European News Headlines - FT.com

European News Headlines - FT.com: "Gazprom’s offer to take control of Serbia’s state-owned petroleum monopoly has divided the Serbian government and sounded alarm bells about the cost of Moscow’s political support"

"Better life for ordinary Russians..."

Medvedev, in his first big speech (November 2005), promised a better life for ordinary Russians. A year on, when he spoke at the World Economic Forum in Davos, he was favoured by 35% of Russians for president. “Here was born the future president of Russia,” somebody scratched in the doorway of Mr Medvedev's old apartment block in St Petersburg. The Economist

Yulia Tymoshenko is bact to office

In a 226-224 vote, the minimum required majority, the Orange Coalition on tuesday confirmed Yulia Tymoshenko's nomination for the post of Prime Minister of Ukraine. The opposition refused to participate. The Party of Regions will be in the opposition, and will stand on guard "against populism and efforts to destroy the economy", Yanukovych said.
More in Ukrainiana

Not bad for an spy

While he is diminutive (about 1.7 m) he projects steely confidence and strength. Putin is unmistakably Russian, with chiseled facial features and those penetrating eyes. Charm is not part of his presentation of self—he makes no effort to be ingratiating. One senses that he pays constant obeisance to a determined inner discipline. The successor to the boozy and ultimately tragic Boris Yeltsin, Putin is temperate, sipping his wine only when the protocol of toasts and greetings requires it; mostly he just twirls the Montrachet in his glass. He eats little, though he twitchily picks the crusts off the bread rolls on his plate. So writes Time.

He is not a boy scout. And not a 'tedy bear'. He killed some people. But he is the Person of the Year for this magazine.

Putin won the title for taking Russia from chaos to a position of importance in the world today choosing order before freedom. Being Time´s Person of the Year is not necessarily an honor, in Putin’s case.

"Sometimes we get the impression that America does not need friends", complains Putin. But Putin is the fourth Russian leader to be chosen Person of the Year. Joseph Stalin was named twice, in 1939 for signing the alliance that opened the doors for Hitler’s war on Europe and in 1942 for joining the Allies in World War II. In 1957, Nikita Khrushchev, the Soviet leader at the height of the Cold War, won for leading the effort to put the first satellite in space. And in 1989, was Gorbachev.

In his youth he was eager to emulate the intelligence officer characters played on the Soviet screen by actors such as Vyacheslav Tikhonov and Georgiy Zhzhonov. Now is frontpage in EEUU.

Not bad for an spy.

Unable to agree on the present, EU looks to the future

The former Spanish Prime Minister, Felipe Gonzalez, has been chosen by European leaders to head a review of the long-term issues faced by the EU.

Former Latvian President, Vaira Vike-Freiberga, and Jorma Ollila, ex-chairman of mobile phone company Nokia, have been selected as vice presidents of the group.

But the celebrations were marred by leaders' inability to reach a unanimous position on the future status of Kosovo, the predominantly ethnic-Albanian province that is seeking independence from Serbia.

As EarthTimes said, "Unable to agree on the present, EU looks to the future"

A creation of Putin will rule Russia

President Vladimir V. Putin has endorsed as his successor today Dmitri A. Medvedev, a young protégé with no background in the state security services and virtually no power base in the Kremlin. Yes, everything that Medvedev has is owed to Putin. There is no Medvedev without Putin.

The president endorsed Medvedev, a first deputy prime minister, at a meeting with party leaders today. This declaration is virtually guaranteeing that he will win a landslide victory in the March 2 election.
Medvedev is more liberal and less hawkish towards the west than Sergei Ivanov, the other contender.

Yevgeny Badovsky, of the Institute of Social Systems thinktank, said: "Medvedev is in a way a more liberal choice, who is not associated with the part of the elite rooted in the security services."

The speculation about Putin's future has included the possibility that he could try to return as president. That possibility seemed potentially strengthened by the announcement about Medvedev, said to Pravda Vladimir Ryzhkov, a prominent liberal politician.

Октябрьская революция в России, 1917 (October revolution in Russia, 1917)

William Wordsworth spoke for millions when he wrote about the French Revolution “Bliss was it in that dawn [of revolution] to be alive, / But to be young was very heaven!”. And 90 years ago the world changed again, in the dirty streets of a city. This time was Saint Petersburg.

Vilnius quiz

street, originalmente cargada por txd.

Hello vilnietis. Who is the clever guy/girl who can tell first which street is this? Post answers here.

The polish Zapatero?

Look at him, he is smiling. Yes, Donald Tusk appears mild-mannered, but friends say the easy outward manner belies a steely ambition that took him to the leadership of his Civic Platform party and now the prime ministership of Poland. A carpenter's son from the Baltic port of Gdansk, the cradle of Poland's anti-communist uprising, can be now the new polish Zapatero, this time without leftist traces. As Solidarity splintered following the 1989 defeat of communism, Mr Tusk became a rightwing liberal and keen advocate of Europe. Mr Tusk entered the upper house in Warsaw in 1997 for the Freedom Union party and became a founder of the Civic Platform in 2001.

We saw his a soothing tone on Tuesday in his first extended comments since a sweeping victory in national elections, pledging to end political strife at home and to improve strained relations with Russia, Germany and the EU.

Ten days ago, the 50-year-old historian went head-to-head in a television duel with Jaroslaw Kaczynski, the wily prime minister. But Tusk routed his opponent calmly and systematically. The TV debate was the turning point in an extremely bruising election campaign. The neck-and-neck polls shifted to give the Platform a 10-point lead. Sunday's victory was revenge for his defeat at the hands of the Kaczynski twins in the past.

Article continues

---

---

"He was tough, decisive and calm," said Tomasz Wolek, a former newspaper editor from Gdansk who has known Mr Tusk for decades. "Donald had a Kaczynski complex and he's finally freed himself of it. He allowed himself to be blackmailed and was put on the defensive. Now he's got tougher."Tusk, a keen amateur football player viewed in his youth as a promising striker, operated in the underground as an anti-communist student leader in Gdansk in the late 1970s before joining the Solidarity movement. After the communists imposed martial law in 1981, he worked on building sites. Both his parents had been forced into slave labour under the Nazi occupation of Poland.

Tusk campaigned on promises to build a more harmonious relationship with the EU and to pursue the economic opportunities presented by membership in the bloc, which Poland joined in 2004.

"The European Union is here — not somewhere in Brussels," Tusk said.

In the United States — which he called "our closest ally, our greatest friend" — Tusk said he would work to keep up the friendship while also establishing a more balanced partnership. Also Russia matters now. Amid already tense ties with Russia, Kaczynski's government has blocked negotiations for a new EU partnership agreement with Moscow due to a Russian embargo on Polish meat, which Russia said it imposed because of health concerns. Poland has also been critical of plans for an undersea pipeline to bring Russian natural gas to Europe, bypassing Poland and raising fears of a potential gas cutoff as well as the loss of transit revenue.

Can Europe smile too?

Tusk-Kaczynski, and uneasy marriage

Tusk won. The twins made enemies across the European Union and also in this blog. Finally, the rightist prime minister, Jaroslaw Kaczynski, conceded defeat. But is brother, Lech, will remain president until 2010 and retain veto power over the presumptive new government's legislation. He will form an uneasy cohabitation with the Tusk Government. He will be able to block, at least for a short while, some foreign policy initiatives.

Official results on Tuesday will determine whether Civic Platform achieves an outright majority or more likely needs to form a coalition with the centrist Polish Peasants Party. But Kaczynski is left without any significant partner.

Exit polls awarded 43.7 per cent to Civic Platform, compared with 30.4 per cent for the Law and Justice party. In theory Tusk could form an alliance with the third-place Left and Democracy party, which won 13.3 per cent of the vote, or the Peasants’ Party (PSL), which picked up just over 8 per cent. Neither of Kaczynski’s former coalition allies – the clericalist League of Polish Families and the rural Self-Defence grouping – won enough votes to be represented in parliament.

The Times says that Tusk is likely to choose Radek Sikorski – who made his name as a journalist in Britain in the 1980s – as Foreign Minister.

Traslation of the joke: "Platforma is happy that Lech is back to politics". Thanks, Andrius.

Ciao, Kaczynski

Poland’s ruling Law and Justice party under its leader, Jaroslaw Kaczynski, the prime minister, on Sunday night admitted defeat in the country’s hard-fought parliamentary elections, putting an end to two turbulent years in government, write Jan Cienski and Stefan Wagstyl in Warsaw for the Financial Times

Civic Platform, Poland’s main opposition party, claimed victory after it emerged as the biggest single party and prepared to form the next government under its leader, Donald Tusk.

PiS narrowly won elections two years ago on a programme of fighting corruption, exposing communist-era collaborators, and helping those who felt left out by reforms that transformed Poland into a capitalist economy 18 years ago.

But once in power, Mr Kaczynski alienated voters with his abrasive political style, fell out with almost all potential coalition partners and failed to win the confidence of business.

During the campaign, Mr Tusk promised to make life easier for business by slashing red tape, reforming public finances, and energetically privatising most of the companies still controlled by the state. He also strongly criticised Mr Kaczynski’s foreign policy.

The official vote count is expected to be released Monday orTuesday.

The outcome was a dramatic reversal for Mr Kaczynski and his twin brother President Lech Kaczynski, who have ruled Poland since 2005, polarising politics and repeatedly running into conflicts with Poland’s European Union partners.

Who fears the verdict of angry youth?

After weeks of campaigning that have seen the Kaczynskis' Law and Justice party (PiS) in the lead, the latest polls suggest that the their rivals in the Civic Platform will win the elections today. The Kaczynski brothers and their Law and Justice Party have poor prospects at the polls in most of Poland's major cities. The twins derive much of their support from voters in rural districtsThe party of Donald Tusk, enjoying an impressive resurgence in recent days, will oust Prime Minister Jaroslaw Kaczynski, leaving Lech, his identical twin, to continue as President in cohabitation with a hostile government, says The Guardian.

The Kaczynskis - or their allies - have denounced gay teachers, advocated the death penalty, compared a Russia-Germany pipeline deal to the pact that divided eastern Europe between Hitler and Stalin and demanded more voting rights from the European Union to reflect the fact that Poland's population would have been bigger than its 38 million if the Nazis had not killed five million Poles during the Second World War.

Despite the political turmoil, the country is booming, with Gdansk only one of many examples of progress. The Polish economy will grow by more than 6 percent this year, and the unemployment rate in Poland has dropped from 19 to 12 percent since the country joined the EU.

Turnout, at over 55 percent, was the highest since Poland voted to end communism in 1989. The high level of participation was expected to benefit the Civic Platform, a centre-right opposition party that had an opinion poll lead, acording to Reuters.

The Kaczynskis have fought repeatedly with EU partners and strained relations with Germany and Russia. The opposition also accused the brothers of focusing on fighting corruption instead of reforming central Europe's biggest economy.

"The Civic Platform's economic program makes more sense to me. The market, not the government, should regulate the economy," said Krzysztof Zawadzki, 36, a tax advisor.

Sixty-year-old Maria Choszczyk, a teacher, said: "I voted for Law and Justice. It's the only party that is serious about combating crime and corruption."

Lech Kaczynski, however, will remain in office whatever Sunday's result, because his presidential term runs until the end of 2010.

Missile in Kamchatka (and Sunrise at Kurilskoye Lake)

Sunrise at Kurilskoye Lake, originalmente cargada por robnunn.

Russia on Thursday carried out a successful test launch of an intercontinental ballistic missile, AFP reports.

The Topol RS-12M rocket hit its intended target on Kamchatka near the Pacific Ocean, the Russian Strategic Missile Forces said in a statement. The launch, from the Plesetsk launch facility in northern Russia, was part of the country's plan to upgrade its ballistic missiles and extend the life of its Topol missiles.

The successful test will allow Russia to maintain the Topol rocket for 21 years, the statement said, significantly more than the original 10 years forecast.

Poland: Election ahead

Poland votes in parliamentary elections on October 21 after the collapse of the governing coalition led by Jaroslaw Kaczynski’s Law and Justice party, writes Jan Cienski in Warsaw.

Why is Poland holding parliamentary elections only two years after the last vote?

The September 2005 election resulted in a narrow plurality for the conservative Law and Justice party (PiS). Efforts to build the coalition wanted by most Poles between PiS and the pro-business Civic Platform party foundered because of personal squabbles and lack of trust despite both parties having their roots in the Solidarity labour union that overthrew Communism. PiS then formed a shaky coalition with two previously marginalised populist parties, the left-wing agrarian Self-Defence party and the nationalist League of Polish Families. The coalition stumbled from crisis to crisis before collapsing over the summer. The reason was a bungled sting operation conducted by a new elite anti-corruption police force against Andrzej Lepper, the leader of Self- Defence.

What are the main campaign issues?

The government of Jaroslaw Kaczynski, the prime minister, is running on Poland’s strong economic growth and is promising to stamp out corruption he sees as disfiguring post-Communist Poland. He is also promising to defend Poland’s national interests in its relations with Germany and the European Union. Civic Platform is promising to end what it sees the misrule of PiS. It wants to introduce a flat income tax of 15 per cent, continue the privatisation of state companies that has stalled under PiS, and slash some of the red tape that encumbers Polish businesses.

Who’s ahead in opinion polls?

When parliament dissolved itself last month, Civic Platform under its leader Donald Tusk was ahead in most opinion polls. However in the weeks since PiS has shown its superior campaigning skills and has pulled even or ahead. Many political analysts now expect that PiS will win the election. As an example of PiS’s tactical superiority, Mr Kaczynski recently held a televised debate with Aleksander Kwasniewski, the prime ministerial candidate of the Left and Democrats, Poland’s third party, while excluding Mr Tusk, saying the opposition leader was too inconsequential to bother debating with. Mr Tusk’s party took an immediate hit in opinion polls.

Which other parties are running?

The third largest party is the Left and Democrats (LiD), an amalgam of ex-Communists and the intellectual gurus of the Solidarity trade union. The party is expected to get about a fifth of the vote, and is campaigning on being the most radical alternative to PiS. Three other parties are balancing on the edge of the 5 per cent threshold needed to make it into the next parliament: The agrarian Peasants party which is likely to team up with Civic Platform, Self-Defence and the League of Polish Families.

Who is likely to form a government after October 21?

That is the great unknown of Polish politics. If, as many expect, PiS wins the elections, it will still probably need to form a coalition to gain a majority in the 460-seat parliament. The problem is that the party has either alienated or terrified most of the smaller parties in parliament. It has ruled out governing with LiD, and Civic Platform shows little interest in being the junior partner in a coalition with Mr Kaczynski. The prime minister has mused about the possibility of the more conservative wing of Civic Platform breaking away from Mr Tusk and joining PiS, which would be his preferred scenario. The other possibility is for Civic Platform to form a coalition with the Peasants party (if it makes it into parliament) and LiD, although that would open the party to attacks from Mr Kaczynski that is has compromised itself by clambering into bed with Communists. If no party is able to form a government, another election could eventually be called by Lech Kaczynski, the president and the prime minister’s twin brother.

Debata Kaczyński vs. Tusk - gospodarka cz 3/5

After trouncing Jaroslaw Kaczynski in a televised debate, Tusk sent the Civic Platform surging ahead of the PiS in opinion polls. Donald Tusk, head of the pro-business Civic Platform party, achieved what was widely considered a surprise win in his Friday night televised debate with Prime Minister Jaroslaw Kaczynski, leader of the nationalist, conservative Law and Justice party.

Tusk criticized Kaczynski's stewardship of the economy, called his foreign policy "incompetent," and accused the prime minister of damaging the country's delicate ties with neighbors Germany and Russia.

Kaczynski labored to defend his government's policies and achievements, often seeming unprepared, and leaving many unconvinced.

Polish landscape: elections

Fuehrer, originalmente cargada por davidcharding.

Fuehrer Kaczynski?

The political career of Vladimir Vladimirivich Putin.

"Vladimir V. Putin is not a household name," wrote The New York Times on Aug. 9, 1999, the day that an ailing and foundering President Boris N. Yeltsin appointed him the latest in a string of prime ministers. Four and a half months later, Yeltsin resigned and anointed him his successor as president. And since then Putin has in a way become the only household name in Russian politics, having consolidated control over almost every aspect of society and business and marginalized what opposition still exists. In nearly eight years in the Kremlin he has crushed opposition, stripped regional governments of their autonomy, reasserted state control of Russia's energy resources and eliminated most independent media. But thanks to the stability that he has brought, and even more to oil-and-gas-fired growth, Putin remains extremely popular with ordinary Russians, writes The Economist.

Putin's supporters maintain that Russians are not ready for liberal democracy, preferring their tradition of a benevolent dictator/tsar. They contrast the stability and prosperity of the Putin years with the chaos and poverty of the Yeltsin years. Some go further, echoing Mr Putin's view that, even if nobody wants to return to communism, the collapse of the Soviet Union was still the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the late 20th century.

He led Russia back to its historical dependence on one powerful leader, and he did this with the support of a large majority of the Russian people. In some way he has to go. But in some way, he wants to stay.

(...) Keen to avoid unflattering comparisons to the presidents-for-life of central Asian ex-Soviet republics, Mr Putin will find a placeman to stand for president (perhaps the man he just plucked out of obscurity to be his own prime minister, Viktor Zubkov). He himself will then take the post of prime minister, which he held briefly in 1999, probably with enhanced powers. After a decent interval, he could then return to the Kremlin as president.

Before, Putin sent his prime minister into political exile and installed a shadowy newcomer (does he have something on the president?), all the while leaving in place two other potential heirs to the presidency (why didn’t one of them get the prime minister’s job?). Putin continued to insist that he will abide by term limits and not run for president next year (but will he stick to that?). Then he spoke about is future in the Duma. Conveniently, Russia's Constitution puts the prime minister in direct line to succeed the country's president. NYT wrote that whe cannot begrudge the Russians a measure of stability and prosperity after what they have gone through. But what they need now is to start building a true democracy on the basis of that stability and prosperity.

We hope Mr. Putin will rethink this cynical game. If he does run for Parliament, he could use his seat to share his experience and skills with a new political generation -- but we doubt it. If his only intention is to hold on to power, then he will be proclaiming that institutions don't matter, only the person manipulating them. Russia's been there, too long. That is not what it needs now.

In the Dec. 2 parliamentary elections in Russia, about 105 million Russians will be eligible to vote. It is an election that will likely set the course for the future political career of Vladimir Vladimirivich Putin.

Quotation of the week (1)

"This is the first time in post-Soviet history when only the Kremlin decides who can participate and who can’t. The Kremlin decides which party can exist and which party cannot."

VLADIMIR A. RYZHKOV, a Russian democracy advocate and member of Parliament whose party has been banned.

What Poland will vote?

As Poland's tight election battle intensifies, the votes of some 850,000 Poles living in the UK could prove crucial. Opposition leader Donald Tusk (at left in picture) is challenging PM Jaroslaw Kaczynski (middle). Leftist Aleksander Kwasniewski (right) is also fighting the poll.

The BBC's Neil Arun asked Poles in London for their views.

"Kaczynski is clean, tough on crime and he respects the Catholic church."

"Kaczynski is an embarrassment. He's a backward man who has successfully manipulated the Polish people's fears and their Catholic faith."

"I’m voting for Kwasniewski. I don’t like what Kaczynski’s done to my country. He’s a very stupid man.

Again this nightmare, Katyn

Mass Graves, originalmente cargada por Stuck in Customs.

This is the site of the Katyn Massacre, where the Red Army executed over 20,000 Polish prisoners, many of whom were senior officers in the military that were captured in 1939. When Trey Ratcliff, author of this photo, went to Kharkov, Ukraine, his host drove him up to the Russian border where we visited these mass graves.

"Those who died at Katyn included an admiral, two generals, 24 colonels, 79 lieutenant colonels, 258 majors, 654 captains, 17 naval captains, 3,420 NCOs, seven chaplains, three landowners, a prince, 43 officials, 85 privates, and 131 refugees. Also among the dead were 20 university profesors; 300 physicians; several hundred lawyers, engineers, and teachers; and more than 100 writers and journalists as well as about 200 pilots. In all, the NKVD executed almost half the Polish officer corps. Altogether, during the massacre the NKVD murdered 14 Polish generals"

More info about Katyn in wikipedia

Putin: love him or leave him

Norman Stone, former Professor of Modern History at Oxford, is now head of the international relations department at Bilkent University in Ankara defends the Russian President and his legacy: "Vladimir Putin rescued Russia from disaster: so let’s just leave him be"

And then Boris bombed the Parlament

This week is the anniversary of the 1993 upheaval in Russia, when Boris Yeltsin order troops to storm parliament. Slate magazine shows it with images that worths a thousand words.

Prime Minister, President and... Prime minister (and then President in 2012?)

Russian President Vladimir Putin announced on Monday that he intends to run for parliament and suggested that he would then -who knows- become prime minister.

"I gratefully accept your offer," he told the 500 delegates to thunderous applause and a standing ovation. Asked by a delegate to govern the country as prime minister in 2008, Putin said it was a "realistic idea" under two conditions: an overwhelming victory by United Russia in the Dec. 2 elections and the selection of a "worthy candidate for the presidency" with whom he could cooperate. In his 20-minute introductory speech, Putin threw his support behind the pro-Kremlin party, praising its work and stressing that he had helped created it six years ago. "I not only supported the creation of the party in 2001, I was among its initiators," he said.

The european press decries this manipulation of democracy and wonders if it will really ensure stability.

The Financial Times writes:

"This plan is in stark contrast to the hierarchy of powers envisaged by the Russian constitution. It immediately raises the question of who will have the ultimate say in future: the newly elected president or his dynamic predecessor who is head of government."

The conservative Die Welt writes:

"Power in Russia is looking for a new bottle, but it's still the same old wine ... One can interpret this solution as something positive. There had been some forecasts of a phase of instability after Putin left office, with an internal conflict between Putin pulling the strings in the background and the new president, even if he were there with Vladimir's blessing. If Putin becomes prime minister then this conflict will be avoided, and the power relations will be fixed for some time. But stability has a high price. The state, society and economy in Russia will become even more rigid."A society that is forced together by authoritarian centralism will inevitably develop countervailing forces again. Putin's stability is only borrowed and, therefore, won't last long."

Yes, we know from past experience that the selection of a successor in Russia depends most heavily on that person’s ability to shield his or her benefactors from investigations and prosecution for their alleged legal sins.

So The Guardian wrote:

Mr Putin's novel plan to continue as prime minister after his presidency ends next year is all but certain to be enacted. Power will simply flow to him in his new incarnation, according to Jörg Himmelreich, of the German Marshall Fund. "It's a smart step to stay in charge. Some people say it will make Russia more democratic by shifting power to the Duma [parliament]. Don't believe it. It's a good marketing move ... the new president, whoever that is, will dance to Putin's tune."

But Robert Amsterdam insists that we should never underestimate Moscow’s ability to sell the story they want told. In an effort to project this image of stability and strength, the Kremlin has resorted to instinct: more and more aggressive interference on international crisis issues like Iran, Kosovo, and Myanmar. Once again more doublespeak from Gazprom, promising to be good supplier to Europe while flexing political muscle on the Ukraine.

In other words, everything looks like business as usual over there.

Putin's approval rating is above 75 percent, meaning his association with United Russia would almost guarantee that the party would retain its two-thirds majority in the Duma -- and likely collect additional seats. Recent polls have indicated that United Russia was on course to secure 50 percent of the vote. Putin's much criticised restrictions on free media and free expression, and his crackdown on political dissent, do not seem to worry the mass of Russians.

The Kremlin website offers the remarks at the United Russia Party Congress.

Yanukovich wins, Tymoshenko will rule

The party of Ukraine's prime minister, Viktor Yanukovich, has overtaken its main rival, the orange party of former premier Yulia Tymoshenko, to claim the largest share of the vote in the country's parliamentary election.But Tymoshenko is still expected to become the new prime minister at the head of an orange coalition with Viktor Yushchenko, Ukraine's pro-western president, whose Our Ukraine bloc has won 14.94% of the votes counted. Two exit polls had predicted that Mr Yanukovich's party would gain the largest share of the vote. He insisted today it would still form the next government. Yes, the Prime Minister was today reluctant to concede defeat. He said: "Nothing confirms the Orange forces' victory. There aren't official results yet and to draw conclusions on exit polls is irresponsible."

"Moscow now has little political capital in the Ukraine with the revived Orange coalition of Ms Tymoshenko and the President Viktor Yushchenko" said Tony Halpin, Moscow Correspondent of The Times. 

Ukaine is voting

Some 50% of the country's 37 million registered voters must have cast votes in order for the ballot to be valid. The results should be known on Monday. Then we will have A repeat, of the present coalition of the Party of Regions with left-wing allies or a restored Orange coalition of the Our Ukraine-People's Self-Defence and Tymoshenko blocs, which the leaders of both blocs say is their favoured outcome.

Ukrainiana offers some electoral videos (with transciption in english) as a summary of the Ukrainian Parliamentary Campaign 2007. Check Who's Who in Political Advertising.

In contrast to recent election campaigns, in which conflicting pro-Russian and pro-Western agendas were highlighted, the leading forces initially appeared to have heeded a call by President Yushchenko not to focus on divisive foreign policy issues. But as the campaign gathered pace, the Party of Regions called for a referendum to be held on giving the Russian language official status and on the possibility of Ukraine's Nato membership.

A Beast of Baku waiting for the end of Putin

The former 'Beast of Baku' wants now to bring down the Russian President next March, when Russia will hold its presidential elections. Drugaya Rossiya (Other Russia) is her political platform, an umbrella group of liberals, neo-Bolsheviks, and just about anyone else against Vladimir Putin. Kasparov is forty-four. He was the world chess champion for fifteen years. He was king of the 64 squares. Can he be a new tsar?

The Observer issued a short profile about him:

Born Garry Weinstein in 1963 in Baku, in the then Soviet state of Azerbaijan, Kasparov had a Jewish father and an Armenian mother. His father died when he was seven and his mother, Klara Kasparova, became and remains his inspiration and most loyal fan. She and former world champion Mikhail Botvinnik guided the prodigy to greatness. But despite establishing himself as the finest player in history, the half-Armenian, half-Jew was always going to struggle to endear himself to nationalist-minded Russians. He changed his name to avoid problems of anti-semitism in Soviet chess.

He is under risk now. As a precaution, Kasparov spends thousands of rubbles a month on security. He never eats in unfamiliar places and avoids flying with the state airline, Aeroflot.

Kasparov explained to The NewYorker why Mikhail Kasyanov, who had served for four years as Prime Minister under Putin and was now angling to run as the opposition’s Presidential candidate, would skip the Other Russia conference. Kasparov, unlike Kasyanov, believes that the opposition can challenge the Kremlin only after it grows, from the bottom up; his argument, which prevailed, was that the Other Russia had to hold extensive Presidential primaries in the Russian provinces, with numerous debates and public meetings, before choosing its nominee in October. “What’s the point otherwise?” Kasparov said. “The only chance to capture people’s attention and get the crowds to come, to get engaged, is by demonstrating that we act democratically.”

Although Kasparov’s popularity ratings are higher than Kasyanov’s, they are both marginal in the Land of Putin. Even if Kasparov decides to run (and he probably will), the government would not likely register his candidacy, and, even if it did, he could not win. The point is to create an alternative, not to be deluded into thinking there is an open election that can be won. Besides, Kasparov is half Armenian, half Jewish—not exactly an ideal ethnic mix for a politician in a country with deep currents of anti-Caucasian and anti-Semitic feeling.

But also the problem for Kasparov is that his liberal agenda of transparent democracy, freedom of speech and civil rights is not one that sets the great melancholy heart of Russia beating with pride. In the minds of many Russians, liberal democracy is strongly associated with the corruption of the Yeltsin years.

"All the polls show that no more than 1% or 2% of Russians would vote for the Other Russia coalition," said Valery Fyodorov from Russian Public Opinion Research.

He took part on a debate at El Mundo, a spanish newspaper, some days ago. There he said "Chess has got rules, but in Russia is the Kremlin who creates them".

Kasparov’s popularity ratings are higher than Kasyanov’s, but they are both marginal in the Land of Putin. Everyone thinks that Putin will select his successor, much as his predecessor, Boris Yeltsin, designated him—unless he forgoes his promise to stand down and changes the constitution to allow a third term. Although a great many Russians would not object if he were to declare himself, Mobutu style, President for Life, it seems increasingly unlikely that he will stay.

While that, opposition finds it dificult to unite.

Vote and we will see how we fix it

The tomorrow's vote is being presented to the public as the solution to the ongoing political crisis brought about by feuding between President Viktor Yushchenko and Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych. This expectationcan be disappointinig. Ukraine’s political problems run deeper than another set of elections can possibly fix. President Yushchenko knows that the root cause of the friction between him and the prime minister is a struggle for power and authority in Ukraine’s political system.

The real battle will take place between the Party of Regions, headed by Yanukovych, the Our Ukraine – National Self-Defense coalition supported by Yushchenko and Yulia Tymoshenko’s eponymous bloc. And the two established parties are unlikely to do well in the voting. The Socialists may not even top the 3-percent cutoff to enter parliament, and the Communists, currently rejoicing at the woes of their former adherent, now Socialist leader Oleksandr Moroz, may not do much better.

Yanukovych’s personal slogan – “What Yanukovych says, he does” – harks back to Kuchma’s main theme in his race for the presidency in 1994, when serving President Leonid Kravchuk was lampooned as “all words,” while Kuchma was the “man of action.”

The Party of Regions is feeling confident, and for good reason, writes Ivan Lozowy in Transitions Online.

A “grand coalition” between these two antagonists looks likely to be short-lived and the same goes for a Tymoshenko government. One result looks certain: people will soon start talking about yet another election.

Ukraine, traditionally passive in its politics, has been mobilised by the young democracy activists and will never be the same again. Some analysts are whispering about the possibility of a worst-case scenario – the Party of Regions garnering more than half the seats in parliament together with the communists, allowing them to form a government on their own. The two parties have worked as solid coalition partners in the Yanukovych-led government.

Why to vote again for Tymoshenko?

Vera Gerasynenko, 56, who was attending the pro-Yushchenko rally with her daughter Maria, 21, said to AFP that the choice on Sunday was between Ukraine's entry into Europe and being swallowed by giant neighbour Russia.

"Russia needs Ukraine as their colony. They're an empire," she said, describing Yanukovych as "a criminal, a sick man."

Why to vote for Yanukovych?

"Tymoshenko has the character of a Nazi. Ukraine will turn into a second Yugoslavia if she takes power," he said.

For Ian Traynor, a US campaign behind the turmoil in Kiev Because while the gains of the orange-bedecked "chestnut revolution" are Ukraine's, the campaign is an American creation, a sophisticated and brilliantly conceived exercise in western branding and mass marketing that, in four countries in four years, has been used to try to salvage rigged elections and topple unsavoury regimes. This type of campaign was first used in Europe in Belgrade in 2000 to beat Slobodan Milosevic at the ballot box: funded and organised by the US government, deploying US consultancies, pollsters, diplomats, the two big American parties and US non-government organisations.

Officially, the US government spent $41m organising and funding the year-long operation to get rid of Milosevic from October 1999. In Ukraine, the figure is said to be around according to TheGuardian.

Stickers, spray paint and websites are the young activists' weapons.

photo by Carpetblogger

Tymo, the Iron Lady

Timoshenko was the orange hope. And for Українська правда she stills the Iron Lady of Ukraine.

Tymoshenko's plaited hairstyle became iconic at the time of the Orange Revolution. Taras, one of the best bloggers of Ukraine, writes about the Tymo, who remains a divisive figure.

In Ukraine, the Iron Lady franchise belongs to Tymo, who has reveled in the brand, despite casual zig-zags between left and right in her international political orientation. (Last year, her party subscribed to an ideology of solidarism and reportedly sought membership in the Socialist International. This year, in the runup to the French presidential election, Tymoshenko surprised experts when she made overtures to Nicolas Sarkozy.)

Is she coming back to power?

Photo courtesy of Ukrayinska Pravda

Putin after Putin?

With his popularity still high, the Russian press has been speculating that Mr Putin might change the constitution to seek a third term if, as expected, the ruling party, United Russia, wins the parliamentary elections set for December. But Russia's president created fresh uncertainty yesterday about who he wants to succeed him next spring when he warmly praised Viktor Zubkov, the virtually unknown bureaucrat he appointed this week as prime minister, and failed to mention either of the two senior figures previously thought to be frontrunners. Mr Zubkov was deputy to the future president from 1992 to 1993 in the external affairs department of the St Petersburg mayor's office.

But what will happen after Putin?

"We are developing a multi-party system. I've been thinking a lot about how Russia should be governed after 2008. I see no solution other than democracy and a multi-party system,"

Well-known political scientists set forth a number of suggestions in the interview with Московский Комсомолец, assuming that the president could possibly start a business of his own, become a diplomat, take a high position that doesn’t require overworking, or find another way to continue running the country. The most popular suggestion is that Putin will become the head of a large energy corporation based of Gazprom. Such is the opinion of Dmitriy Rogozin who believes it to be the only way for Putin to maintain his power. International Olympic Committee President is also mentioned.

"I don't interfere in your politics, please don't interfere in ours,"

Vladimir Putin’s interview today was during a meeting of about 40 foreign experts on Russia invited by the state news agency, Ria Novosti. Most were from the US, Britain, Germany,
China and Japan. He started the meeting with a two-and-a-half hour lunch in which he took questions then invited the group to a villa where he off ered drinks on a terrace with a magnifi
cent view to waves breaking 100 feet below. In a rare view for foreigners, he led the way through his own offi ce, past his desk where the Russian fl ag stood behind his chair. The group ,
known as the Valdai Discussion Club, has come to Russia every summer since 2004. Mr Putin has received them in diff erent venues each time. This year’s location, in the subtropical luxury of Russia’s Black sea coast, was the most exotic.

Mr Putin, looking relaxed and confident, suggested the Americans had not brought Iraq real democracy. "What kind of democratisation can they have in the context of military action?" he asked. He disagreed with those who recommend Iraq's partition as the best or only solution. "This would not end the Iraq problem but start a new one," he said.

Mr Putin was also directly critical of the US. "I don't interfere in your politics, please don't interfere in ours," he told a Washington academic referring to US funding for opposition groups and human rights organisations in Russia. He said independence was a very "expensive" thing in the modern world and only a few big countries such as India, China and Russia could afford it.

"Unfortunately, in some eastern European countries defence ministers are cleared by the US ambassador," before they are appointed, he said. "You know how decisions in Nato are taken," he said, hinting that the United States dominates the alliance undemocratically.

"Russia is a country which cannot live without its own sovereignty. It will either be independent and sovereign or it will be nothing," he said, acording to The Guardian.

Not in the same train

Not in the same train, originalmente cargada por nicointhebus [nicolas monnot].

"Russia is now saddly famous for its social contrasts, and it is true that they are really shocking. What in common between this old guy, that has probably fully experienced the hard years of communism and who is probably now having some hard time to survive, and with this young girl, living in the dangerous dreams of an extreme capitalism? They are both Russian, they take the same subway, but they do not go to the same destination" (Russia, Moscow, line 5, July 2006)

Congratulations to Nicola Monnot. (ranked #1 in Flickr Explore)

Lithuania wants to e-vote like E-stonia

Lithuania aims to follow fellow Baltic state Estonia and use the Internet for voting in elections, the government said on this month. 

Estonia in March became the first country in the world to allow voting via the Internet in a national parliamentary election. Other countries are studying the idea. Lithuania said it hoped to launch its system in time for elections in 2008.

"I hope that in this area we will catch up with Estonia, and by doing this we will surpass most European Union states," Prime Minister Gediminas Kirkilas told a news conference.

The government said it approved a program to pave the way for Internet voting at a cost of about 580,000 euros. In Estonia, 3 percent of the 940,000 eligible voters used e-voting

If Bush reads the New York Times should leave Irak

The Road Home

It is time for the United States to leave Iraq, without any more delay than the Pentagon needs to organize an orderly exit.

•

Like many Americans, we have put off that conclusion, waiting for a sign that President Bush was seriously trying to dig the United States out of the disaster he created by invading Iraq without sufficient cause, in the face of global opposition, and without a plan to stabilize the country afterward.

At first, we believed that after destroying Iraq’s government, army, police and economic structures, the United States was obliged to try to accomplish some of the goals Mr. Bush claimed to be pursuing, chiefly building a stable, unified Iraq. When it became clear that the president had neither the vision nor the means to do that, we argued against setting a withdrawal date while there was still some chance to mitigate the chaos that would most likely follow.

While Mr. Bush scorns deadlines, he kept promising breakthroughs — after elections, after a constitution, after sending in thousands more troops. But those milestones came and went without any progress toward a stable, democratic Iraq or a path for withdrawal. It is frighteningly clear that Mr. Bush’s plan is to stay the course as long as he is president and dump the mess on his successor. Whatever his cause was, it is lost.

The political leaders Washington has backed are incapable of putting national interests ahead of sectarian score settling. The security forces Washington has trained behave more like partisan militias. Additional military forces poured into the Baghdad region have failed to change anything.

Continuing to sacrifice the lives and limbs of American soldiers is wrong. The war is sapping the strength of the nation’s alliances and its military forces. It is a dangerous diversion from the life-and-death struggle against terrorists. It is an increasing burden on American taxpayers, and it is a betrayal of a world that needs the wise application of American power and principles.

A majority of Americans reached these conclusions months ago. Even in politically polarized Washington, positions on the war no longer divide entirely on party lines. When Congress returns this week, extricating American troops from the war should be at the top of its agenda.

That conversation must be candid and focused. Americans must be clear that Iraq, and the region around it, could be even bloodier and more chaotic after Americans leave. There could be reprisals against those who worked with American forces, further ethnic cleansing, even genocide. Potentially destabilizing refugee flows could hit Jordan and Syria. Iran and Turkey could be tempted to make power grabs. Perhaps most important, the invasion has created a new stronghold from which terrorist activity could proliferate.

The administration, the Democratic-controlled Congress, the United Nations and America’s allies must try to mitigate those outcomes — and they may fail. But Americans must be equally honest about the fact that keeping troops in Iraq will only make things worse. The nation needs a serious discussion, now, about how to accomplish a withdrawal and meet some of the big challenges that will arise. (...)

The Fight Against Terrorists

Despite President Bush’s repeated claims, Al Qaeda had no significant foothold in Iraq before the invasion, which gave it new base camps, new recruits and new prestige.

This war diverted Pentagon resources from Afghanistan, where the military had a real chance to hunt down Al Qaeda’s leaders. It alienated essential allies in the war against terrorism. It drained the strength and readiness of American troops.

And it created a new front where the United States will have to continue to battle terrorist forces and enlist local allies who reject the idea of an Iraq hijacked by international terrorists. The military will need resources and bases to stanch this self- inflicted wound for the foreseeable future. (...)

The Civil War

One of Mr. Bush’s arguments against withdrawal is that it would lead to civil war. That war is raging, right now, and it may take years to burn out. Iraq may fragment into separate Kurdish, Sunni and Shiite republics, and American troops are not going to stop that from happening.

It is possible, we suppose, that announcing a firm withdrawal date might finally focus Iraq’s political leaders and neighboring governments on reality. Ideally, it could spur Iraqi politicians to take the steps toward national reconciliation that they have endlessly discussed but refused to act on.

But it is foolish to count on that, as some Democratic proponents of withdrawal have done. The administration should use whatever leverage it gains from withdrawing to press its allies and Iraq’s neighbors to help achieve a negotiated solution.

Iraq’s leaders — knowing that they can no longer rely on the Americans to guarantee their survival — might be more open to compromise, perhaps to a Bosnian-style partition, with economic resources fairly shared but with millions of Iraqis forced to relocate. That would be better than the slow-motion ethnic and religious cleansing that has contributed to driving one in seven Iraqis from their homes.

The United States military cannot solve the problem. Congress and the White House must lead an international attempt at a negotiated outcome. To start, Washington must turn to the United Nations, which Mr. Bush spurned and ridiculed as a preface to war.

The Human Crisis

There are already nearly two million Iraqi refugees, mostly in Syria and Jordan, and nearly two million more Iraqis who have been displaced within their country. Without the active cooperation of all six countries bordering Iraq — Turkey, Iran, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Syria — and the help of other nations, this disaster could get worse. Beyond the suffering, massive flows of refugees — some with ethnic and political resentments — could spread Iraq’s conflict far beyond Iraq’s borders.

Kuwait and Saudi Arabia must share the burden of hosting refugees. Jordan and Syria, now nearly overwhelmed with refugees, need more international help. That, of course, means money. The nations of Europe and Asia have a stake and should contribute. The United States will have to pay a large share of the costs, but should also lead international efforts, perhaps a donors’ conference, to raise money for the refugee crisis.

Washington also has to mend fences with allies. There are new governments in Britain, France and Germany that did not participate in the fight over starting this war and are eager to get beyond it. But that will still require a measure of humility and a commitment to multilateral action that this administration has never shown. And, however angry they were with President Bush for creating this mess, those nations should see that they cannot walk away from the consequences. To put it baldly, terrorism and oil make it impossible to ignore.

The United States has the greatest responsibilities, including the admission of many more refugees for permanent resettlement. The most compelling obligation is to the tens of thousands of Iraqis of courage and good will — translators, embassy employees, reconstruction workers — whose lives will be in danger because they believed the promises and cooperated with the Americans.

The Neighbors

One of the trickiest tasks will be avoiding excessive meddling in Iraq by its neighbors — America’s friends as well as its adversaries.

Just as Iran should come under international pressure to allow Shiites in southern Iraq to develop their own independent future, Washington must help persuade Sunni powers like Syria not to intervene on behalf of Sunni Iraqis. Turkey must be kept from sending troops into Kurdish territories.

For this effort to have any remote chance, Mr. Bush must drop his resistance to talking with both Iran and Syria. Britain, France, Russia, China and other nations with influence have a responsibility to help. Civil war in Iraq is a threat to everyone, especially if it spills across Iraq’s borders.

•

President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney have used demagoguery and fear to quell Americans’ demands for an end to this war. They say withdrawing will create bloodshed and chaos and encourage terrorists. Actually, all of that has already happened — the result of this unnecessary invasion and the incompetent management of this war.

This country faces a choice. We can go on allowing Mr. Bush to drag out this war without end or purpose. Or we can insist that American troops are withdrawn as quickly and safely as we can manage — with as much effort as possible to stop the chaos from spreading

.

The New York Times has said enough is enough about Irak in a full page editorial article which is a piece of good journalism and an example of patriotism.

What she will do now?

Latvia’s longest serving president, Vaira Vike-Freiberga, left office last month with an emotional goodbye speech to the people. She became President of Latvia in 1999. Although not a candidate in the first ballot, she was drafted by the Saeima (Latvian Parliament) and was elected to the office of President of Latvia. She was sworn in on 8 July. Her election coincided with the offer of European Union (EU) membership to Latvia at the EU Summit at Helsinki 1999.

Latvia’s president is elected for four years and the duties include foreign affairs and defense. The president also can propose legislation and can return measures approved by the Saeima for reconsideration.

Born in Riga in 1937, she was forced to live in exile most of her life, like so many other members of the Latvian elite. After growing up in refugee camps in Germany, she went to a French school in the French protectorate of Marocco, and then studied in Canada, where she became a professor of psychology in 1965.

Her views are said to be quite conservative though she has no political affiliation. She is also a strong supporter of the U.S. policy in Iraq and on various occasions she has asked that Russia admit to the Soviet occupation of the Baltic States. Her relationship with the russian-speaking comunity was, however, difficult. When she took over as a presidente promised to learn Russian language, but she never did, as she explained to me in our second, and last, interview at her residence in Jurmala in July 2006.

Cosmopolis keeps record of her views of russian problem.

For centuries, Latvians were under German, Swedish, Russian and later Soviet domination. This has created today's strong nationalism among Latvians which even led to some problems with the European Court of Justice. I pointed out to the president that 15 to 17% of the people living in Latvia do not have the Latvian nationality, even though most of them were borne here. Most of them are Russians who moved here after the Second World War, during the Soviet occupation and colonisation.

Vike-Freiberga responded that Latvia's nationality laws are not very different from the ones in Germany, where Turkish immigrants - sometimes even third-generation residents - do not automatically receive the German nationality. She is right, but I had no time to point out that Germany applies ius sanguinis instead of ius solis, contributing to its serious immigration and minority integration problem; therefore, can rarely be cited as an example to follow.

However, the president came up with some substantial arguments in favor of her position. She pointed out to the fact that, at the moment Latvia regained its independence after decades of Soviet military occupation and that it took Latvians five years more to get the Red Army to leave. In that situation, the president explained, giving the occupiers automatic citizenship would have meant sanctifying the occupation and accepting its legitimacy.

She always felt that history was not being re-written by acknowledging that the Soviets had occupied the three Baltic nations and that, for Latvia, the end of World War II meant the occupation by one foreign totalitarian regime being replaced by the occupation by another foreign totalitarian regime.

Vike-Freiberga was certainly a thorn in the side of the political elite. She dominated the Latvian political stage from 1999 to 2007, and achieved unheard-of levels of popular support from a jaded public that is typically suspicious of the political class. Indeed, her success was largely based on her status as an outsider – a retired psychology professor from the French-speaking University of Montreal in Canada, she had been resident in Latvia for less than a year when elected president. As Daunis Auers, teacher at the department of political science at the University of Latvia writes for Transitions Online: "She devoted most of her presidency to foreign affairs, believing that Latvia’s future security would be guaranteed by rapid accession to the European Union and NATO",

In Latvia, if nowhere else, she was seen as a major international player. This also meant that she rose above the grubby infighting of the Latvian political scene. As a result, she was an inspirational figure, representing the Latvia that many wanted to see – sophisticated, intellectual, and punching above its weight – rather than the Latvia that actually existed.

What she will do now?

Daragoi Daragoi Mockba (Expensive Expensive Moscow)

Russia's capital Moscow has been named as the world's most expensive city for expatriate staff to live for the second year in a row. London climbed three places to second in Mercer Human Resource Consulting's 2007 Cost of Living study. Asian cities Seoul, Tokyo and Hong Kong completed the top five. Paraguay's capital Asuncion was the cheapest.The report measures the cost of 200 items such as housing, clothing and food in 143 cities on six continents.

The high cost of accommodation and a favourable exchange rate against the US dollar were the key factors behind Moscow's continued dominance of the annual cost-of-living survey.

"Don't touch our flag!"

The Latvian police asked judges to prosecute two Spanish and two Portuguese citizens accused of desecrating the Latvian flag, officials confirmed in May.

The incident dates to May 16th, when seven tourists reportedly tore down and stamped on a Latvian flag in Riga, security police spokeswoman Kristine Apse-Krumina told Deutsche Presse-Agentur dpa.

Police subsequently detained the two Spaniards and five Portuguese on a bridge. Local media reported that they were carrying several Latvian flags, and that more were floating in the river, having apparently been jettisoned when the group saw the police.

The seven said that they had not intended to insult the Latvian flag, but had merely wanted to take souvenirs home, the Leta news agency reported. An initial investigation of the incident concluded that three of the seven had not been involved in the flag-stealing.

Baltic Times reported:

Police in Riga have detained seven foreigners, Spanish and Portuguese nationals, for damaging Latvia's national flag, a police representative said. Police spokesman Aigars Berzins said the foreigners were trampling on the Latvian flag in the Old City and were held later in Pardaugava on the left bank of the Daugava River, not far from a suspension bridge. The men were visibly drunk, and officers found more damaged Latvian flags on them, but the vandals had managed to throw some of the flags in the river. The young men have been taken to a police station, and are facing criminal prosecution for desecrating a national symbol. Two of the detained are Spanish nationals, aged 25 and 24, while five are Portuguese, aged 25 to 36. If found guilty they may face up to three-year jail terms, community work or fines of up to 50 minimum wages.

Under Latvia's criminal code, the maximum penalty for such an offence is up to 3 years in jail or a fine of up to 6,000 lats (8,537 euro, 11,494 dollars).

Latvia has seen a boom in tourism since it joined the EU in 2004. However, its reputation for cheap alcohol and beautiful women has made it a favourite destination for all-male groups whose behaviour has in some cases caused great offence. In the most outstanding incident, a British tourist was prosecuted last November for urinating on the national Freedom Monument on Remembrance Day.

The British embassy in Riga launched a campaign this spring to urge travellers to behave responsibly. Other embassies are studying the campaign with a view to possibly taking similar action.

Narva, Estonia's third largest city, is now at the centre of geopolitical tensions not seen in the region since the collapse of the Soviet Union nearly two decades ago. Some analysts are calling it 'the new Cold War'. The concern spreads far beyond Narva and the frontier. Estonia has been hit by riots linked to the tensions. New disputes pit states that emerged from the collapse of the Soviet Union throughout much of Eastern Europe against their former overlords.

The internet warfare broke out on April 27th, amid a furious row between Estonia and Russia over the removal of a Soviet war monument from the centre of the capital, Tallinn, to a military cemetery. Estonia's prime minister, Andrus Ansip, first raised the issue for party advantage. He wanted his Reform party, founded by zealously free-market ex-communists, to pinch some patriotic votes from other centre-right parties in the March parliamentary elections. His country is now paying a colossal political, social and diplomatic price.



Stonians are blaming Russia for stoking riots in Tallinn last month in which one died and 153 were injured, for the roughing up of Estonian diplomats in Moscow and for a massive 'cyber-attack' on the infrastructure of the small Baltic state, as The Observer publishes:

According to Andres Kasekamp, director of Tallinn's Foreign Policy Institute, the Russian government is mounting a deliberate attempt to destabilise former Soviet republics. 'This strategy is intensifying as Moscow's attitude to the US, the UK and the EU becomes more aggressive and assertive,' Kasekamp said. 'They are seeing how far they can push us, the European Union, Nato, the Americans, everybody.' Some Estonians even fear Moscow may be searching for a casus belli. At the international level the Russian testing last week of an inter-continental ballistic missile led to an extraordinary diplomatic spat between the US Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice - who deplored Moscow's 'missile diplomacy' - and Russian President Vladimir Putin, who attacked American 'imperialism'.

Then there are profound disagreements over the future of Kosovo and policy on Iran, a row over the rights of major British commercial investors to parts of the massive Siberian gasfields, harassment of British officials and diplomats in Moscow, and a series of apparently state-encouraged propaganda pieces in the Russian media against the West. Analysts are talking of relations between Moscow and London being at a 25-year low.

The Economist is more critic

Ignoring the looting, media there claim that “anti-fascist schoolchildren” trying to stop Estonians “demolishing” the memorial were “tortured” by the “inhuman” police. Russia's foreign minister said Estonia was behaving “disgustingly”. A delegation of Russian politicians, invited to see that the monument had been moved, not demolished, called for the government's resignation before setting off. On arrival, they repeatedly insulted their hosts, while demanding that “political prisoners” be freed.

This has scary echoes for Estonians. In 1940 a Soviet delegation issued similarly phrased demands. Weeks later, Estonia was wiped off the map. The protests also sit oddly with the ruthless way that entirely peaceful and purely political protests are squashed in Russia, as well as with the often casual treatment of war memorials there.

The turning towards the west is repeated in almost every field. The ruling coalition in Estonia, returned to power after elections in March, has continued the fiercely Thatcherite-Reaganite economics of its recent predecessors. A single flat income tax of 22 per cent, low business taxes and cheap, weak welfare provision have, government supporters claim, led to a spectacular annual economic growth of more than 10 per cent and negligible unemployment - outside the poorer industrial and agricultural areas. Money is coming from the West too.

But why Russia is behaving in this way? For The Observer domestic factors are also important: "With parliamentary and presidential elections within the next year, Putin is playing to the crowd and strengthening the position of his possible successor, the Defence Minister Sergei Ivanov. 'To an extent it's theatre,' said one UK-based diplomat. 'And it is logical that Estonia has a key role."

But, even if there was some outside interference, the demonstrations around the memorial and the riots were a powerful reminder to Estonia's government not to forget the country's ethnic Russian minority.

Say what you want about Yeltsin – and you are probably right.

Who was Boris Yeltsin? Westerners see Yeltsin as the defiant reformer with the thick thatch of white hair and the growl for a voice who stood atop a tank in 1991 to help bring down the Soviet Union. Russians, however, remember the flaccid face of Yeltsin's second presidential term, the slurred speech, the extended absences and a tenure stained by bloodshed, corruption and widespread economic hardship.
Yeltsin was the first Russian politician whose legitimacy rested on the genuine popular support of the masses, and he brought public politics to a country where for centuries politics had been confined to the czars' court intrigues and Politburo fights behind the curtain. But many people feel that he oversaw the terrible economic crisis in Russia in the late 1990s and started a very unpopular war in Chechnya, a mistake that has been a failure for Putin.

Bill Keller, editor of the New York Times, was correspondent in Moscow from 1986 to 1991 and remembers Yeltsin as a "talented politician" like Gorbachev. But Yeltsin understood that the party should be abandoned somehow, and Gorbi wanted to fix it. Hear the audio and the slideshow here.

He entered in the spotlight in 1991, when he climbed to the top a tank to rally Muscovites to put down a right-wing coup against Mr. Gorbachev, a heroic moment etched in the minds of the Russian people and television viewers around the world; it ended with his electrifying resignation speech on New Year’s Eve 1999.

His kedy-dates:

1. July 1990: Resigns from Communist Party
2. June 1991: Elected president of Russian republic (in USSR)
3. August 1991: Rallies citizens against anti-Gorbachev coup, bans Russian Communist party
4. December 1991: Takes over from Mikhail Gorbachev as head of state
5. 1992: Lifts price controls, launches privatisation
6. October 1993: Russia on brink of civil war, Yeltsin orders tanks to fire at parliament
7. December 1994: Sends tanks into Chechnya
8. June 1996: Re-elected as Russian president, suffers heart attack during campaign
9. 1998: Financial crisis, rouble loses 75% of its value
10. December 1999: Resigns, appoints Vladimir Putin successor

In office less than nine years, beginning with the collapse of the Soviet Union, and plagued by severe health problems and alcoholism, Yeltsin added a final chapter to his historical record when, in 1999, he stunned Russians and the world by announcing his resignation, becoming the first Russian leader to give up power on his own in accordance with constitutional processes.

For The New YorkTimes, his relationship with the United States was a complicated one. President Clinton seized on the fall of the Soviet Union as an opportunity to advance American interests, and he and Mr. Yeltsin maintained a strikingly good rapport. In his dealings with Mr. Yeltsin, Mr. Clinton was protective, careful not to tempt old-line Communists to try to turn the clock back to dictatorship. There was some success between the two countries on nuclear issues, the removal of Soviet troops from the Baltic states and Moscow’s cooperation with NATO as it expanded toward the borders of Russia itself.

Like Peter Rutland wrote in Transitions Online, say what you want about Yeltsin – and you’re probably right. The former president's legacy remains controversial in today's Russia.

A good source of documentation about his excinting existence is Midnight Diaries, by Boris Yeltsin. Public Affairs, 12 October 2000. 336 pages, in English. Translated from Russian. I bought it in St. Petersbourg in 2005, and even if it is too partial, stills useful to understand the character. For Elena Chinyaeva, he embodied Russia in its troubled years: large, imposing, unpredictable, thirsty for change, riddled with problems, highly temperamental, exhausted, and totally lacking of nicely measured, decent manners.

Boris Yeltsin is a man who once escaped his enemies within the Communist Party in a military airplane, hugging a cannon. He mounted a tank calling for the nation to embrace democracy. He fell off a bridge during a dubious night rendezvous. He slept at Shannon Airport, snoring, while the Irish prime minister stood by, waiting in vain. Drunk, and looking like a true Russian bear, he directed an orchestra in Berlin during a ceremony devoted to the Russian army leaving Germany. He started a bloody Chechen war. He danced, clumsily and enthusiastically, through his presidential campaign, despite two heart attacks.

Unlike his predecessor Mikhail Gorbachev and his successor, Vladimir Putin, Yeltsin was able to overcome his Soviet background, writes Masha Lipman in The Washington Post.

After rising to a high-ranking position in the Communist Party, he reformed into a staunch anti-communist and associated himself with Russia's liberals and Westernizers, including prominent Soviet dissident Andrei Sakharov. Yeltsin was a statesman with a clear vision and a strong sense of purpose: he committed himself to ridding Russia of communism and attaining freedom for his country, whose people had always lived in fear of the state.

Yeltsin achieved both goals: He made his victory over communism irreversible, and he turned Russia into a free nation. The coup in 1991 was above all a revolution -- even if it proved short-lived -- of public attitudes. The Russian people overcame their fear, they came to believe in freedom and in themselves, and they united to change the country's direction.

Mistakes? Many. During the rule of his successor, the phrase "the chaos of the '90s" has been firmly tied to Yeltsin's tenure. But he was running against time: The and turmoil of the early post-communist years left the Russian people frustrated and disillusioned, and they came to hate him as fiercely as they had loved him only a few years earlier. His compatriots, having no experience with freedom, failed to use their newfound options to make their lives better; they expected him to be their benefactor, and when he failed to deliver they resented and condemned him.

He was a drunk, but after all a modernizer. Even in his death: Yeltsin's funeral was the first for a head of state sanctioned by the Church since Tsar Alexander III's in 1894, helping to restore the role of the Russian Orthodox Church in the life of the country and its people. Al least that is what Church spokesman Metropolitan Kirill said. Read what russian newspapers said on his death in Sean's Russia Blog

Writing on RIA Novsoti, political commentator Vladimir Simonov claims that the Sinatra song My Way best described Yeltsin.

So, final courtain for him.

Do svidanja, Boris Yeltsin

He destroyed the Soviet framework that kept the satellite states of Eastern Europe under eroding, but determined, Kremlin control, effectively dismantling the geopolitical structure that had fueled the Cold War for four decades. It was perhaps the most significant political change in modern history.

But he also sent tanks into the Russian streets to ensure his own power when it was threatened by old-line Communists in 1993. He unleashed a futile, brutal and, many would argue, immoral war against separatists in Chechnya in 1994 that leveled towns and villages and killed noncombatants in the thousands.

As a popular Russian joke in the late '90s had it, “Mikhail Gorbachev took us to the edge of the abyss, and Yeltsin took us one step further.”

Chernobyl at home

A report published this week has suggested that air pollution in big cities ould be as damaging to our health as the radiation Chernobyl survivors were exposed to. But short of moving to the countryside, what can city dwellers do? Quite a lot, actually. Leo Hickman offers in The Guardian 10 tips on how to breathe more easily

"Take a deep breath. If you live in an urban environment, which four out of five of us now do, then you are exposing yourself to a cocktail of airborne pollutants that could be seriously damaging your health". And all becasue the air pollution you suck into your lungs each day could be shortening your life expectancy even more than the radiation exposure suffered by survivors of the Chernobyl disaster in 1986.

Meanwhile the World Health Organisation reports that transport-related air pollution — which now causes the vast majority of urban air pollution — causes a wide range of health problems including "cancer, adverse pregnancy and birth outcomes, and lowering of male fertility". In 2004, a report said that a pedestrian walking down Marylebone Road in London would draw in the equivalent pollution of one cigarette in just 48 minutes. But other than moving to the countryside, what practical steps can city dwellers take to reduce their exposure to urban air pollution? Quite a lot, it turns out.

1 Watch where you walk

One of the best ways to reduce your exposure to air pollution, says Dr Roy Colvile, a senior lecturer in air-quality management at Imperial College London, is to avoid walking along busy streets and thoroughfares, instead choosing side streets and parks. Carefully choosing your route has a "dramatic" effect, he says, because pollution levels can fall by a factor of 10 just by moving a few metres away from the main source of the pollution — exhaust fumes. "Just by being one block away makes a massive difference as the high pollution levels are generally restricted to fairly small areas within a city," he says. Also, try to avoid walking down "street can yons" (where tall buildings hug tightly to the sides of streets, creating valleys in which pollutants build up), don't walk behind smokers, and walk on the windward side of the street where exposure to pollutants can be 50% less than on the leeward side.

2 Pavement sense

When you're crossing a road, stand well back from the kerb while you wait for the lights to change or for a gap in the traffic. Every metre really does count when you are in close proximity to traffic, according to Colvile. "Do all you can to avoid getting stuck for too long on a central reservation," he adds. As the traffic moves off from a standstill, the fumes can dissipate in just a few seconds, particularly if the wind is up, which means holding your breath during this momentary period can make a difference, silly as that might sound. Also, don't dawdle: cross the road as quickly as possible. And once you're over, continue along the pavement as far away from the kerb as possible.

3 Avoid pollution spikes

Predictably, there are large spikes in pollution during times of high traffic congestion — ie, the morning and late-afternoon rush hours. Pollution levels generally fall during the night-time. The time of year can also make a big difference. Pollution levels tend to be at their lowest during the spring and autumn when winds are at their "freshest"; the trapping effect of extreme cold and hot spells tend to exacerbate the build-up of pollutants.

Venturing outside when there is less pollution obviously makes sense, but of course that's not always realistic. In fact, the hottest part of a summer's day — the time when most office workers go outside during their lunchbreak — is a particularly bad time to head out, according to Noel Nelson, one of the authors of the Royal Commission report. Walking in the rain, conversely, is a good way of avoiding the worse excesses of air pollution, he adds, as the rain "cleans" the air both by washing out the pollutants and bringing with it fresher air.

4 Wear a mask

Masks can be a good thing, but they only make a difference if they fit tightly and are cleaned regularly. Even the slightest gap to allow you to breathe more easily will cancel out any benefits. Worse, if you fail to clean or change the mask regularly there is a danger of allowing oily organic compounds to build up on the filter. Build-up can make the air you breathe dirtier rather than cleaner. As for looking like Michael Jackson while you go about your daily business . . . only you can decide how high a price you're willing to pay for clean lungs.

5 Pushchairs

According to the Royal Commission report, several recent studies indicate that "children living close to busy roads have an approximate 50% increased risk of experiencing respiratory illness, including asthma". Children are smaller than adults and therefore that much closer to the source of pollution when walking besides roads. They also have a faster metabolic rate and breathe more rapidly, and tend to inhale more pollution, proportionate to their size, than adults. One small step that can be taken is not to push them along in a buggy too close to traffic. Colvile advises positioning the buggy alongside you, instead of in front of you, when waiting to cross the road.

6 Beware of exercising in traffic

Cycling or jogging disproportionately expose you to air pollution — you inhale three times as much as if you were walking, according to Colvile — for the simple reason that your lungs are gasping for more air than the people you're speeding past on the pavement. The best times of day to exercise, thus avoiding the worst excesses of air pollution, are early morning or in the evening. Alternatively, exercise indoors or in a park. Cyclists — for whom the exhaust of a car should be seen as being as much of a hazard as the front bumper — should stick to side-roads where possible.

7 Where to sit on the bus

Buses are cleaner in terms of their emissions than even just a decade ago, particularly London's fleet, but they still emit pollutants worth avoiding. Intriguingly, Colvile says that his own research shows that sitting on the driver's side of a bus can increase your exposure by 10% compared with sitting on the side nearest to the pavement. And sitting upstairs on a double-decker can reduce your exposure too. He says it's difficult to say whether travelling on an undergound train, if you have that option, is better or worse than taking the buses, but he does say that the air pollution on underground trains tends to be less toxic by weight than that found at street level because the pollution is principally made up of minute iron particles thrown up by the wheels travelling along the rails as opposed to the mixture of pollutants found in diesel and petrol fumes.

8 Protect yourself indoors too

We spend about 90% of our time indoors, on average, and two-thirds of that time is spent at home; more perhaps for some of the most vulnerable groups such as the elderly and children. And indoor pollution can actually be more of an issue than that found outdoors, it seems: studies by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) suggests that pollution levels can be two to five times higher indoors than out — and this can rapidly rise depending on what activity you are doing at home. It tends to be a different soup of chemical pollutants from the ones we encounter outside, and if anything, less is known about how they affect us. Our centrally-heated, carpeted, airtight homes only act to aggravate the situation.

Ventilating your home is therefore an important step to take in reducing risk — hopefully with air that's not full of air pollutants from the outside — as is using a good doormat to help prevent outdoor pollutants from the pavement being walked into your home. (The EPA has raised doubts about the claims made by some "ozone generating" indoor air purifiers, by the way.)

Feeling smug about the fact that you live high up in a flat away from outside air pollution? Well, unless you live in a penthouse at the top of a very tall skyscraper, then height doesn't seem to offer significant sanctuary. A study by Hong Kong's City University used laser measurements to show that pollution levels in the city remain constant up to heights of 700m. Living in the suburbs, away from major roads, seems the best way to avoid the worse excesses of urban air pollution. But that then means you are statistically far more likely to be a car owner and are therefore only exacerbating the situation.

9 Don't drive

The best thing you can do, both for yourself and for your fellow citizens, is to get out of the car. Fuel choice is also important: diesel may produce less carbon dioxide compared with petrol, which is good news in terms of climate change, but it produces more ground-level pollutants. While urban air-pollution levels today, compared with the "pea-soupers" of the mid-20th century, could be said to be vastly improved — healthy young men don't tend to drop down dead in the street now from air pollution as they did then, says Colvile — we are now exposed to a form of pollution that can much more readily enter our bloodstream. A particle of pollution today tends to be 100 times smaller than a particle of coal soot and therefore it can pass into the blood stream via the lungs as opposed to being caught in the bronchial passage. The full health implications of this shift in pollution type have yet to become fully apparent.

10 Get out of town!

As long as you go by public transport so as not to create yet more pollution, lifting yourself up and out of the urban mire offers at least a temporary escape. But don't head to the south-east corner of England. Colvile speaks of a "sheet of pollution from Europe", thick with sulphates, nitrates and ozone, that now regularly reaches across the Channel and can affect the counties south of London. For example, the air over the idyllically rural South Downs is only two to three times cleaner compared with the air over central London. Better instead to head to the nation's extremities, preferably facing into the winds blowing off the Atlantic

So breath normaly and leave forever.