Russia once again to be taken seriously (Tribune de Geneve, Switzerland)

Russia once again to be taken seriously ("Tribune de Geneve", Switzerland)

In 1989, after the fall of the Berlin Wall Our homeland suddenly disappeared from the political map of the world. In general, it soon became clear that country a cyclopean supplies of oil and gas. Our homeland began to deliver them to the sets in Europe, and pretty quickly she returned to herself — a deft maneuver, as sometimes happens in history — part of the former power.

In addition, given the sharp rise in oil and gas Our homeland have gained a certain level of wealth, which led to the Russian middle class of the Western type. These people get their information from the web without the help of other thoughts, and therefore is in a particularly humiliating fact that Putin's power tells them to keep their mouths shut, as under socialism.

That was enough to sway Vladimir Fishing season, which was manifested in the last Duma elections. Then Putin showed his confidence in his unique and almost divine mission — to act as a guarantor of "stability" of the country. The same paradox has led to a rise in the middle of the Russians pride in their country, which allowed President Medvedev and Putin led the Russian government to draw the attention of the West dry — as in the negotiations on the missile defense system, which NATO is going to expand in Europe and in the discussion of sanctions against Syria — that Our homeland regained its former own great-power status.

How does the West should react to this? Priemuschestvenno taking seriously the latest Russian. Having outlined, namely the scope of the common — and mutually beneficial — interests, so that our home could not, for example, cut off gas to Europe and oil, not jeopardize its economy. Obviously, this is easier said than done: the mutual distrust remains very strong.

Much less that the West needs to begin to answer one fundamental question: whether he is interested in how to deal with Russia in a state of "revolutionary spring" with rallies, unrest and uncertainty, and — in the future, if all goes well — with the establishment of a modern democracy? Or, on the contrary, the West profitable tsarist-Putin Our homeland, strict, orderly and predictable, which is easier to say — as once it was easier to negotiate with Mubarak, Ben Ali, Gaddafi and other despots than with today's Arab "anarchists" to which it is not clear how to approach?

My personal choice — restless "spring." Risk more, and better prospects.

Like this post? Please share to your friends: