Daria Kazarinova At the end of the second decade of the 21st century, problems of global security have become the main issues on the agenda of all regions of the world. Russia’s relations with the West have already entered the stage of the so-called new Cold War “with the elements of arms race, remilitarization and […]
The summit of the presidents of the United States and Russia Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin that took place earlier this week caused mixed reactions all over the world and in the member states in particular.
And while in Russia the attitude towards the national leader is extremely positive and towards his opponent – controversial, in the United States most establishment representatives, including Republicans and national media, lashed out at Donald Trump even harder than at Vladimir Putin.
On May 7 Vladimir Putin for the fourth time took office as the President of the Russian Federation and almost in a month made his first foreign visit of this term. On June 5 he paid a working visit to Austria and on June 8-10 – state visit to China where he also took part in the work of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization Summit. After the formation of the government and defining priorities for its domestic development, Russia is likely to avoid further confrontation and widen the space for dialogue.
The first Development of Parliamentarism International Forum was held in Moscow June 4-5, 2018. It brought together over 500 people from 96 countries. The Forum did epitomize such a rapidly expanding format of global interaction as parliamentary diplomacy. It can hardly be regarded as a new format of international cooperation, but it has acquired considerable relevance in recent years.
Today chemical weapons pose a more challenging and dangerous threat than even nuclear ones. Recent events in the UK’s Salisbury and Syrian city of Duma make one reassess the problem of chemical weapons
Amidst the deepening confrontation between Russia and the U.S., Rethinking Russia sat down with the professor of the European University in St. Petersburg, Ivan Kurilla, to discuss his new book “Frenemies” and the way of how Russia and the U.S. have been influencing each other throughout history.
With the Moscow confrontation with the West, Russia’s Defense Ministry uses it as a tool of bolstering the image of the army within the country. Specifically, it showcases its military potential and the newest weapon to counter American missile system in Eastern Europe. Yet, while the popularity of the Russian armed forces is increasing among the population, it is not the case in the West: some hardliners see the Kremlin as a force that provokes a new arms race.
There are so many global threats impacting the future of the Earth but Western democracies fear only one person – Vladimir Putin. That’s because on almost all geopolitical fronts of the emerging multipolar world, Russian President is deftly striking a blow against the collective challenge mounted by the West. It is thus no surprise that the West’s endless dread of Russia’s military power has made Putin the world’s most powerful man.
It is a generally accepted opinion nowadays that whatever international conflict or tension exists, there is always a track behind it. A Russian track. It is almost unanimously believed that Russia strikes first to exercise its imperialistic expansionism. However, has Russia been historically an international despot, or it is just perceived so? Let us have a quick fact check of the largest international conflicts for the last two centuries and see what they tell us.
With the expulsion of the Russian diplomats by the UK, the U.S. and some European countries, President Vladimir Putin’s ranking among Russians remains robust and high. Paradoxically, the Western pressure on the Russian leader contributed to his landslide victory during the presidential race and increased the voter turnout. In this hostile environment, Russians don’t see alternatives to the current President.