendly but half-hearted policy toward Russia it pursued under Boris Yeltsin. But Putin is no Yeltsin. In fact, Putin is the anti-Yeltsin. What ever Yeltsin was, Putin is not. Whatever policy the West pursued toward Yeltsin should be replaced with its opposite--with a few exceptions: Not even Putin wants to revive Communist ideol ogy, and Russia remains a market economy.

Although poorly understood in the West, Yeltsin was a democrat, as Leon Aron shows in his excellent biography. Yeltsin believed in free and fair elections and free media. Putin, by contrast, is a secret policeman. In his book First Person, made up of in terviews, he marvels at his own skillful repression of dissidents.

Excuse me, but I do not wish to make comments on this hysterical set of stamps.

Adequate article can be seen seldom, and similar articles simply correspond one with another, words a little change, but stamps remain.