RedCat

This. Sorry Bruce, but for you reasonable Russian is some person who blame own country, own people and prefer be subslave of a West. But for real Russians such behavior looks so strange. We are not some minor nation, who be used to good submissive servants. We are proud Empire citizens, conquerors, we shall rule instead of obey to anyone. Your "reasonable Russians" looks by same way to me as Ancient Romans who dreamed to be a slave in Parthia. Just unbelievable characters they are. I cant ignore this one. A lot of people tie the term "Empire" with power, greatness and prosperity. but it is also harbors, colonialism, exploitation, inequality, conquest. I do not consider USSR and Russia as an empire, and as a common russian i have no desire to rule or conquer anyone. I do, of course, wish for Russia to be strong and independent. Howerver, i do not wish my country to replace US as a global police force. I think that is a wrong way to go, not only due to explotative nature of that position but also to a harmful social and economic degradation it eventualy brings to your country. Historically, Russia has a big territory, multi-national population and plenty natural resources, that in combination with enourmous land borders with other foreign nation, we have to consider, makes russians to have a defensive mind-set. Thats why it is hilarious for me to see statements in press from NATO officials about "russian threat to europe calls for more NATO spendings". At the same time all talks about nuking Kiev or even Washington, i consider immature and not worth taking seriously. Of course there are a lot of radical elements in any society, and in Russia, also due to decline after USSR collapse, a lot of russians feels threatened and fascist ideologies have a serious potential for growth. Thus i consider the talk about "Russian World" is a wrong direction to take, same as american exeptialism or ukranian nazism. I believe in friendship of nations not in domination of one above another. And i think the majority of russians somewhat close to these views. To better demonstrate russian mentality toward this i would quote a passage from Osmar White's "By the eyes of a war correspondent" when he met a Soviet officer in Berlin 1945: "It seemed to me that the Russians were the only victors who did not attempt to run with the hare and hunt with the hounds. From what I could see and hear, they were unconcerned with problems of "humanitarianism" as it was defined by the British or the Americans. Nor were they concerned with vengeance for the sake of vengeance. The were sublime egoists, the uncompromising realists. An English-speaking ordinance officer in the Kabarett der Kommiker, the candor of wine in him, told me: "We are pledged to destroy Fascism. German fascism is no worse than any other Fascism. The only country in the world which recognises and destroys Fascism in any disguise is Russia – but it is not a matter of nationality, you know. Nationality is not important to us. We did not hare Germans – or Italians or Chinese or Negroes. Oh no. We do not think Russians are better than other people, except perhaps that Russians have a system which seeks to destroy Fascism. We will make Russia strong and secure – not to impose our will on other peoples but to defend men against Fascism wherever it shows itself. Russia must first be made strong and secure. That is a good sense. That is logic. We have nothing against capitalist democracy, except perhaps that it turns Fascist so easily when something goes wrong with the machinery.’"

Fixed for you Actually quite small amount of ukranians are nazis. But the problem with nazism is that if not contained it will eventually spread like a plague and infect all people. When in Febraury 2014 maidan coup happened, core force was members of Right Sector - ukranian nazi movement, trained at military camps sponsored by Washington They were provoking militia during at first peacefull standoff at maidan square. Used fear tactics against those who opposed maidan, and some government officials.After maidan events, they mostly were involved in criminal activity - robbing, kidnapping, racket, buisness raiding and so on. That was mainly due to the factor that government institutions were still in paralized state. At some point internal fights inside the organization started to decide who gets most of the pie. They proved to be ineffective in military operation against Novorossia. So eventually they became more of a liability for new Ukranian government. It became clear that new government cant suppress Donbass uprising (i think around summer 2014). It was nesessary to make new government more solid, more powerful to deal with it. Some, Right Sector leaders where assasinated. Massive propaganda campaign started. You can notice the drastic change in ukranian blogsphere started at around june 2014 i think. Before that campaign people were mostly wary about the future, scared and confused, but now you can see extreme anti-russian and anti-Putin rhetoric dominates. Common people whent from "we should talk to Donbass" to "we must bomb Donbass to the ground" in less then two month. A lot of russians who have relatives in Ukraine (and i mean really alot), saying that it is impossible to have normal conversation with their relatives now, amount of blind hate towards Russia is bewildering, its like people were brainwashed. Now however, brainwashing started to loose its effectiveness. But back to the Nazis. There were various players fighting between themselves, Poroshenko, Avakov, Kolomoisky, Yatsenuk, Yarosh. They all wanted to have a larger share. Kolomoisky was even on the verge of declaring independence for Dnepropetrovsk he was controling. But to keep Ukraine as an effective anti-russian instrument, Washington decided to solidify its government, and they choose to support Poroshenko. Yarosh - Right Sector leader, was made an adviser of current commander in chief of Ukrain Armed Forces, and Right Sector volonteers were intagrated into ministry of defence chain of command. So now nazism in Ukraine shifted its focus from Right Sector activists, with its svastika and Hitler portraits, to more general, Ukraine-oriented nazism, stating that https://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/OUN-B these guys were equally fighting against Nazi germany as well as Soviets.

I definitely expect the government along with president to sever all ties with kiev. Sanctions and closing the borders is definitely on the table. Of course not with current party and a joke of a president in charge. But we will have new president and new government this year. I do not think its enough to just change the government. Poland as most of the countries in the world lies in Washington sphere of influence mostly through economic ties(IMF, WTO) but military as well(NATO). Such ties are not easy to break, and the process of redirecting your economy towards independance wont be painless. So new government, even if it would be extremely anti-US oriented, would need to offer a new convincing strategy of developement, which would compensate the economic and diplomatic loss of turning away from US. That would require immence amount of support from people as well as suitable international political situation. But i should note that Poland probably the only country in EU that have the best chances to do it. To keep your national currency and not replace it with Euro was a very smart move. Also a stategic position between Russia and Germany gives a great opportunity to be intermediary and reap the benefits,

As usual, they tried to smash a mosquito but used a club so broked a jaw while doing it. But what not mentioned in the article is that there is actually 3 main points of the law they try to pass: Law of violation of using personal data of public persons: 1. To make fake account using a public person identity (name,foto, birthdate, position etc.) 2. To create a fake website about public person and its professional and social activity. 3. Using a foto of a public person as representation of a popular internet meme not related to a persona of that public person. Sorry for the rough translation.

I've talked to a few western people (EU and US) and so alot of discussions about this and it all seems to have one thing in common - a severe underestimation of relation between Russia and Ukraine. You probably heard somene said before that russians and ukranians are the same people? That actually true, for example any ukranian can speak perfect russian if he choses to do so, and most of them do. If, for example, i speak to ukranian i wouldnt tell him apart from any other russian for exept maybe slight accent, the example that comes to mind would be a differense in southern and northern american accent, or New York and New Jersey accents i think. Now to fully grasp what Ukraine events means to average russian, try to imagine a fictional situation like this: Lets say after WW2 for whatever reasons Mexica merged into US, and in 1991 instead of Soviet Union falling apart it happened to US instead, and lets say Texas,California, and Mexica split off into separate country under the name Mexica. So now Mexica has 3 states inside. Then for 23 years up to 2014 both countries US and Mexica started to go separate ways, rebuilding its economy, regaining its power and so on. Now while US had its share of turbulance and power struggle, eventually, due to various reasons, US economy improved, quality of life improved. While Mexico at the same time was doing pretty badly between drug cartel wars, corrupt government, more corrupt government and overall economic decline. Now instead of improving the situation, Mexican govenment started a massive propaganda campaign that all Mexica troubles are caused by US and english language, and as soon as all mexicans(Texas and California included) will stop using it and start speaking only spanish everything will magically became great. Now for people of Texas and California, who can see and compare their former country US and their current country Mexico you can imagine their love for the government grows. At the same time in addition to standart anti-US propaganda, Mexica adds another idea on the table: Lets join BRICS! And while US points that half of Mexican industry sale their products to US which is not simply needed in BRICS, Mexica ignores that and continues to push. Finally at the febraury 2015, Mexican president overthrown in a coup by a junta. And the first declaration junta makes is abolishing of english as one of the state languages. Now try to think what feelings people of Texas and California would have while watching all this happens? Now substitute the following: Mexica = Ukraine, US = Russia, Texas = Donbass, California = Crimea. After that try to revaluate Ukraine events again. I skipped alot of details here and made some oversimplifications but i hope you got my point. P.S. I apologies for any offence i might have caused to any forementioned party by this comparison.

Let me clarify my point a bit. Impact of sanctions on both sides of course is not equal, but there IS an impact on both sides. Consider the difference in perception on those sanctions for both parties. From Russian side, it is viewed as threat to Russia sovereignity, as Russia constantly opposes to US policy on Ukraine. From foreign companies who suffer losses on russian market due to sanctions, (and with the currency rate falling, people simply started to buy much less foreign goods because their price doubled), it is viewed, as US trying to push their agenda with Russia on expense of those companies, which in turn result in political pressure towards their leaders who agree to follow US lead and support sanctions. Secondly, while current economic policy is suicidal, and the peolpe who decide on it and execute it are the top management of Central Bank, it should be understood that the root of this system lies in 90s, when privatization of state property and country's economic institutions were intentionally designed this way under US advisers. That is the main reason of anti-US tendencies among russians. And yes without foreign investment capital, Russia economy cant work, and thats why we need to create a financial mechanism for investment which would be independent from IMF and FRS. Thirdly, sanctions, as well as Magnitsky list, in the first place target comanies which belongs to either Putin's friends or his supporters. People like Chubais, Voloshin, Yumashev, are not under sanctions mainly because they represent a branch of power inside Kremlin which opposes Putin. For the common people US trying to send a simple message: "Your quality of life dropped because of the sanctions, and we imposed sanctions because Putin's bad. Putin need to go." In reality economic recess started back in 2012, and it is worldwide For example, really harmful sanctions would be a ban on planes parts sale which would result in no civil aviation in Russia after couple of years. And lastly, when you say about foreign companies moving on from Russia to another market. I think its an overstimation of a market capacity. What we deal with today worldwide is a global consumption decline, people buying less, FRS funds rate is already 0% for long time and discount rate as i recall around 0.25%, which means that consumer stimulation resource is no more. Houshold debt in US is around 25-30% above income (i think in EU is a bit lower), so i think loosing a market right now is quite a bit hit for any major company.

Tell that to Ukraine, Georgia, Estonia, and any country that has them as neighbors... Granted, USA isn't exactly innocent either, but that's my point: the alleged guilt of one party =/= the innocence of the one opposed to them. Besides, give them both credit, in a way. Sure we're tyrants but at least we're both smart enough to recognize there's limits and not blow the world up fighting each other. May not sound like much but who's to say that wouldn't be the outcome in other hands? At least we got the respect for one another right even if we do both have habits of picking on countries that are clearly outmatched. I think its entirely different topic to discuss, so i'll just state, that in my opinion you have a wrong picture here. If you wondering about why Putin have this much support, the short answer is: there is simply no alternative to Putin. I'll elaborate a bit. If you are familiar with election mechanism, you probably know that you can only rigg them up to a certain degree. Usually its 3-7%, 10% tops. Well you can probably stretch as far as 15% if you want every observer to point finger in your direction and make a scandal. It would make sense to do when candidates are closely tied, but in case with Putin its would only cast unnecessary shade on your win. In Russia, ruling party dominates by dividing electoral base of "opposition" to the smaller parties. For example, back in 90s, long before Putin, Communist Party had really good chances of coming back to power through election as most people at that point realized they got cheated. So after that Kremlin promoted creation of parties with different shades of socialistic agendas, like Fair Russia, LDPR and so on, to divide communists electoral base. In 2000, Putin was brought to power as a figure of compromise, an arbiter between various clans of power. But due to his action in his first 2 terms he actually gained people support which gave him quite a big degree of independance. For example first two things that come to mind would be, winning Chechen war and making oligarchs to pay taxes. Now you can see why after huge disaster of 90s, a strong and decicive leader like Putin won people's love. It may be hard to believe now, but back in 2008, after his 2nd term Putin actually was planning to retire and leave country to Medvedev as his sucсessor. Medvedev's presidency turned out to be one huge /facepalm instead. Medvedev's betrayal of Libiya, his inability to act during 08.08.08 Georgian agression, and his controversial renaming of militia into police didnt win him much love. Story goes on. In 2012, Washington tried to promote an opposition in Russia with an anti-corruption agenda. The idea was quite good by itself, and in first weeks of protests in december 2012, Kremlin was actually disoriented by turn of events. The problem was in a Washington's choice of people for leaders positions for this. I wont go into much detail but, basically, people saw two options: either Putin, or a bunch of "pro-US, corrrupt hysterical snobs". Choice was quite obvious, especially after Libiya events. And on top of that, return of Crimea in 2014 gave Putin a huge poeple support, thus he ended with 86% rating. Now to the question of why a lot of people became disappointed with Putin over the years. While Putin was brough to power as arbiter between clans of power, his actions in punishing Khodorkovsky and forcing oligarchs to pay taxes, gave him huge support but at the same time people started to expect more from him. In people's conscience every oligarch is a thief. Privatization in 90s was a crime. So when Khodorkovsky was punished, a lot of naive people expected other oligarchs to follow, and Privatization revised. Didnt happened. Following years, a few scandals with insubordination in the government, corruption in the Ministry of Defence, people waiting for heads to start rolling, but instead nothing. So most people who dissapointed in Putin thinks that he's too soft. While that has some degree of truth, i should note that one of the major problems Putin faces, is the lack of competent people for the job. I wrote earlier about Central Bank destructive policy towards economy, but they still there cause there are no people to replace them. So the real problem before Russia (and Putin is aware of it) is the lack of proper political field which results in shortage of personnel for government.

While i appreciate the effort, i think the form in which obyknven tried to make his point could be improved. Main problem with russian economy lies in its dependence on external investments. Central Bank policy dictates that the dollar should be the only source of investment. And while Central Bank by law is independent of the government, it follows IMF directives by the book. At the same time dollar revenues from oil and gas trade go into stabilization fund instead of being used as investment source. That being said, economic grows started to decline in 2012. Now, currency devaluation is not necessary a bad thing, it could be a very useful tool in boosting your industry against imported products, if it is used properly, and russian economy is very dependant on foreign import. So instead, when ruble started to drop in fall 2014, Central Bank raised credit rate up to 17% in december 2014. That resulted in mass speculation on currency market, and corporate credit debt increase as most companies has credits in dollars and profit in rubles. In march 16, 2015 Central Bank lowered credit rate to 14%. Sanctions towards Russia actually is a double-edged sword. The more severe they are, the more they hurt both parties. For example companies like Hyundai not only suffer in sales decline but also they have to keep up with losses by keepeng their prices on the 2014 level or China will eat their market share. The main goal of sanctions is to undermine Putin's political power, but there is a tricky part. In perfect scenario, sanctions should hurt russian elites and force them to remove Putin from power, instead we saw support rating of 86% as most russians see sanctions as attack on their sovereignity. Also i would say that due to difference in mentality and quality of life, compared to EU, russians can tolerate quite a bit of economic decline without Putin losing his support. That would probaly answer a question why most russians have quite optimistic outlook towards sanctions. At this point we can also see a good progress being made in building Currency Union with Kazakhstan and Belarus, which ultimately will gives us a necessary investment resource for import replacement. p.s. I apologize for my english skills.