Vladimir Putin Thread

GarryB wrote:I look forward to hear what Putin says to the various western demands for Russian cooperation...

He appears to me to be the only Russian politician to actually understand the west and realise they truly are wolves in sheeps clothing.

TR1 wrote:Not hard to remain youthful with botox.

Regarding elections, come on, everyone who isn't a Nashist knows there was large scale fraud, both blatant (recorded on film), and more discrete (employers/universities influencing/forcing votes one way). Without it would Putin lose? Probably not.

Crappy that there is no alternative to vote for than that Yeltsin leftover.

TR1 wrote:Uniting while making domestic portion of populace (Kavkaz) an enemy. You can probably guess why I am not a Putin supporter.

What threat is there to Russia right now? Sounds exactly like that which Putin stuffed peoples ears with when he was first elected...

The threat to Russia is nationalistic, corrupt, thieves like Putin and his entourage.
They don't give a shit about Russia, their concern is themselves, money, and illusions of power.

And you should care about them pocketing Russia's money, because the estimates on corrupt elements whittling away resource from say military complex are shocking. Even in civilian life, the structure we have in Russia right now is horrible for fostering say small business creation and competitiveness. Why? Corrupt bastards who are already established are happy with their cash cows as they are, and resist any competitors that might force them to invest money out of their pocket into their businesses. And I am not talking in vague terms, this is directly from first and second hand experience of myself, family, and friends in trying to do business in Russia, be it something like restaurant operation, to small industrial projects.

Now, why did I go on this rant about corruption in Russia, in a Putin thread? It all comes down from the top, and will endure if those thieves stay there.

TheArmenian wrote:I watch the whole series.
They should have called it "Let's demonize Putin".

The BBC is soooo predictable.

Russia’s Foreign and Defense Policy during Putin’s Third Presidential Term

Vasiliy Kashin

Moscow Defence Brief 2012

In May 2012 Vladimir Putin will begin his third presidential term of office. Although he remained Russia’s most important politician even as prime minister, this is not going to be a mere change of decor. Putin’s return to the Kremlin may well herald a significant correction in Russia’s foreign and defense policy.

Foreign policy was one of those areas where President Dmitry Medvedev has demonstrated the greatest degree of independence over the past four years. It appears that his visit to the South Kuril Islands in November 2010, which caused the worst deterioration in Russian-Japanese relations in many years, was his personal initiative. After the visit Medvedev continued to demonstrate a hawkish stance on the territorial dispute with Japan, sending senior officials to the islands and pledging to strengthen their defenses. Such a stance was clearly designed to bolster Medvedev’s credentials as a protector and defender of national interests.

Even more importantly, Medvedev took a number of independent foreign policy steps aimed at mending fences with the United States. It was Medvedev’s decision to interpret the UN Security Council ban on weapons supplies to Iran, imposed on June 9, 2010, as sufficient grounds not to deliver the S-300PMU (SA-20B) SAM systems, for which Tehran signed a contract back in 2007. The president’s decision was opposed by the Foreign Ministry; senior ministry officials had gone as far as making some rather feeble attempts at getting it overturned, which by their standards is entirely extraordinary conduct.

The conflict with Medvedev eventually cost AndreyNesterenko, head of the Foreign Ministry’s press department, his job. He was fired because he continued to insist in his public statements that the sanctions do not apply to the S-300PMU-2 contract – even though he had already been informed of the president’s view to the contrary. In another curious twist, the Foreign Ministry dragged its feet with the sacking of Nesterenko in an apparent hope that Putin would intervene. As a result it took until January 2011 for Nesterenko to be formally dismissed.

Medvedev’s decision aimed to achieve a rapid improvement in Russian-Western relations – but the flip side of it was the loss of an 800m dollar contract with Iran and a general deterioration in relations between Moscow and Tehran. Domestically Medvedev faced accusations of ceding too much ground to the Americans and selling out Russia’s national interests. It must be pointed out, however, that the contract seemed destined to fall through in any event, given the general political context and the subsequent developments in the Iranian crisis.

A much more serious political standoff within Russia was triggered by another independent foreign policy decision by Medvedev – namely, not to oppose the military operation in Libya by NATO and its allies. That presidential decision was openly criticized by Prime Minister Putin; in fact, it was the first precedent since the early 1990s of top Russian leaders openly disagreeing on a foreign policy issue. Up until then, setting Russia’s foreign policy course had been an unquestioned prerogative of the president, a prerogative which was never assailed even during the darkest days of the Yeltsin presidency.

Even worse, the president’s stance on the Libyan conflict was openly questioned by a serving Russian diplomat. That, too was something unprecedented in Russia’s post-Soviet history. In March 2011 the Russian ambassador to Libya, Vladimir Chamov, sent a scandalous cable to Medvedev in which he described Russia’s decision not to veto UN Security Council Resolution 1973 as a betrayal of Russian national interests. Surprisingly, even though Chamov was recalled from his post in Libya, he was then appointed to a senior position in the Foreign Ministry. He even announced his difference of opinion with the Russian leadership in an interview with MoskovskiyKomsomolets, a popular tabloid.

It is therefore safe to assume that Putin’s return to the Kremlin will at the very least restore the president’s status as the sole decision-maker on foreign policy issues.

Nevertheless, Putin’s pre-election article “Russia and the Changing World” in MoskovskiyeNovosti, a high-brow broadsheet, suggests that Russian foreign policy priorities will remain essentially unchanged. The article contains the traditional criticisms of the United States and its closest NATO allies, who are accused of “undermining trust” by their policies on strategic security. It also accuses Washington of “diktat and arbitrariness” in the international arena.

Putin describes Russia’s relations with China and other countries in Asia Pacific as a growing priority. Ties with the EU are also viewed as important, but Putin complains of Europe’s discriminatory practices against Russian companies and highlights the continent’s economic problems, which are contrasting sharply with the rise of “China, India and other new economic powers”. He describes partnership with the United States as “lacking stability”. According to him, this is a consequence of America’s “phobias and stereotypes” about Russia, and of Washington’s aspiration to dominate and to ignore other countries’ interests. He views the Arab Spring as just another episode in a power struggle in the Middle East that has brought nothing but more bloodshed. He also stresses that Russia vehemently opposes the use of force to resolve the Iranian and North Korean nuclear problems, and rejects as a matter of principle the Western practice of “humanitarian intervention”.

Putin voiced even more outspoken views on the international situation in an interview with Russian national TV channels on November 17, 2011. Answering a question about the future of relations between Russia and China, he said that China’s aspiration was not to secure the natural resources of the adjacent territories but to become a world leader, adding that “we have no quarrel with China on that score”. “In this China has other competitors. Let them sort it out among themselves”. He also said that it was “usually our Western partners” who were trying to intimidate Russia with the alleged Chinese threat.

Russia is already seen as one of the decisive factors in determining the outcome of global rivalry between the United States and China. Russia itself does not believe that it is in a position to contend for world leadership, but it wants to capitalize on Sino-American rivalry. Moscow’s relations with Washington will be part of that balancing act. But, unfortunately, these relations are poisoned by deep-seated mistrust, which is evident from Putin’s foreign policy pronouncements.

As for Putin’s future policies on national defense, it is absolutely impossible at this point to make specific predictions about any reshuffles in the army, the uniformed agencies or the Russian defense industry that may or may not be in the pipeline. The Russian security and defense community is full of various rumors about such reshuffles, but the entire record of Putin’s personnel policy suggests that such rumors turn out to be true very seldom and only by coincidence. The Russian leader has always kept his intentions regarding his future appointments very close to his chest, and all attempts by external analysts to predict those intentions are almost always wide of the mark. But the recent appointment of Dmitry Rogozin, an outspoken nationalist, as the deputy prime minister in charge of the military-industrial complex may be a signal that serious reforms and reorganizations are in the pipeline. If that is the case, Rogozin’s role might be to “sell” those reforms to the audience both in Russia and abroad.

Medvedev’s defense policies have always followed the course set during the Putin presidency. The political impulses generated by Medvedev himself have been fairly sporadic and chaotic. As far as we can judge, it was Medvedev who rammed through the decision to buy the expensive Mistral-class universal assault landing craft from France, despite the opposition of the Russian defense industry and grumblings in the Russian political establishment. On several occasions Medvedev sharply criticized the Russian defense industry - and the aerospace industry in particular – for churning out technologically substandard products. But, despite these criticisms, it was during the Medvedev administration that Russia saw the biggest increase in spending on the army, the uniformed agencies and the defense industry.

In a notable departure from Putin’s style, Medvedev has tended to be more confrontational with the Cabinet on financial and economic matters. That confrontation peaked in September 2011, when Russia’s widely respected finance minister, Aleksey Kudrin, lost his job. One of the pretexts for his sacking was that he disagreed with Medvedev-approved plans for a rapid increase in military spending. Putin, on the other hand, had always made a point of listening to Kudrin’s opinion during his time as president. In the expectation of Putin’s imminent return to the Kremlin, rumors started to circulate in the early 2012 that the Cabinet was working on a plan to cut spending on defense by 0.5 percentage points of GDP in the period up to 2020. Later those rumors were denied by Putin himself, but it appears that such plans had in fact been considered. If the economy takes another turn for the worse, those plans may yet be given the green light.

Putin outlined his future defense policies in an article published in the RossiyskayaGazeta newspaper in February 2012. He reiterated his intention to press ahead with the military reform and to ramp up the financing of defense programs. Some 23 trillion roubleshas already been earmarked for the rearmament program for the period until 2020. Putin praised the achievements of the reforms but also highlighted the need for further measures to improve the military command-and-control system, make military service a more attractive career, and improve the recruitment system, etc. Meanwhile, the defense industry has been tasked with achieving “a technological breakthrough” using both indigenous and imported technologies. But, although Russia has begun to import some weapons systems, the bulk of the weaponry for the Russian army’s rearmament program will continue to be sourced from Russian suppliers.

Vladimir Putin and Dmitry Medvedev have once again swapped their places. Putin, Prime Minister of Russian Federation for four years, has become the president, and he has appointed the outgoing president, Medvedev, as the Prime Mister. Medvedev will also head the United Russia Party to which Putin also belongs. Putin has been ‘ruling’ Russia for the last 12 years (eight years as President and four years as de facto president) and now has a mandate for another six and perhaps even 12 years up to 2024.Where is Russia likely to go under Putin?

Medvedev, in his address to the Russian federal assembly in December 2011, had recounted his achievements as president. The long list included the successful handling of the Russia-Georgia war over South Ossetia, economic recovery from the devastating global financial crisis, and initiation of several steps aimed at modernising the economy, the launch of a Russian ‘silicon valley’ in Skolkovo near Moscow to promote technological innovation, increased spending on health and education, pension reforms, increase in the salaries of doctors, teachers and engineers, police reforms, war against corruption, military modernisation, reset of relations with the US and so on.

This is indeed an impressive list backed by corresponding data. The Russian economy, which suffered a decline of over six percent in 2008-09, has subsequently been growing at the rate of four per cent per annum, a creditable achievement considering that Europe is now stagnating. Russia has large foreign exchange reserves and a current account surplus. Its per capita debt is among the lowest in the world. The state has pumped in large amounts of funds in women and child health care to shore up the dwindling population. The life expectancy of women has increased sharply up to 75 years. A slew of measures have been taken to encourage mothers to look after the family and also have jobs. Four million children have been born in the last four years. Pensions have been increased and arrears have been cleared. The salaries of doctors and teachers have also gone up.

Russia has joined the WTO after long, bruising negotiations. This will open up new opportunities for Russian and foreign businessmen. Focussing on the Asia-Pacific, Russia is offering is territory for the construction of transport and energy corridors linking Europe with Asia-Pacific.

Russia is all set to tap into opportunities offered by global climate change. With the melting of the Arctic ice in the summer months, the northern sea route between the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans through the Arctic Sea is opening up. Much of this route will pass close to Russia’s northern coast. Russia has put in place a vigorous policy to develop its northern territories and is pursing an aggressive diplomacy to maximise the huge benefits that would accrue from the opening of the northern sea route. Thus, there is much that Russia has achieved in the past few years under Medvedev’s watch.

Yet, Russia faces major socio-economic problems. Top leaders recognise the underlying reality that structural deficiencies of the economy remain unaddressed. The most glaring of these is Russia’s continued dependence on high oil prices. The Russian economy is in serious need of diversification, new investments and technological modernisation. Corruption remains a major problem. Socio-economic inequalities are rising. Physical infrastructure is poor. Democracy is weak. There have been visible, unprecedented mass protests on the streets of Moscow against Putin and the establishment in general. Businessmen and media persons have complained about state persecution.

During his presidential campaign Putin wrote a series of articles in which he touched upon a number of these issues. He noted that the growth model adopted in the last few decades, based on high oil prices, had ‘almost exhausted’. The high oil prices due to geopolitical tensions and turmoil in the Arab world have kept the Russian economy afloat. A fall in oil prices below $100 billion per barrel will cause major economic problems in Russia. He emphasised the need to make the economy more efficient and remove bureaucratic hurdles to improve investor confidence. Both Putin and Medvedev have spoken of the need to curb inflation and bring down the interest rate.

Medvedev during his tenure as president laid great emphasis on innovation. Putin is likely to continue with Medvedev’s innovation drive and has stressed the need to create matching human resource potential. It is interesting that within hours of taking over as President, Putin signed a presidential order on higher education aimed at raising the global rank of Russian universities.

In Putin’s scheme of things, the focus of Russia’s growth should be the Russian family. He emphasises the importance of the family’s commitment to the “fate of the Fatherland”. He has an interesting take on religion. Even though Russia is a secular state, Putin believes that the traditional religions of Russia have an important role to play in strengthening the moral and spiritual values of society.

President Putin has promised to increase public support for families with children. Women who come back to work after maternity leave will be given new opportunities in professional training. Child care systems will be strengthened. Young families will be given housing support. Putin has promised that schools will be improved, teachers will be paid better salaries and the quality and scope of vocational education will be improved.

It would appear that during Putin’s watch, the state will remain at the commanding heights. It will have a say in all aspects of Russia’s policies. And that is where the issue of governance and political reforms comes in.

The issue of political reforms becomes urgent as in recent months there have been large mass protests on Russian streets against Putin. The West has seen this as a growing sign of public dissatisfaction with the government and has speculated about the onset of a ‘Russian Spring’ similar to the Arab Spring. The government has dismissed these protests as motivated and agenda driven aimed at destabilising the Russian government and society. However, many Russian critics have dismissed Medvedev’s four year rule as a period of missed opportunities when deeper political reforms could have been undertaken. They see Medvedev’s achievements as superficial and predict greater confrontation between the government and the public.

Despite these criticisms, Putin enjoys certain support in Russia. His margin of victory is substantial, having officially secured 63 per cent of the popular votes, although some have disputed this figure. Russians see in him a provider of much needed stability. In global affairs Putin has relentlessly worked towards redeeming Russia’s place at the top table. Although Russia plays a weak hand due to structural problems in the economy and several deficiencies in the political and social order, Putin will try and leverage Russia’ substantial advantages—energy being one of them—to Russia’s advantage.

Putin is in a unique position to guide Russia’s destiny. Russia is unlikely to have a Western style political system. It will in all likelihood remain a guided democracy controlled from the top. Rather than being dismissive of Putin, the West should take his views with greater seriousness and not indulge in wishful thinking. Russia will remain an important global player during Putin’s third term as president.

Firebird wrote:I've never been into Judo.
Has anyone here learned Systema or another classic Russian martial art?

I've found Russian arts seem to have a lot of good use of plyometrics and internal energy. Personally, I started in Korean arts, then moved onto Chinese. I rate the latter much more than Korean.

TR1 wrote:The guy is a farce when it comes to actual martial arts, especially compared to his boasts.

MOSCOW, March 13 (R-Sport) - Russian President Vladimir Putin and action movie
star Steven Seagal teamed up Wednesday to open a new martial arts center in Moscow.
Putin and Seagal were guests of honor at the official opening of the Sambo-70
center, which holds a sports school and a 1,600-capacity fight venue.
Various martial arts are catered for including boxing, sumo and the Russian
fighting style of sambo, and there are also gymnastics facilities.
Later Wednesday, Putin is to meet sports coaches and experts at the center
to discuss the development of children’s sport in Russia.
Seagal has made several visits to Russia, where his films are hugely popular
and often broadcast on network TV.
Seagal accompanied Putin to a sambo tournament last year. He has also visited the southern region of Kalmykia, known for its wrestling tradition and strong
Buddhist faith, of which Seagal is a devotee.
The actor played a Russian diplomat in 2009's Driven to Kill, which was
partially set in St. Petersburg but filmed in the US and the Czech Republic.

TR1 wrote:Ugh.

I hate how Segal has shoved himself into the MMA and combat sport scene lately.
The guy is a farce when it comes to actual martial arts, especially compared to his boasts.

TR1 wrote:Ugh.

I hate how Segal has shoved himself into the MMA and combat sport scene lately.
The guy is a farce when it comes to actual martial arts, especially compared to his boasts.

TR1 wrote:Van Damme actually had fights, Segal's competitive fighting record is basically nonexistent.
That's basically why I can't stand the guy, he pretends like he is some actual fighting god when he has ZERO basis for such a claim. As a long time martial arts practitioner, I hate such boasting.
Aikido is a good martial art ( I did it for some time before moving on ), but being a high Dan in it is not the same as winning the K-1 world GP or actually holding high level grappling or standup wins.


Lately he has inserted himself into the MMA scene, claiming stupid stuff like saying he taught Anderson Silva and Lyoto Machida how to do a jumping front kick...come on Steven, you ain't fooling anyone.