Russian modern Geo-politics

[lashachochua]

Is Russia trying to manage world order in different way?
Does Russia has strength to be called the superpower?
Does Russian Geo-politics is only "oil-Geo-politics" which very soon will be ended?
Does Russia still beleive that international politics is zero-sum game?
Is Russia right when it opposes western countries?
Does Russia realise that in modern geo-politics the role of China is getting more and more vital?
Does Russia want to become a world superpower or just will be satisfied being regional superpower?
If Russia will control the parts consisting Post-Soviet countries, will the theory of heartland apply in a new way for russia to become the world superpower?
Does Russia has geo-political ideology for global manoeuvre?
Does Russia has social, political and cultural ideology for servicing global positioning of russia?
What does really the ideology of "Russian Soul" implies, does russian soul differ from that of western countries?

Let's discuss all these topics and try to understand what are the goals of Russia?

[lashachochua]

Some notes about heartland theory...

The doctrine of Geopolitics gained attention largely through the work of Sir Halford Mackinder in England and his formulation of the Heartland Theory in 1904. The doctrine involved concepts diametrically opposed to the notion of Alfred Thayer Mahan about the significance of navies (he coined the term sea power) in world conflict. The Heartland theory hypothesized the possibility for a huge empire being brought into existence in the Heartland, which wouldn't need to use coastal or transoceanic transport to supply its military industrial complex but would instead use railways, and that this empire couldn't be defeated by all the rest of the world against it.

The basic notions of Mackinder's doctrine involve considering the geography of the Earth as being divided into two sections, the World Island, comprising Eurasia and Africa; and the Periphery, including the Americas, the British Isles, and Oceania. Not only was the Periphery noticeably smaller than the World Island, it necessarily required much sea transport to function at the technological level of the World Island, which contained sufficient natural resources for a developed economy. Also, the industrial centers of the Periphery were necessarily located in widely separated locations. The World Island could send its navy to destroy each one of them in turn. It could locate its own industries in a region further inland than the Periphery could,so they would have a longer struggle reaching them, and would be facing a well-stocked industrial bastion. This region Mackinder termed the Heartland. It essentially comprised Ukraine, Western Russia, and Mitteleuropa. The Heartland contained the grain reserves of Ukraine, and many other natural resources. Mackinder's notion of geopolitics can be summed up in his saying "Who rules East Europe commands the Heartland. Who rules the Heartland commands the World-Island. Who rules the World-Island commands the World." His doctrine was influential during the World Wars and the Cold War, for Germany and later Russia each made territorial strides toward the Heartland.

Mackinder's geopolitical theory has been criticised as being too sweeping, his interpretation of human history and geography too simple and mechanistic. In his analysis of the importance of mobility, and the move from sea to rail transport, he failed to predict the revolutionary impact of air power. Critically also he underestimated the importance of social organization in the development of power

[lashachochua]

Except for religious conflicts and the petty wars of feudal lords, wars are primarily fought over resources and trade. President Woodrow Wilson recognized that this was the cause of World War I: “Is there any man, is there any woman, let me say any child here that does not know that the seed of war in the modern world is industrial and commercial rivalry?”

J.W. Smith, Economic Democracy: The Political Struggle for the Twenty-First Century, (M.E. Sharpe, 2000), p.58

Should we think that Russia's goal in Russian-Georgian conflict was industrial and commercial? I do not think so, as the economic consequences of this conflict does not tell the same story, but is there some long-term industrial goals? I think no...Because Russia by these actions lost its face of "trusty partner"

But smith idea very well characterize the period which I call economic-effusive Globalization...

[Eka]

Its for those persons who understans Franch:
interesting position about Russian politics and past expiriance they have:
Point de vue
Lourd héritage soviétique, par Thierry Wolton
LE MONDE | 03.09.08 | 13h45 • Mis à jour le 03.09.08 | 13h45

a plupart des analyses et commentaires consacrés à la crise russo-géorgienne passent sous silence l'héritage communiste qu'elle révèle. La chute de l'URSS date d'un peu moins de deux décennies, mais nous semblons avoir tout oublié. Or, il est difficile de comprendre ce qui se passe dans le Caucase sans intégrer cet héritage.


Nombre de bons esprits justifient la politique actuelle de la Russie en invoquant la continuité avec l'Union soviétique tout en négligeant la dimension communiste de ce que fut cette entité. On nous assène comme une évidence que Moscou veut simplement retrouver les frontières de l'URSS comme si celles-ci lui appartenaient de droit. Drôle de conception de l'histoire.

L'URSS s'est construite dans le feu et le sang, par l'écrasement des peuples du Caucase et d'autres encore, à l'ouest, au nord de ses frontières. Elle s'est consolidée par la mise en coupe réglée des peuples qui occupaient ces régions, à qui fut imposé le système communiste. Des centaines de milliers d'hommes, de femmes et d'enfants ont été assassinés ou déportés massivement, payant de leur vie cet impérialisme. Invoquer les frontières de l'URSS pour excuser aujourd'hui la politique de la Russie est une forme de négationnisme lorsqu'on oublie le drame de cette histoire.

Pourquoi escamoter ce passé quand les dirigeants russes en sont imprégnés ? C'est le précédent soviétique qu'ils ont en tête quand ils revendiquent de nouveaux droits impériaux. Vladimir Poutine, dont nul ne peut douter qu'il dirige à Moscou, est un nostalgique de l'URSS. Ne proclama-t-il pas, dès son entrée en fonctions, à la fin des années 1990, que la chute du système soviétique avait été la pire catastrophe jamais arrivée à la Russie ? Ce n'est pas l'Union soviétique en stagnation de l'époque de Brejnev que regrette Poutine mais celle triomphante et criminogène de Staline.

Les historiens russes ont pour devoir, sur ordre du Kremlin, de réhabiliter le dictateur, d'en faire un héros de la nation. Ajoutons qu'aucun dirigeant actuel n'a cru bon, jusqu'à présent, d'exprimer la moindre repentance pour ce passé. Au contraire, Poutine et les hommes en uniforme qui l'entourent se réclament avec fierté de la tradition tchékiste, du nom de cette police politique connue sous diverses appellations (GPU, NKVD, KGB...) qui fut le bras armé du Parti communiste, l'exécuteur de ses basses oeuvres.

Osons une comparaison hardie mais pertinente. Si au milieu des années 1960, soit deux décennies environ après la défaite du nazisme, l'Allemagne avait été dirigée par des nostalgiques de Hitler, plus grave encore par les héritiers spirituels des SS et de la Gestapo (ce que fut à la fois l'ancien KGB dont sont issus Poutine et son entourage). Imaginons encore que cette Allemagne décide, par exemple, de récupérer les Sudètes. Parlerions-nous avec autant de désinvolture de "frontières naturelles" ?

C'est parce que les Géorgiens n'ont pas oublié ce que fut l'occupation soviétique qu'ils ne veulent surtout pas d'un retour en arrière. De même pour les Moldaves, la Crimée, l'Ukraine (les prochains sur la liste de cette recomposition de l'URSS d'antan ?), sans parler des pays de l'Europe centrale et orientale ni des Baltes, nos compatriotes européens. Tous ces peuples ne sont pas frappés par notre amnésie et craignent la politique impériale de Moscou.

On peut certes évoquer les racines slaves présentes dans certains de ces pays pour légitimer la politique du Kremlin, mais pourquoi alors ne pas laisser aux peuples concernés le choix de décider s'ils souhaitent ou non s'abriter dans le giron moscovite ? Le régime poutinien, qui hait la démocratie, de crainte d'avoir un jour à rendre des comptes à des électeurs libres, n'est guère dans cette logique. La militarocratie au pouvoir au Kremlin conçoit le monde en termes de rapports de forces. Ces tchékistes, orphelins de Staline, ne connaissent pas d'autre culture politique.

Une Russie démocratique ne se serait pas lancée dans cette aventure militaire. Quant au discours qui consiste à interpréter la politique du Kremlin comme une réaction à l'encerclement occidental, à inverser la culpabilité en accusant Washington d'avoir poussé Moscou à réagir, il fait également fi de la nature particulière de ce régime. La diplomatie de nuisance pratiquée par Poutine sur la scène internationale depuis quelques années (chantage au gaz, blocage sur le nucléaire iranien, front commun avec la Chine, armement de la Syrie...) a de quoi susciter la méfiance occidentale. Cette diplomatie s'inscrit dans la logique de la politique menée par le Kremlin à l'intérieur du pays. Un régime qui opprime son peuple représente toujours un danger pour ses voisins. Après avoir muselé les Russes, la militarocratie poutinienne passe à l'offensive à l'extérieur. Et à l'instar de tout régime fort, celui-ci sait jouer du nationalisme pour faire croire à sa légitimité (les JO de Pékin ont fourni sur ce point une démonstration exemplaire).

Entériner le coup de force du Kremlin au nom du fatalisme géopolitique (la prétendue "zone d'influence" de Moscou) est le pire des services à rendre au peuple russe, à la Russie elle-même et à ses voisins. Un Poutine libre de faire ce qu'il veut en Géorgie se sentira encouragé à opprimer davantage encore son peuple et à lorgner sur d'autres prétendus dominions proches. Une blague de l'époque soviétique disait que l'URSS avait des frontières avec qui elle voulait. Ce n'est pas (encore) le cas avec la Russie actuelle mais l'homme fort du Kremlin en rêve sans doute.

Dans cette crise il ne faut pas se tromper d'analyse. La question caucasienne ne consacre pas un retour sur la scène internationale de la puissance russe mais sanctionne plutôt l'extrême difficulté qu'éprouve ce pays à sortir du communisme faute d'avoir su et voulu, jusqu'à présent, regarder son terrible passé en face. Au-delà des logiques d'Etat, il y a dans la situation présente une dimension morale essentielle qui devrait conforter nos démocraties dans leur bon droit par rapport à un adversaire (n'ayons pas peur du mot) qui aimerait bien imposer son ordre en Europe après avoir réussi à le faire chez lui, en s'inspirant d'une histoire condamnée par le sens commun.
Thierry Wolton est historien, spécialiste des systèmes communistes.

<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.inopressa.ru/print/lemonde/2008/09/04/10:27:48/estate">http://www.inopressa.ru/print/lemonde/2 ... :48/estate</a><!-- m --> . Same in Rusian

[Eka]

Its interesting too: <!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.inopressa.ru/print/lemonde/2008/09/04/10:27:48/estate">http://www.inopressa.ru/print/lemonde/2 ... :48/estate</a><!-- m -->

[Simon A]

Opinion of the ossetic party: <!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://osinform.ru/index.php?action_ski">http://osinform.ru/index.php?action_ski</a><!-- m --> ... me=full_en
Genocide in ossetia: <!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://64.233.179.104/translate?u=http">http://64.233.179.104/translate?u=http</a><!-- m -->% ... uage_tools
Paul Craig Roberts: BUSH PUSHING WORLD TOWARD ARMAGEDDON <!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.americanfreepress.net/html/b">http://www.americanfreepress.net/html/b</a><!-- m --> ... n_148.html

[Salomo]

I would like especially EU1 to read that article in Le Monde. Then we could debate about it, in French if necessary...

Yes, if Russia would not be part in this conflict, who knows on whose "side" I would be in this propaganda war...

[Eka]

This post is for topic about Russian geopolitics? i supose yes.its there methods of geopolitics and lifestyle.

[Eka]

It must be here-http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-EGLdeWMVSU&feature=related
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BCPq1zzOVzc&feature=related">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BCPq1zzO ... re=related</a><!-- m -->

[Balkaneese]

..., does russian soul differ from that of western countries?

It does.

[lashachochua]

..., does russian soul differ from that of western countries?

It does.

In Russian, the Soul Is Key to Self-Expression
By Robert Coalson
Of course, everyone has heard of the velikaya russkaya dusha, or great Russian soul. It is that strange, mystical quality which enables Russians to claim that they are more spiritual than Westerners, even though foreigners generally come to Russia to find the spirit of Tolstoy and Dostoevsky while Russians often visit the West for some good shopping.

But I maintain that just a quick survey of the Russian language is enough to convince one that Russia really does have a more penetrating, all-encompassing conception of "the soul" than most other nations. Those who have read Nikolai Gogol's satiric masterpiece "Myortvye Dushy," or "Dead Souls," already know that in many circumstances the Russian word dusha is a synonym for chelovek (person). Russians seem never to have bought into the Hellenistic division of mind, body and soul that post-Enlightenment Europe adopted.

Like English-speakers, a Russian entering an empty room might remark, ne vidno ni dushy (there's not a soul to be seen). However, Russian also has expressions like zhit dusha v dushu (to live in peace and harmony) or dusha bolit (to be worried about something). Of a poor person, it is said, u neyo za dushoi ni grosha (she doesn't have a grosh to her soul, a grosh being an old Russian coin).

Etot razgovor mnye ne po dushe (I don't feel like having this conversation) is a useful expression which can disguise mere petulance as spirituality. The next time your friends suggest another trip out to Izmailovo, you can turn up your nose and say chto-to mnye ne po dushe tuda sevodnya yekhat - literally, for some reason my soul is not up to going there today.

Russian also has a fabulous expression for someone who becomes afraid when faced with sudden danger, u nevo dusha ushla v pyatki - literally, his soul ran into his heels. Sometimes this expression is rendered even more dramatically as u nego dusha upala v pyatki - his soul fell into his heels.

Clearly, in the Russian language, the soul is the key to a person's identity and behavior. U neyo dusha naraspashku - her soul is wide open, an open book - Russians say about someone who is honest and sincere. When a person is worried, they say u nevo dusha ne na meste (literally, his soul isn't in the right place) or eto u nevo tyazhelo na dushe (that is heavy on his soul). When a person really wants something or is particularly excited by some idea, u nevo dusha gorit - his soul is on fire.

Clearly the Russian soul is far busier than your average Western soul,which is generally only dragged out on Sundays and special occasions. There is one other moment that Western and Russian souls have in common though. When the time come, we all must otdat bogu dushu - give up our souls to God.

But I think this is the old language just existing by inertia.....Or Russian soul is important for a small number of people...By the way, it is interesting to know what is the role of Russian Church in modern russian reasoning

[lashachochua]

All russian here claimed that they have solid understanding of Geopolitics :haha :haha But it seems that none of them have desire to provide a single comment. Hey, You modern russian geopoliticians unit, Putin Mother is calling!!!

[SiD]

I do not think that many russians realy think about Russia as superpower. Great country is more suitable. Even this title needs achieving still. But one dont need to be superpower do defend its interests.

[lashachochua]

I do not think that many russians realy think about Russia as superpower. Great country is more suitable. Even this title needs achieving still. But one dont need to be superpower do defend its interests.

SiD, just read the first comment......There are a lot of questions which does not touch the question of Russia being superpower. Be more attentive plz...

[lashachochua]

"To Russia, international politics is still a zero-sum game in which there must be losers if there are to be winners. With most of the soft power it inherited from the Soviet Union gone, mostly due to its often brutal handling of its relations with countries that surround it, what remains is a strategy that involves actions that generally tend to make neighbouring governments even more anxious"

<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://perspectivesonrussia.wordpress.com/2007/09/25/russian-geopolitics-of-2007/">http://perspectivesonrussia.wordpress.c ... s-of-2007/</a><!-- m -->

[lashachochua]

I do not think that many russians realy think about Russia as superpower. Great country is more suitable. Even this title needs achieving still. But one dont need to be superpower do defend its interests.

Are you sure that Putin also thinks in this way...I am not sure about it...And if Putin does not think in this way, who cares what Russian people really thinks, where is the voice of Russian People...I do not hear it...The only voice coming from Russia is VOICE of PUTIN!

"Russia is, however, not only seeking leverage in its own backyard, but increasingly also on global issues. It has e.g. turned into a fierce opponent of most of the stuff the United States is advocating on everything from Sudan to Iran, Kosovo and North Korea. This is not very surprising. President Putin has on a number of occasions voiced his opposition to the American hegemony in global affairs and during the past years these attacks have grown even fiercer. Putin says that he wants a multipolar world instead of the unipolar one he claims we are living in today. That is not really true. Putin would not really care about unipolareness was Russia the dominating power of the globe and to strengthen the influence of China, India and other potential power hubs is definitely not on his to-do list. This is about Russia and her geopolitical position and, if this is a zero-sum game and if it is to be strengthened, someone else’s has to be weakened. And now, Moscow thinks, this someone has made a wrong move in this global game of chess".

<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://perspectivesonrussia.wordpress.com/2007/09/25/russian-geopolitics-of-2007/">http://perspectivesonrussia.wordpress.c ... s-of-2007/</a><!-- m -->

[lashachochua]

The Karamazov Brothers

The brothers represent three aspects of man's being:
reason (Ivan)
emotion (Dmitry)
faith (Alesha).

I do wonder how many Ivans, Dmitrys and Aleshas are in Russian Population...

[Lenus]

US condemns Russia over Georgia
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7597336.stm">http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7597336.stm</a><!-- m -->


Mr Cheney is the most senior US official to visit Tbilisi since the conflict
US Vice-President Dick Cheney has condemned what he called Russia's "illegitimate" attempt to change Georgia's borders last month.

Mr Cheney added that Russia's actions during the recent conflict with Georgia had cast doubt on its reliability as an international partner.

He also said the US was fully committed to Georgia's efforts to join Nato.

Mr Cheney was in Tbilisi a day after the US announced a $1bn (£564m) aid package to help rebuild Georgia.

Russia's actions have cast grave doubt on Russia's intentions and on its reliability as an international partner

Dick Cheney
US vice-president

The conflict between Georgia and Russia erupted on 7 August after Georgia tried to retake the breakaway region of South Ossetia by force.

Russian forces launched a counter-attack and the conflict ended with the ejection of Georgian troops from South Ossetia and another breakaway region, Abkhazia.

Russia has since recognised the independence of both regions, and earlier this week dismissed Georgian President Mikhail Saakashvili as a "political corpse" whose leadership it did not recognise.

Energy route

Mr Cheney was speaking at a news briefing in Tbilisi, standing beside President Saakashvili.

"After your nation won its freedom in the Rose Revolution, America came to the aid of this courageous young democracy," Mr Cheney said.

"We are doing so again as you work to overcome an invasion of your sovereign territory and an illegitimate unilateral attempt to change your country's borders by force that has been universally condemned by the free world.




Q&A: Conflict in Georgia
Cheney in ex-Soviet energy call
"Russia's actions have cast grave doubt on Russia's intentions and on its reliability as an international partner - not just in Georgia but across this region and, indeed, throughout the international system," he added.

Georgia has been a significant troop contributor to US operations in Iraq, and it is a key link in the only energy export route from Central Asia westwards that does not pass through Russian territory.

However, the aid package announced on Wednesday is limited to helping re-settle refugees and rebuild Georgia's infrastructure, and the BBC's diplomatic correspondent Jonathan Marcus says it remains unclear how far the US and its Nato allies are prepared to go in re-arming its military.

On Wednesday, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) also announced that Georgia was to receive a $750m (£422m) loan.

Russian President Dmitry Medvedev has accused the US of helping Tbilisi build its war machine, and criticised its decision to send humanitarian aid to Georgia aboard military ships.

Faced with a chorus of international calls for Russia's isolation as a result of the war, Mr Medvedev said Moscow did not fear being expelled from the G8 group of rich nations nor did it fear Nato cutting ties with his country.

Early this week, EU leaders agreed to suspend talks on a new partnership agreement with Moscow until Russian troops had withdrawn from Georgia, but they did not threaten sanctions.

Mr Cheney, who was in Azerbaijan on Wednesday, will end his tour of the region in Ukraine later on Thursday

[SiD]

All russian here claimed that they have solid understanding of Geopolitics But it seems that none of them have desire to provide a single comment. Hey, You modern russian geopoliticians unit, Putin Mother is calling!!!

there are many questions and some are difficult to answer so give a little time.

[Salomo]

Russia is, however, not only seeking leverage in its own backyard, but increasingly also on global issues. It has e.g. turned into a fierce opponent of most of the stuff the United States is advocating on everything from Sudan to Iran, Kosovo and North Korea. This is not very surprising. President Putin has on a number of occasions voiced his opposition to the American hegemony in global affairs and during the past years these attacks have grown even fiercer. Putin says that he wants a multipolar world instead of the unipolar one he claims we are living in today.

Yes, the problem with Russia is specifically this "wants multipolar world at any price" - which means they start supporting more and more dubious dictatorships which are hated by the democratic world, just for the purpose of "creating balance". Look at Sudan, for example: its government supports janjaweed troops doing genocide in Darfur. North Korea: everybody knows what kind of orwellian dictatorship it is... Why, Russia, why support those??

Could Russia not simply bend to admit it is not more a super-power, concentrate to put its own things in order, but allowing freedom of opinions as well as demands for cultural autonomy of all its small people? That kind of Russia would be sympathic and many could soon forgive its past crimes. Yes, btw, Russia: settle an old score with the past, admit Soviet and newer crimes etc... like Germany did with Hitler's crimes. Don't make new schoolbooks praising Stalin!

And then start encourage your still-non-democratic neighbours to become more democratic, starting e.g. with Belarus, where president Lukashenko still puts opposition leaders to prison...

Why shall this be a dream, Russia just doing everything opposite??

[SiD]

Yes, the problem with Russia is specifically this "wants multipolar world at any price" - which means they start supporting more and more dubious dictatorships which are hated by the democratic world, just for the purpose of "creating balance". Look at Sudan, for example: its government supports janjaweed troops doing genocide in Darfur. North Korea: everybody knows what kind of orwellian dictatorship it is... Why, Russia, why support those??

Could Russia not simply bend to admit it is not more a super-power, concentrate to put its own things in order, but allowing freedom of opinions as well as demands for cultural autonomy of all its small people? That kind of Russia would be sympathic and many could soon forgive its past crimes. Yes, btw, Russia: settle an old score with the past, admit Soviet and newer crimes etc... like Germany did with Hitler's crimes. Don't make new schoolbooks praising Stalin!

And then start encourage your still-non-democratic neighbours to become more democratic, starting e.g. with Belarus, where president Lukashenko still puts opposition leaders to prison...

Why shall this be a dream, Russia just doing everything opposite??

Well that kind of opinion is popular in the west i think.
I will tell you why.
Becouse it brings us nothing good. We were EXTREAMLY pro west in 1990s. What did we gained? Freedom? dont be rediculus. Prosperity? nonsense. Stability? only chaos. Respect? yeah sure no one even considered Russia as geo P player. Of course that kind of Russia is sympathic to everyone, but not to us.
We were STRONGLY against military operation of NATO in Kosovo, were we heard? We were against US atacking Irac becouse it is sovereign country and there are no WMDs there, enyone cared? we were against proclaiming independance of Kosovo no one paid any attention, we told that we are concerned about growth of NATO and US military instalations in East Europe no one even bother to notice.
So what you want us to do? to seat silently and wait untill we will find NATO forces on our territory?
EU and US paid NO attention to Russias concerns or interests even in minor things, Russia was just ignored.
Why should we seek thier aproval or forgivnes now? Becouse they are buyng our gas? Thanks but it is better to be alive and free. And when we move to defend our interests West is calling us agressors, is it friendly?
If you add to US position interests of gas buyers you will have EU position. So you can see how independent from US they realy are. If keeping friendship means hurt ourselves we dont need such friendship.

[lashachochua]

"Dear friends! The textbook you are holding in your hands is dedicated to the history of our Motherland... from the end of the Great Patriotic War to our days. We will trace the journey of the Soviet Union from its greatest historical triumph to its tragic disintegration."

It is really planned propaganda of Putin...I do not want to beleive that new generation of Russia will read such texts. The greatest sin of Putin will not be the war in Chechnia, the war in Georgia, but the envenom of russia's new generation, which for ages will cause Russia to live under tyranny and unstability....But who can oppose such planned degradation of russian reasoning?...

[SiD]

"Dear friends! The textbook you are holding in your hands is dedicated to the history of our Motherland... from the end of the Great Patriotic War to our days. We will trace the journey of the Soviet Union from its greatest historical triumph to its tragic disintegration."

It is really planned propaganda of Putin...I do not want to beleive that new generation of Russia will read such texts. The greatest sin of Putin will not be the war in Chechnia, the war in Georgia, but the envenom of russia's new generation, which for ages will cause Russia to live under tyranny and unstability....But who can oppose such planned degradation of russian reasoning?...

I think you see signs of new russian ideology. "For ship who dont know were it is swimming there is no favorouble winds" (i dont remember wher i saw it but i think that are right words even if i remember not quite correctly). So triumphs are praised and tragedies are mourned. Actualy yo can agree that Soviet Union has many great triuphs achieved sometimes by terrible price.(sometimes by terrible crimes). And do not forget that mistakes are learned.
BTW what a book is it? Is it shoolbook?

[lashachochua]

Well that kind of opinion is popular in the west i think.
I will tell you why.
Becouse it brings us nothing good. We were EXTREAMLY pro west in 1990s. What did we gained? Freedom? dont be rediculus. Prosperity? nonsense. Stability? only chaos. Respect? yeah sure no one even considered Russia as geo P player. Of course that kind of Russia is sympathic to everyone, but not to us.

This is tragedy and comady of russian reasoning...The only one whom you have to blame that Russia could not manage to become democratic world player is the fault of Russian Government, Kremline, trying to look democratic but act as a tyranny...Russia has never been democratic, Russia has never managed to be ruled without intervention of Russian Generals...This is your trageday..........

We were STRONGLY against military operation of NATO in Kosovo, were we heard? We were against US atacking Irac becouse it is sovereign country and there are no WMDs there, enyone cared? we were against proclaiming independance of Kosovo no one paid any attention, we told that we are concerned about growth of NATO and US military instalations in East Europe no one even bother to notice.

Sorry but while during 4 years a lot of people were killed in Kosovo you Russians were for Serbia...Sorry but while a lot of people were tortured in Irac, your government was signing contracts with Sadam, even not carring about people killed by this person....You natuarally always have been on wrong side...So do not look for bowels, when the position you hold is against humanity, against basic natural laws like independence, freedom of speech, the right on living and so on....

So what you want us to do? to seat silently and wait untill we will find NATO forces on our territory?

It will be great!

EU and US paid NO attention to Russias concerns or interests even in minor things, Russia was just ignored.
Why should we seek thier aproval or forgivnes now? Becouse they are buyng our gas? Thanks but it is better to be alive and free. And when we move to defend our interests West is calling us agressors, is it friendly?
If you add to US position interests of gas buyers you will have EU position. So you can see how independent from US they realy are. If keeping friendship means hurt ourselves we dont need such friendship.

[/quote]

Good argument! Just stop hurting others and everything will be ok

[lashachochua]

"Dear friends! The textbook you are holding in your hands is dedicated to the history of our Motherland... from the end of the Great Patriotic War to our days. We will trace the journey of the Soviet Union from its greatest historical triumph to its tragic disintegration."

It is really planned propaganda of Putin...I do not want to beleive that new generation of Russia will read such texts. The greatest sin of Putin will not be the war in Chechnia, the war in Georgia, but the envenom of russia's new generation, which for ages will cause Russia to live under tyranny and unstability....But who can oppose such planned degradation of russian reasoning?...

I think you see signs of new russian ideology. "For ship who dont know were it is swimming there is no favorouble winds" (i dont remember wher i saw it but i think that are right words even if i remember not quite correctly). So triumphs are praised and tragedies are mourned. Actualy yo can agree that Soviet Union has many great triuphs achieved sometimes by terrible price.(sometimes by terrible crimes). And do not forget that mistakes are learned.
BTW what a book is it? Is it shoolbook?

This greeting is addressed to hundreds of thousands of Russian schoolchildren who will in September receive a new history textbook printed by the publishing house Enlightenment and approved by the ministry of education. "The Soviet Union," the new textbook explains, "was not a democracy, but it was an example for millions of people around the world of the best and fairest society." Furthermore, over the past 70 years, the USSR, "a gigantic superpower which managed a social revolution and won the most cruel of wars," effectively put pressure on western countries to give due regard to human rights. In the early part of the 21st century, continues the textbook, the west has been hostile to Russia and pursued a policy of double standards.