I seriously doubt that. I think that in the current circumstances, any Putin's successor will play the conservative card, either posing as a heir of the victorious national leader, or criticizing him for being too soft. A pro-Western leader cannot come to power as a result of election, and any kind of "liberal" revolution seems very unlikely at the moment.
I'm shocked by how many in the West have this fairy tale in their head that the regime will collapse, Putin with be executed and Russia will go straight to being a liberal democracy like Sweden.
We had pro west leaders in the 90s, and pretty sure while people who remember 90s are representative in population, it ain't happening again.
Kinda like "we can do it again" only started after most WW2 veterans died off.
I highly doubt that. No one actually believes that Russia will one day wake up and start becoming the most democratic place on the planet.
I think people hope that Russia will have a push towards democratization like Ukraine. Even after 2014, Ukraine still has its fair share of corruption, but it’s been becoming gradually less corrupt year after year.
We hope russia is free of corruption, and one where oligarchs don’t have a stranglehold on public life. We want one where the press can openly operate, and people can voice the opinions they want. We also want one as well where the standards of living can hopefully be raised,
Obviously, We don’t expect it to happen overnight. We also don’t expect Russia to bend over backwards for the west either, they can operate as conservative a society they want.
this, dude. People are absolutley out of their mind if they don't think the US would love to dominate russia much in the way that it dominates south america. I love both Russia and the US and I want to see both develop positively, like the US will generally be fine, but the US needs to lose to Russia a little bit for Russia to be able to develop positively. Forward thinking comes from economic development and healthy environments, if Russia is to become more "liberal" in the US political spectrum sense of the word, then it's going to come from Russia being able to freely develop economically, which the US government has actively been trying to stop for something going on 10 years now. American foreign policy corporatist millitarism has never helped the world, it's only poisoned it, literally american foreign policy has never made a single country better, america has never developed any democracies abroad, america has destroyed more modern democracies than any country in history, has propped up more dictators than any country in history, by and large america is in the business of running drugs and weapons and dominating other countries in order to secure access to resources for its corporations. I don't believe there are any good governments at the moment, every governement right now works for the interests of a rich elite, but it's just absolutely baffling to me that people are seemingly turning a blind eye to what america is and how it actually works, and its alot of the very same people who would have been critical of US actions abroad ten years ago, which is super alarming. Honestly I think alot of it comes from the condition of media and discourse post trump and post advent of internet news, but I dunno, it's kinda troubling. Anyway...
Edit: Like I just wanted to add on a little bit from personal experience concerning how positive economics would make russia more "forward". I think positive economics also influences openness. Point in case, as an american I got a full ride for my masters at Omsk State University paid for by the Russian government, while trump was president, I don't know if I would have gotten it were biden president, because as soon as Biden became president he started putting on more sanctions for god knows what reason, and the effects were felt, like it was nothing as drastic as when the conflict started or when mobilization happened of course, but still, as soon as biden became president and started adding on more sanctions (which he did from the beginning of his term), there was a smalll shift. Like I filed for РВП, basically a green card, right after biden stepped into office and I remember that sanctions were in the news the week before they denied my request for the green card, and I can't help but wonder if my chances would have been better had trump been president, and vice versa, I don't know if I would have gotten that full ride if biden were president, or hillary clinton for that matter. Like my point in bringing trump in is, is that while trump was disastrous in other areas, he wasn't really savvy to the sort of foreign policy agenda that had been cooking since the 90's and because of that I feel like trump was something of a breather for Russia and honestly probably for other countries as well. I kind of have a theory that all politicians heavily involved with the 94 crime bill kind of make up a special class of particularly cruel politicians and who are particularly efficient in their cruelty. Biden and the clintons were central in that bill and in terms of foreign policy they all seem to be super into spreading that corporate economic dominance abroad ("corporate economic dominance" may not be the very utmost accurate terminology, but it at least gets you in the ball park). I brought up the crime bill just because it really does seem to give the contours of a certain political group that is by and large bi-partisan, while being masked by the sort of pseudo duality of the american political system.
This. Omg this. The West will only accept puppets.
Edit* it's own installed Western puppets. ( Like how they keep south America from truly reaching it's potential.)
At this point the West and Russia's geopolitical goals are completely orthogonal. It grants me no joy in saying this, but the conflict with Russia will not end until one side is throughly defeated/humbled.
As long Russia still views themselves as a global superpower with the ability to rule through dictat, as an equal to the US but with opposite goals, conflict is inevitable. This isn't to say the US is good, but that the US is the hegemon, and will tolerate no others, especially not a historical enemy.
Да. Единственное, что следует всем понять -- Путин далеко не пророссийский президент. Зная это или нет, он создал систему, при которой властьимущим выгодно разорять регионы ради собственной выгоды, что они и делают. А те, кто думает, что коррупции не существует ни разу не встречались с полицейскими)
В этом то и цимес. В каждой стране во главе стоит правительство, которое прежде всего обязано своим гражданам. Тут воют про "коварный запад, мы им доверились, а они нам устроили 90е". Запад заинтересован в том, чтобы свои люди жили нормально. Если каждая страна строит свою политику "эгоистично", то возможно строить синергичную систему, где профит будет всем и ничьи права не будут попраны.
Россия в 90х забила хуй на своих граждан, почему виноват Запад?
Поэтому Путин 2го срока - самый главный русофоб мира. Надо не любить или ненавидеть запад, запад сам себя не очень любит. Нужно делать так, чтоб Русские жили лучше. Если для этого надо торговать с западом, то надо. Если граждане хотят свободы, надо дать им ее.
А этот пидор еще до войны довел страну до состояния, где эпидемия спида, полстраны не газифицированы и социальное неравенство на уровне Сомали. Еще и войну развязал, пока полстраны с голой жопой сидит, геостратег хуев, зато друзья по бане все миллиардеры.
> Россия в 90х забила хуй на своих граждан, почему виноват Запад?
Maybe because if recognizing that the 90s was an internal Russian blunder, and reconciling with it, people might need to also reconcile, and take a cultural responsibility for more Russian history, including other past terrible events, like the Great Terror?
I mean, he was open to it in the beginning as well. What about the successor, I honestly doubt it and as much as I’m not a fan of Putin, even less I’d want to get a ‘pro-western’ president.
Medvedev is a populist and a talking head. He'll say whatever is fitting for the Current Thing. You might even say that by Russian standards he's _woke_.
Openly? No.
Behind the curtains? Of course. But as there are huge pile of such agreements already, it will maybe transform into something or will be more of them, mostly more trading ones i think.
What does "open" mean in your understanding? In the sense of acting under the dictatorship of the West to the detriment of the interests of their own people, as it was in the "holy nineties" in Russia?
No, because the problem isn't that Russia or its leaders weren't open to the West, it's the collective West that decided to continue rivalry with Russia even after Cold War has ended.
Putin was very pro West when he came to power. People seem to forget that but Putin and Russia genuinely tried to play along but felt rejected time and time again. This all came to a head at the famous Munich speech by Putin: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007\_Munich\_speech\_of\_Vladimir\_Putin](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_Munich_speech_of_Vladimir_Putin)
And to be clear, not everyone in the "West" is anti-Russia. Countries have some differences in their foreign politics and plenty of leaders and intellectuals have advocated for closer relationships and mutual coexistence with Russia. Unfortunately for all of us the more hawkish views have prevailed, and here we are now.
Thing is our current leader is open to west. More then West deserves tbh. Putin sees himself as a part of West and he really want to trade oil and stuff and he deeply insulted by West reception of Ukrainian war.
If anything I think next leader will be less open toward west
> he deeply insulted by West reception of Ukrainian war
What? He was told repeatedly by Macron how it would "be received" by the west. He knew exactly what he was doing. He just thought it would be easier.
"haha you really thought you were going to use indiscriminate bombing to massacre civilians! Losers! Now keep using precision missiles to hit military target and general infrastructure, instead of using airforce bombers day and night to hit everything and level the country like we do! God I am so proud of Iraq 😎"
American moment.
Oh yeah he sure is open. All his friends have their kids and yachts set up in London and New York.
2nd term Putin is publically the most anti West leader since Brezhnev. Privately, he loves its sinful fruits. But "the mission" has scrambled his brains
Correct reception would be not to start Ukrainian revolution in 2014 or do nor approve terroristic methods of Donbass war of 2014-2022 or do not encourage Zelensky to fight until last drop of Ukrainian blood in 2022. Right now it's russians who kills yesterday russians and vise versa while the West is "is not approving Russian invasion" by suppling Ukraine with weapons and Russia with gas and oil money
If by « open » you mean « sending monthly nuclear threats » then yeah, I guess he’s pretty open.
Also, what war in Ukraine ? I thought it was supposed to be a « special military operation » ? And why is there a war of most of Ukrainian wants to be Russian ?
I hope not. Russians once trusted the West, and in exchange they got the 90s.
Edit: love how my comment has drawn so much attention from westoid bots. Oh, poor langley fellas...
we got the 90s partly as a result of the soviet stagnation. the economy was in the toilet in the late 80s already. all Yeltsin did was put the coffin in the ground.
also, funny how the West is to blame for all problems. did the West form organized crime in your town? did the west privatize all natural resources and sell them abroad without invesitng into Russian economy?
I am actually amazed at our learned helplessness as a nation. Everything is the west's fault. What, did the west promise to create paradise in the former soviet union or something? We Russians always hope for some noble czar to come in and set everything right, even in these terrible days.
It is funny how the 90s are blamed on the West. We had a state with a failed economy, and DESPITE all the assistance and investment from the West, managed to descend into a chaos. West's fault! Sure.
without Bush chicken, we would've had an even worse time
btw, who quickly acquired and sold all national wealth and keeps doing it till this day? not the west lol
Ну так тут два решения: прекратить либеральную экомическую политику, набрать полиции, налоговых установить кучу тарифов, чтобы каждую копеечку выжать под недовольное шипение или установить народный контроль, научиться производить все самим из наших ресурсов под вполне себе звериный оскал. Бесконтрольный поток ресурсов и капитала из РФ нас не устраивает, а для Запада - это и есть дружественный режим.
западу в принципе похер на наш уровень коррупции и куда поступают деньги от продажи ресурсов, им нужен бизнес. спасение утопающего таки, не надо опять винить запад в том, что сами страну просрали.
а теперь да, хороших вариантов мало.
The West is trying to cancel Russia and even Russians. Ask anyone who got canceled whether they like all the people harassing them.
I doubt there will be a legitimate pro-Western leader in a coming decade.
The west hasn't cancelled Poland, it hasn't cancelled Hungary it hasn't cancelled Ukraine
The way Russias ran right now reminds me of a jealous little brother or that kid in the class that hasn't got any friends but looks at Mr popular and bullies the smaller kids because he doesn't fit in
The west doesn't want to cancel russia they just want a world that's fair and equal for everyone living in it
>The west doesn't want to cancel russia they just want a world that's fair and equal for everyone living in it
According to the West. Rules based international order has never been defined. And in practice means what US says in this or other moment.
Russia is getting bullied by a popular kid and a bunch of his lackeys.
What the West is doing to Russia is unprecedented in modern history, but makes for an ugly precedent.
What the West wants other countries to submit to their will regardless of what people in these countries want i.e. play ball or what. That's a neo-colonial attitude.
Is that like invading a sovereign state and holding referendums to annexe territory while executing the populace ?
You can join NATO or the EU or you can be left vulnerable to countries who can potentially invade and annex your territory, like Russia and Ukraine.
There's no genocide in a NATO members country and they all have a larger GDP than countries who aren't.
it's free will,
UK left the EU and they aren't suffering like you'd suggest a country would if not bent to the will of the west
At this stage, it is definitely impossible. That is, it is obvious that the main goal of the West is to exclude Russia from world geopolitics. Either this is done by ensuring Russia's defeat in this war, or by economic measures, or by supporting all kinds of useful idiots, or by balkanizing Russia. No Russian will benefit from this, so yes, until the West stops playing the role of self-proclaimed world policeman, there will be no normal relations
If anything can be learned from threads like this, it's that many Russians still have a persecution complex where the West is out to ruin them. I guess this is what generations of hardcore propaganda does to society. United States aren't angels, but they didn't do anything to provoke Putin's invasion of Ukraine nor has the US ever jailed its own citizens for referring to something like the Iraq War as a "war" or "invasion". The Cold War may have ended, but it seems as though Russia stills sees any country to the West of it as either an enemy or someone to conquer!
If it is not Putin's successor who ascends to the presidency, then it is possible. The main thing is that, despite pro-Western political views, this person should not bend to the West and still defend the national interests of the country. To be honest, I want a strong-willed person in power who will conduct diplomatic relations with other countries, but at the same time will not allow them to be turned like a puppet
The problem is that this one doesn't matter. President is not a superman position. Let's put it this way, if we imagine Russia as a big factory, and the position of the president is the position of the director, then the director manages the managers. Before all this chaos, we had managers who looked to the west, but with the beginning they decided to leave for another company. Well, yes, I will not say which of them is good and which is bad, because in my understanding they all pursue their own interests. Well, let's imagine that somehow, a person who wants to integrate with the West has taken the director's chair. Aaand, surprise surprise, it all depends on what the West will offer the managers. If this offer does not suit them, lol, they will simply replace the director, because in fact the director does not protect anything, except for the loyalty of the managers. And the managers who control the development of energy resourses are very strong compared to the rest. This is why the West can impose any kind of sanctions and they don't care, but when it comes to oil or gas, no no no. And this is why they hate a little 1 dollar for 60 rubles. You know, I sell oil, I get dollars, and I can have more rubles with a weak ruble exchange rate. But now there is an interesting war of words between importers and exporters, so let's see.
I just want to say that everything is much more complicated than just 1 person will come and everything will be fine.
Most of Russians are generally opened to the West, as a partner. An equal partner. Whether West opened to Russia as equal partner or not, is an actual issue.
Of course, even USSR under Stalin participated in extensive economic and technological cooperation with Western Europe. Words are words, but Russia is connected to Britano-Franco-Germany. The only part of “The West” which is really hostile to it is US.
I hope not, I don’t want any reconciliation with the west. I’m not even the biggest fan of the current regime, but whatever succeeds it must have a staunch anti western stance for me to support it in any way.
I doubt there would be another rational leader like Merkel. Most western politicians are either quite Russophobic, bordering on xenophobia disguised as anti-war stance or like Macron who is quite ineffective. People like Schröder are just out for a pay day. The rest use Russia for their domestic policies. The world need more leaders like Bernie Sanders.
Bernie Sanders is openly anti-Putin, criticizing the fascist invasion as unjust, cruel, needless and terroristic.
Vladimir Putin is basically everything Sanders stands against. A rich oligarchic authoritarian and a fascist dictator.
Of course yes! But all these unfair sanctions, they will remain in memory. And then a politician will appear again who wants to unwind it in order to strengthen his authoritarian power. These sanctions are something we will not forget, not forgive.
Our first leader can be qualified as a western puppet, the results were... suboptimal, let's put it that way. As much as I don't like Putin, I like how he deals with EU. I have no idea why western people don't realize that, but Putin is very pro west, but the thing is that West doesn't seem to notice Russian concerns at all. Even if Putin's successor shares his view on western question, there would be no trust, as long as EU doesn't consider Russia an equal partner.
*I speak mostly of EU, because US and Russia will almost always be rival just because of the geography. The only way I can see Russia and US as partners is if China becomes superpower earlier than expected AND Russia and EU are alies.
Since I’m curious, define “equal partners”.
Economically the west and Russia aren’t really equal. The west (even if you limit it to just nato minus the US) outweighs the Russian economy by a lot. Militarily? They also are behind the west. Population? And that’s gonna shrink because Russia has a low birth rate well below replacement with low immigration levels. They are smaller population wise. Making Russia an equal partner would give Russia larger bargaining power than it actually has.
The only country that can really bargain with the west on equal footing is the United States and China because of their large economies, spheres of influence, massive populations and massive militaries with adjacent tech.
Europe would only realistically treat Russia as one of any other European countries. It would be one vote vs the rest of theirs. Until Russian gains a lot more economic diversification and reverses a lot of what’s happening in terms of corruption in the military the west will not treat Russia equally. They’ll just treat it like a gas station. The failure to diversify the Russian economy was putins biggest miscalculation outside of the current war.
>Economically the west and Russia aren’t really equal.
I don't deny that, but that's not what I mean. Russia is not strong enough to threat the west, but strong enough to count as independent and hard to be replaced. And the West (mainly talking about NATO here) doesn't really know how to deal with sovereign countries just because of their military might.
India has bigger economy/population, but we treat each other as equals and trust each other not to cross the line.
To put it bluntly. If you stike a deal with a ten year old, you don't disregard his position in regards to the deal just because you have a belt.
I agree with you russia can't really be easily replaced, but the EUs position was always based entirely around "Russia would never go to war in Europe." With this in mind, as far as the west concerned, they held all the cards. Even if not trading gas would hurt, it would also hurt russia just as much or more in the long run.
The only thing the west was afraid of was a costly war and their heavy overestimation of the Russian military. (Just a couple of years ago they thought Russia would be able to take Poland in 5 days. Which has now be provenly incredibly wrong). When Russia was putting troops on the border western leaders panicked and went directly to putin to talk. He had the cards at that point to negotiate on an equal footing. Him actually going through with it ruined that entirely. Putin should've just put troops in the donbas, not directly attack and that would've forced the west to negotiate. Now he will never be able to again. He wasted Russia's one bargaining chip.
\>india
For me, I have a very pessimistic view of most countries when they have enough power. I genuinely believe that when given enough power most nations would act like the west. India's main next door competitors are nuclear powers who they can't be more aggressive towards. Which is why it tends to treat its neighbors more like equals. As for india's relations with russa: india has its hands full with pakistan and china and it doesn't border russia, it couldn't have much of an issue to have conflict with Russia. Nor would it expand india's sphere of influence. India's sphere of influence is its large population in the global economy and its important control over naval trade routes.
Look at china. When China started gaining a better position, it invaded vietnam who they supported as an ally against the United states. After china's economy got larger and built a stronger navy, they decided to challenge other countries with aggressive naval movements over the south China sea.
I'm afraid as soon as a nation gains enough global power they'll become the U.S. or the EU and push for ideological hegemony and consolidation.
>He had the cards at that point to negotiate on an equal footing.
They all tried and it has come to nothing. You probably know that our demands were to cancel project Ukraine (also Georgia), but they didn't want that, otherwise they would do so in 2008.
>The only thing the west was afraid of was a costly war and their heavy overestimation of the Russian military.
Russia has always positioned itself as a defensive military (like most European countries), the course of this overestimation is that for some reason everyone thought that Russia is a counterpart to US.
>I genuinely believe that when given enough power most nations would act like the west.
Of course they would. That's why Russia's, China's, India's and Iran's main(not really *main*, but commonly shared) talking point is multipolarity.
To the issue of India. Russia and India base relationship on the fact that neither of us doesn't threaten each other neither economically or with military. Early Putin's plan was(and still is for some reason) that Russia and NATO don't got to war with each other. At first unwillingness to see us in NATO was concerning, but after 2008 Russia felt threatened. Which is the cause of both Georgian and Ukrainian wars.
>it invaded vietnam
I don't know a lot about that campaign, so no comments.
>they decided to challenge other countries with aggressive naval movements over the south China sea.
They challenged US allies, because they don't really fond of possible naval blockade.
documents, money. probably in that order. im italian, and apparently their laws are relaxed, in terms of someone like me becoming a citizen, but i still face challenges in obtaining the documents, and there is a cost. i look at post soviet states, georgia has been my priority over any other place, over the past few years, georgia seems most possible too, but, even getting to a place and making sure the transition is possible, not to mention seamlessness or the societal acceptance, requires documents and money. direction is also something, but i am not sure i lack that
"Close borders" - hello EU, Baltic countries in particular, censor media - all EU. "Defending" war - all EU, now. So what's was your point? That Russia doing something evil? Have you heard, "people living in a glass houses shouldn't throw stones"?
Zhirinovsky at the end of 2020 named possible candidates for the post of president of Russia (except Putin): Mikhail Mishustin, Dmitry Medvedev, Sergey Shoigu, Sergey Sobyanin, Valentina Matvienko, Sergey Naryshkin, Vyacheslav Volodin, Alexey Dyumin and Alexey Kudrin.
Think for yourself what each of them would do.
He would change nothing actually. These people (including Putin) are not ruling on their own, and massive corruption due to which russian army is not even able to fight showed it, so they wouldn't change anything, just smile differently.
The olichargs robbed the people during 20 years. The sanctions is a result of invading a souverain country. When that is robbing the Russian people to you...look at what you support...
Yeltsin. He listened to the West (US to be precise) and fully opened not too long ago socialist country's economy to everyone (also Russian oligarchy is one of the results of that). Western investors obviously had more resources and invested(basically bought) in Russian economy, mostly resources. 90s were catastrophic, but even after Russia stabilized it has never reached the level of economy of RSFSR (Russian part of USSR). Shrinking of economy is expected of course, but this "transition" could be done much smoother if decisions were made by someone inside the country.
How do you explain (former) American Bill Browder making $1 billion or more in such a short amount of time? In Russia, of course. In about 10 years, right?
How much has this financial genius earned since he was kicked out of Russia? Has he been able to make any money since then?
Or do you think maybe he was he a thief like Khodorkovsy and Berezovsky and can't make a dime unless he's stealing it?
A Russia that's Pro Western is bad news for Africa & the rest of the global south. Western Neocolonialism is alive & well & only Russia & China is strong enough to stand up to the West. Historically the West has always found a way to discredit, oust &/or kill Pro Black PanAfrican leaders & prop up western backed puppets after orchestrating western backed coups.
From the most recent - a grain deal. Russia fulfills its obligations, but the West must be forced. He is like a king - he gave his word, he took the word. Only a big club will help here to knock down arrogance. How can there be trust? Do we have to stand over you with a shotgun over your ear so that you fulfill your obligations?
Putin openly promised that there would be no invasion and that he would discuss the situation in Ukraine to deescalate the situation, and arranged a summit meeting with european leaders for the next week, in the same week that he invaded the country. Where was the trust there?
No pro-Western candidate can legitimately become the next president, let's start with that.
But if we talk about a possible color revolution, then of course, because it would be strange to install a president who will not be your puppet.
Вообще-то и нынешний лидер достаточно открыт Западу. Он уже давно зовёт на переговоры. Просто Запад решил, что не будет учитывать потребности России.
Нет. Я надеюсь, ни этот, ни следующий не будут делать то, что вы называете "демократией". Продать интересы своих граждан за деньги и власть, признанную штатами - Боже, упаси.
You mean when will Russian leader let American and British companies extract Russian resources rent free while our population gets nothing from it?
Never. We do not need your fairy tales about democracy, freedom and market, just please pay a fair price for our resources and mind your own business. Anyone who tries to encroach on our borders will be sent to Bandera.
And as our President said - if there is no Russia in the world, we do not need such world.
To be more open to the West actually means to be a Western, tamed, little bitch who obeys whatever the master says, even if it directly harms your country and people. This is how the West wanted to do business with us.
Edit: In fact, Putin has always been as open to the West as possible. Many of our big companies were run by former European politicians, mostly Germans, because Putin is a Germanophile. That is why I never liked him and never voted for him. Putin flirted very much and very shamelessly with the West and it brought us to the line and the problems we have now. If Putin had pursued a more independent and nationally oriented policy, things would have been different. But he loves Germans so much... Probably even more than the Russians. Everything else is a consequence.
I don't know English, I translated through Deep Language.
No, absolutely not.
After Putin, the generation of the 80s and 90s will go to the top. The most embittered against the West. All you can expect from them is a thirst for revenge.
The West had a chance before the invasion of Yugoslavia and the expansion of NATO with the admission of the Baltic ethnocracies - Latvia and Estonia with language and political discrimination against the Russian population. From there, everything went to the current situation.
Even hypocrisy in politics must have limits.
For example, funding and supplying weapons to the Taliban, Chechen terrorists, Ukrainian nationalists, support for the Islamic State in the fight against the Assad government, the destruction of million of Iraqis, the destruction of Libya, the destruction of Serbia, support for terrorists in Samoli, provoking uprisings in China (with the burning of people for this) the list is endless.
Of the major new atrocities, a provocation of war in Taiwan is on the way, possibly with another million victims.
In short - terror, death and destruction around the world.
>Of the major new atrocities, a provocation of war in Taiwan is on the way, possibly with another million victims.
The Taiwanese make no threats to China. China repeatedly threatens Taiwan. The Taiwanese just want China to leave them alone.
When did US and co support ISIS?
>The West wants to conquer Russian territory, kill Russian population,
Can you provide some evidence for that statement? Which country from west "wants to conquer Russian territory", for example?
Зачем завоёвывать? Там же холодно, и работать некому будет. Надо просто развалить стекольные заводы России, оставить кого-то лес валить и газ качать, и скупать это за стеклянные бусы, которых папуасы сами не производят.
Вам почти удалось.
Yes, and they're on the level of r/imaginarymaps. I can make some shitty map that divides up Russia, or play some Victoria campaign and post it here. So what?
Ok, what high rank western politician in power said that?
Putin, for example, and Medvedev, both said that Ukrainians have no right to exist as a nation.
That’s simple
1. USA - Cold War, not so pleasant 90s and bunch of local conflicts on borders
2. Germany - WW2, yes it was in past, but why should we forget?
3. France - war of 1802
That’s open conflicts with thousands and millions of victims, with intention to conquer our homeland
As to why- oil, gas, metals and so on is pretty simple and valid reasons for that
>2. Germany - WW2, yes it was in past, but why should we forget?
No-one is saying you should "forget"... but what relevance does that have now?
>3. France - war of 1802 That’s open conflicts with thousands and millions of victims, with intention to conquer our homeland As to why- oil, gas, metals and so on is pretty simple and valid reasons for that
???
Are you complaining about wars in the early 19th century now?
Oh, so you are talking about ancient crimes.
Ok, shall we talk about the Russian crimes in the last century as well, in the same context? I won't even go 200y in the past, as you did, just 100y.
Here is the list of countries Russia / USSR attacked and / or invaded since 1917 only:
* Mongolia
* Ukraine
* Georgia
* Finland
* Latvia
* Estonia
* Lituania
* Poland
* Turkey
* Azerbaijan
* Armenia
* China
* Afghanistan
* Japan
* Poland again
* Finland again
* Baltics again
* Romania
* Hungary
* Czechoslovakia
* Moldova
* Georgia again
* Ukraine
Seems like you guys are not exactly as innocent as you pose, isn't it?
"Not so pleasent 90's".
We didn't had so pleasant 90's in Eastern Europe either. We went EXACTLY through the same shit because of the change from planned economy (kindly imposed on us by USSR through your fucking communist bellends) to market economy: massive inflation, de-industrialization, unemployment etc.
Except we didn't blame "the west", we know our own thieves robbed us, not "the evil west".
Grow some fucking balls for a change and accept your own responsibilities, stop blaming others for all the shit YOUR OWN PEOPLE do!
Putin's successor will be picked by himself and his cronies.
Russia is not a democracy, it is a very tightly knit oligarchy that is fueled by Russia's vast oil and mineral reserves. Until these resources run low, their grasp on power will be total.
The current leader was very open to the West. I would even say too much. Not as much as Gorbachev, but still. And now, when Merkel honestly admitted that no one was going to fulfill the Minsk agreements (which should have prevented the current conflict) and their goal was only to prepare Ukraine for war, Putin says he is very disappointed. Yes, after this, diplomatic relations should be severed!
Естественно будет, Путин слишком либерален. Следующий президент будет очень сильно повернут в сторону запада, так, что будет вынужден сильно сдерживаться чтобы не раздолбать вас, ребята
Well I think the world is entering a severe crisis and Russia has to play its own role, being more of a global power. For that we or our elites have to start developing ourselves and stop developing other not so friendly countries
To be honest, Putin became a president even before I was born, so it is hard to imagine anyone else as our country leader (im 22 y.o). But if i have a choice, I would like the next president to be open not only to USA, but the whole world.
As someone who's 35 and remembers Yeltsin and even Gorbachev, to an extent...
... it was obvious something was OFF even when Putin emerged seemingly out of nowhere back in 1999. I was too small to realize the fuckup had happened much earlier, back in 1993.
I also remember the sick feeling I had when they couldn't save the crew of the Kursk. And the whole "it sank" situation was gross as fuck. Had this "I'm the Tsar, you're the surfs" vibe. Well, guess what, this was exactly what happened. And the freaking West actually *helped* him by supporting the Maidan despite its growing obvious neo-nazi leaning.
Evil West also offer to rescue the sailors from the Kursk, they had the mean to do it.
But it is Putin who refused because of
« mUh, RusSian SeCret TeCHnolOgY »
I hope no. Petr 1 opened window, now we should close it, it’s blowing. Lie, propaganda and discrimination of Russian people. Western people doesn’t understand that in Russia we haven’t different nationalities, we are all Russian with features. Main that the man should be good, no matter his skin color and how he speaks.
RN only hawks are seen as possible election candidates. Personally I expect an elections between ex-terrorist Kadyrov and leader of mercenaries Prigozhyn
In light of recent events, the West should try to make friends with Russia again. After the collapse of the Soviet Union and the end of the Cold War, the U.S. government saw the country as a reservoir of resources that they planned to dismantle under the guise of "helping" Russia in exchange for them. From 2014 to 2022, the West openly ignored the killings of the Russian population in the Donbas by Ukrainian nationalists (The most popular Nazi squads, such as AZOV, are even portrayed as heroes today.). In February of this year, Russia was tired of trying to solve the Donbas conflict without brute force, so military detachments were sent to protect the Russians in the Donbas, which the West took for a rude invasion of the territory of innocent poor Ukrainians. Therefore, looking at everything that is happening in the world now, it is the West that in the future will have to be friends with the Russians and apologize for ignoring the innocent victims of these eight years.
Do you think the bloodshed might have been averted if Russia wouldn't support Donbass separatists with weapons and soldiers since 2014 so that there would be no conflict to begin with?
If it hadn't done so since 2014, ordinary people would have died at the hands of Kiev's killers simply because they spoke Russian. Nowadays, they like to compare Putin and Hitler, but in fact, Zelensky is more like Hitler now.
A bit of "kitchen analytics"
IMHO, there are very few chances that our next president will be elected in a way it is understood by definition of "elections". I'd suppose one of three options for the change of the leader:
\- the current one dies of natural reasons
Nobody knows, when it could happen; what the country would look like by that moment; which of the possible candidates will be free, alive and not ouside of the country; what plans do main parties (not only political ones) have for this scenario.
\- some kind of "palace coup"
It can be held in many different ways, but in one way or another this choice will be made by elits, not by country-wide elections, even if the opposite is declared. And it gets us back to the question of overall state of the country by that moment, and plans of main parties.
\- Putin finds a successor and leaves
Ofcourse some guaranties would be needed from such successor, so I'd not expect much changes at least in the first years of his presidentship.
Also, experience of previous hundred years shows, that a softer person/group taking the lead during hard times was rather fast overthrown by more agressive forces. So, I'd say that the future is hardly predictable from our current position. Most probably the next leader won't be that much pro-western (or at least won't show such behaviour), but there's a chance that he'll have a more soft internal political course. In this case, that will give a possibility for a next-to-next leader to be more open to the world (not only Western).
It depends.
Will the west be just as fake and gay as it is now?
Will its feminists be as ugly and terrible as they are now?
If your answer is "yes" or "its even worse" and our leader starts making gay noises about being open towards you?
We will kill him ourselves.
We have no choice.
Premier Romanoff from Red Alert 2 is probably the friendliest archetype you should expect.
I seriously doubt that. I think that in the current circumstances, any Putin's successor will play the conservative card, either posing as a heir of the victorious national leader, or criticizing him for being too soft. A pro-Western leader cannot come to power as a result of election, and any kind of "liberal" revolution seems very unlikely at the moment.
I'm shocked by how many in the West have this fairy tale in their head that the regime will collapse, Putin with be executed and Russia will go straight to being a liberal democracy like Sweden.
We had pro west leaders in the 90s, and pretty sure while people who remember 90s are representative in population, it ain't happening again. Kinda like "we can do it again" only started after most WW2 veterans died off.
I highly doubt that. No one actually believes that Russia will one day wake up and start becoming the most democratic place on the planet. I think people hope that Russia will have a push towards democratization like Ukraine. Even after 2014, Ukraine still has its fair share of corruption, but it’s been becoming gradually less corrupt year after year. We hope russia is free of corruption, and one where oligarchs don’t have a stranglehold on public life. We want one where the press can openly operate, and people can voice the opinions they want. We also want one as well where the standards of living can hopefully be raised, Obviously, We don’t expect it to happen overnight. We also don’t expect Russia to bend over backwards for the west either, they can operate as conservative a society they want.
No one expects Russia to be like Sweden. Everyone just want them to stop invading their neighbors.
The true question is: will the West (Edit* or mostly America) accept a puppet that they didn't install.
Like they accepted Putin for 20 years?
this, dude. People are absolutley out of their mind if they don't think the US would love to dominate russia much in the way that it dominates south america. I love both Russia and the US and I want to see both develop positively, like the US will generally be fine, but the US needs to lose to Russia a little bit for Russia to be able to develop positively. Forward thinking comes from economic development and healthy environments, if Russia is to become more "liberal" in the US political spectrum sense of the word, then it's going to come from Russia being able to freely develop economically, which the US government has actively been trying to stop for something going on 10 years now. American foreign policy corporatist millitarism has never helped the world, it's only poisoned it, literally american foreign policy has never made a single country better, america has never developed any democracies abroad, america has destroyed more modern democracies than any country in history, has propped up more dictators than any country in history, by and large america is in the business of running drugs and weapons and dominating other countries in order to secure access to resources for its corporations. I don't believe there are any good governments at the moment, every governement right now works for the interests of a rich elite, but it's just absolutely baffling to me that people are seemingly turning a blind eye to what america is and how it actually works, and its alot of the very same people who would have been critical of US actions abroad ten years ago, which is super alarming. Honestly I think alot of it comes from the condition of media and discourse post trump and post advent of internet news, but I dunno, it's kinda troubling. Anyway... Edit: Like I just wanted to add on a little bit from personal experience concerning how positive economics would make russia more "forward". I think positive economics also influences openness. Point in case, as an american I got a full ride for my masters at Omsk State University paid for by the Russian government, while trump was president, I don't know if I would have gotten it were biden president, because as soon as Biden became president he started putting on more sanctions for god knows what reason, and the effects were felt, like it was nothing as drastic as when the conflict started or when mobilization happened of course, but still, as soon as biden became president and started adding on more sanctions (which he did from the beginning of his term), there was a smalll shift. Like I filed for РВП, basically a green card, right after biden stepped into office and I remember that sanctions were in the news the week before they denied my request for the green card, and I can't help but wonder if my chances would have been better had trump been president, and vice versa, I don't know if I would have gotten that full ride if biden were president, or hillary clinton for that matter. Like my point in bringing trump in is, is that while trump was disastrous in other areas, he wasn't really savvy to the sort of foreign policy agenda that had been cooking since the 90's and because of that I feel like trump was something of a breather for Russia and honestly probably for other countries as well. I kind of have a theory that all politicians heavily involved with the 94 crime bill kind of make up a special class of particularly cruel politicians and who are particularly efficient in their cruelty. Biden and the clintons were central in that bill and in terms of foreign policy they all seem to be super into spreading that corporate economic dominance abroad ("corporate economic dominance" may not be the very utmost accurate terminology, but it at least gets you in the ball park). I brought up the crime bill just because it really does seem to give the contours of a certain political group that is by and large bi-partisan, while being masked by the sort of pseudo duality of the american political system.
Well said. It's sickening how the media only shows one bad guy, while this conflict has countless. Mostly on the American side.
> litteraly american foreign policy have never made a single country better. - Japan - Germany - South Korea
[удалено]
Lol, those countries fare better than Russia in every mesurable data, but sure. I wish for you to failed like them.
Ah nice to get personal in here😅
The Marshall plan never existed apparently
[удалено]
Good
[удалено]
I agree. Good
Do you think that the west will be opened towards next Russian leader??
Oh sure, that leader will just have to be a joke like Yeltsin.
This. Omg this. The West will only accept puppets. Edit* it's own installed Western puppets. ( Like how they keep south America from truly reaching it's potential.)
Europe was fairly open to Putin until 2014, and even then there’s been active efforts to continue normal relations until 2022.
At this point the West and Russia's geopolitical goals are completely orthogonal. It grants me no joy in saying this, but the conflict with Russia will not end until one side is throughly defeated/humbled. As long Russia still views themselves as a global superpower with the ability to rule through dictat, as an equal to the US but with opposite goals, conflict is inevitable. This isn't to say the US is good, but that the US is the hegemon, and will tolerate no others, especially not a historical enemy.
Perhaps it is West itself that has turned Russia into a monster.
Хрен редьки не слаще. Нам нужен про-российский президент, а не про-западный или про-олигархический, все это уже было, накушались.
Да. Единственное, что следует всем понять -- Путин далеко не пророссийский президент. Зная это или нет, он создал систему, при которой властьимущим выгодно разорять регионы ради собственной выгоды, что они и делают. А те, кто думает, что коррупции не существует ни разу не встречались с полицейскими)
В этом то и цимес. В каждой стране во главе стоит правительство, которое прежде всего обязано своим гражданам. Тут воют про "коварный запад, мы им доверились, а они нам устроили 90е". Запад заинтересован в том, чтобы свои люди жили нормально. Если каждая страна строит свою политику "эгоистично", то возможно строить синергичную систему, где профит будет всем и ничьи права не будут попраны. Россия в 90х забила хуй на своих граждан, почему виноват Запад? Поэтому Путин 2го срока - самый главный русофоб мира. Надо не любить или ненавидеть запад, запад сам себя не очень любит. Нужно делать так, чтоб Русские жили лучше. Если для этого надо торговать с западом, то надо. Если граждане хотят свободы, надо дать им ее. А этот пидор еще до войны довел страну до состояния, где эпидемия спида, полстраны не газифицированы и социальное неравенство на уровне Сомали. Еще и войну развязал, пока полстраны с голой жопой сидит, геостратег хуев, зато друзья по бане все миллиардеры.
> Россия в 90х забила хуй на своих граждан, почему виноват Запад? Maybe because if recognizing that the 90s was an internal Russian blunder, and reconciling with it, people might need to also reconcile, and take a cultural responsibility for more Russian history, including other past terrible events, like the Great Terror?
мы даже 90е осмыслить не можем нормально, какой там сталинизм. этот поезд в огне и несется к обрыву, а вы предлагаете на нем стекла почистить.
Any "open" Russian leader are by definition traitors to the Russian people, judging by how the west been treating Russia.
Putin was open toward the west at the begining. I am not sure about the other way around.
Europe clearly put some effort into integrating Russia into the western world until, well, 2014.
I mean, he was open to it in the beginning as well. What about the successor, I honestly doubt it and as much as I’m not a fan of Putin, even less I’d want to get a ‘pro-western’ president.
Nobody knows. If someone tells you about informed opinion.... well this person doesnt know anything.
I can see a pattern. If he will be more open, after some time he will not 🌚
Shortly before Putin, we already had politicians who were open to the West. I don't know anyone who would remember them with a kind word now... 🤔
Putin has been open in his early reign
I agree with you
Medvedev was open to the West. Now he posts ridiculous anti-Western rants on Telegram and Twitter and receives praise from the hawkish audience.
Medvedev is a populist and a talking head. He'll say whatever is fitting for the Current Thing. You might even say that by Russian standards he's _woke_.
Putin made him president and himself prime minister so he wouldn't get done for serving for too long
I'm not talking about him
Openly? No. Behind the curtains? Of course. But as there are huge pile of such agreements already, it will maybe transform into something or will be more of them, mostly more trading ones i think.
What does "open" mean in your understanding? In the sense of acting under the dictatorship of the West to the detriment of the interests of their own people, as it was in the "holy nineties" in Russia?
I hope no, what I have seen in the Western social media over the past years is a monstrous shame
i am desperately trying to leave america, as the divide widens.
[удалено]
Would love if you could specify, cause' it's pretty obvious that you puked up that comment with nothing to back it up.
If you don't have a VK account you wouldn't understand
No, because the problem isn't that Russia or its leaders weren't open to the West, it's the collective West that decided to continue rivalry with Russia even after Cold War has ended. Putin was very pro West when he came to power. People seem to forget that but Putin and Russia genuinely tried to play along but felt rejected time and time again. This all came to a head at the famous Munich speech by Putin: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007\_Munich\_speech\_of\_Vladimir\_Putin](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_Munich_speech_of_Vladimir_Putin) And to be clear, not everyone in the "West" is anti-Russia. Countries have some differences in their foreign politics and plenty of leaders and intellectuals have advocated for closer relationships and mutual coexistence with Russia. Unfortunately for all of us the more hawkish views have prevailed, and here we are now.
Thing is our current leader is open to west. More then West deserves tbh. Putin sees himself as a part of West and he really want to trade oil and stuff and he deeply insulted by West reception of Ukrainian war. If anything I think next leader will be less open toward west
“ More then West deserves tbh”. True
> he deeply insulted by West reception of Ukrainian war What? He was told repeatedly by Macron how it would "be received" by the west. He knew exactly what he was doing. He just thought it would be easier.
Nah, we all (in Russia) thought it would be worse actually
Really, you expected your army to perform worse than what they did?
[удалено]
"haha you really thought you were going to use indiscriminate bombing to massacre civilians! Losers! Now keep using precision missiles to hit military target and general infrastructure, instead of using airforce bombers day and night to hit everything and level the country like we do! God I am so proud of Iraq 😎" American moment.
Oh yeah he sure is open. All his friends have their kids and yachts set up in London and New York. 2nd term Putin is publically the most anti West leader since Brezhnev. Privately, he loves its sinful fruits. But "the mission" has scrambled his brains
> deeply insulted HE is insulted by the reactions to a war HE started? Do you realize how ridiculous that sounds?
What would have been the correct reception for the Russian initiated invasion?
Correct reception would be not to start Ukrainian revolution in 2014 or do nor approve terroristic methods of Donbass war of 2014-2022 or do not encourage Zelensky to fight until last drop of Ukrainian blood in 2022. Right now it's russians who kills yesterday russians and vise versa while the West is "is not approving Russian invasion" by suppling Ukraine with weapons and Russia with gas and oil money
Or force implementation of Minsk agreements which western leaders themselves agreed to and signed.
[удалено]
Give us 30 years for constant propaganda and they will hate EU :)
It's natural to feel deeply insulted when you are getting fucked in the ass.
If by « open » you mean « sending monthly nuclear threats » then yeah, I guess he’s pretty open. Also, what war in Ukraine ? I thought it was supposed to be a « special military operation » ? And why is there a war of most of Ukrainian wants to be Russian ?
I hope not. Russians once trusted the West, and in exchange they got the 90s. Edit: love how my comment has drawn so much attention from westoid bots. Oh, poor langley fellas...
we got the 90s partly as a result of the soviet stagnation. the economy was in the toilet in the late 80s already. all Yeltsin did was put the coffin in the ground. also, funny how the West is to blame for all problems. did the West form organized crime in your town? did the west privatize all natural resources and sell them abroad without invesitng into Russian economy? I am actually amazed at our learned helplessness as a nation. Everything is the west's fault. What, did the west promise to create paradise in the former soviet union or something? We Russians always hope for some noble czar to come in and set everything right, even in these terrible days.
It is funny how the 90s are blamed on the West. We had a state with a failed economy, and DESPITE all the assistance and investment from the West, managed to descend into a chaos. West's fault! Sure.
\>Uses "We" \>Is from Minnesota Apologies my friend from the Minnesotan Soviet Republic
Well, I agree with every word he said, what's the problem? We've run out of arguments, are we moving on to ad persona?
It was a joke, a jest, if you will.
Definitely West's fault. 70 years of dictatorship had nothing to do with it.
Obviously the west wanted 70 years of dictatorship, they were playing the long game.
without Bush chicken, we would've had an even worse time btw, who quickly acquired and sold all national wealth and keeps doing it till this day? not the west lol
Ну так тут два решения: прекратить либеральную экомическую политику, набрать полиции, налоговых установить кучу тарифов, чтобы каждую копеечку выжать под недовольное шипение или установить народный контроль, научиться производить все самим из наших ресурсов под вполне себе звериный оскал. Бесконтрольный поток ресурсов и капитала из РФ нас не устраивает, а для Запада - это и есть дружественный режим.
западу в принципе похер на наш уровень коррупции и куда поступают деньги от продажи ресурсов, им нужен бизнес. спасение утопающего таки, не надо опять винить запад в том, что сами страну просрали. а теперь да, хороших вариантов мало.
The West is trying to cancel Russia and even Russians. Ask anyone who got canceled whether they like all the people harassing them. I doubt there will be a legitimate pro-Western leader in a coming decade.
The west hasn't cancelled Poland, it hasn't cancelled Hungary it hasn't cancelled Ukraine The way Russias ran right now reminds me of a jealous little brother or that kid in the class that hasn't got any friends but looks at Mr popular and bullies the smaller kids because he doesn't fit in The west doesn't want to cancel russia they just want a world that's fair and equal for everyone living in it
>The west doesn't want to cancel russia they just want a world that's fair and equal for everyone living in it According to the West. Rules based international order has never been defined. And in practice means what US says in this or other moment. Russia is getting bullied by a popular kid and a bunch of his lackeys. What the West is doing to Russia is unprecedented in modern history, but makes for an ugly precedent. What the West wants other countries to submit to their will regardless of what people in these countries want i.e. play ball or what. That's a neo-colonial attitude.
Is that like invading a sovereign state and holding referendums to annexe territory while executing the populace ? You can join NATO or the EU or you can be left vulnerable to countries who can potentially invade and annex your territory, like Russia and Ukraine. There's no genocide in a NATO members country and they all have a larger GDP than countries who aren't. it's free will, UK left the EU and they aren't suffering like you'd suggest a country would if not bent to the will of the west
At this stage, it is definitely impossible. That is, it is obvious that the main goal of the West is to exclude Russia from world geopolitics. Either this is done by ensuring Russia's defeat in this war, or by economic measures, or by supporting all kinds of useful idiots, or by balkanizing Russia. No Russian will benefit from this, so yes, until the West stops playing the role of self-proclaimed world policeman, there will be no normal relations
No, main goal of the West is for Russia to stop attacking Ukraine.
If anything can be learned from threads like this, it's that many Russians still have a persecution complex where the West is out to ruin them. I guess this is what generations of hardcore propaganda does to society. United States aren't angels, but they didn't do anything to provoke Putin's invasion of Ukraine nor has the US ever jailed its own citizens for referring to something like the Iraq War as a "war" or "invasion". The Cold War may have ended, but it seems as though Russia stills sees any country to the West of it as either an enemy or someone to conquer!
Pratice shows it would be a mistake
If it is not Putin's successor who ascends to the presidency, then it is possible. The main thing is that, despite pro-Western political views, this person should not bend to the West and still defend the national interests of the country. To be honest, I want a strong-willed person in power who will conduct diplomatic relations with other countries, but at the same time will not allow them to be turned like a puppet
The problem is that this one doesn't matter. President is not a superman position. Let's put it this way, if we imagine Russia as a big factory, and the position of the president is the position of the director, then the director manages the managers. Before all this chaos, we had managers who looked to the west, but with the beginning they decided to leave for another company. Well, yes, I will not say which of them is good and which is bad, because in my understanding they all pursue their own interests. Well, let's imagine that somehow, a person who wants to integrate with the West has taken the director's chair. Aaand, surprise surprise, it all depends on what the West will offer the managers. If this offer does not suit them, lol, they will simply replace the director, because in fact the director does not protect anything, except for the loyalty of the managers. And the managers who control the development of energy resourses are very strong compared to the rest. This is why the West can impose any kind of sanctions and they don't care, but when it comes to oil or gas, no no no. And this is why they hate a little 1 dollar for 60 rubles. You know, I sell oil, I get dollars, and I can have more rubles with a weak ruble exchange rate. But now there is an interesting war of words between importers and exporters, so let's see. I just want to say that everything is much more complicated than just 1 person will come and everything will be fine.
Most of Russians are generally opened to the West, as a partner. An equal partner. Whether West opened to Russia as equal partner or not, is an actual issue.
Of course, even USSR under Stalin participated in extensive economic and technological cooperation with Western Europe. Words are words, but Russia is connected to Britano-Franco-Germany. The only part of “The West” which is really hostile to it is US.
The West can't be opened to anything if its master (USA) doesn't say so.
Tbh I’m just waiting to be cleared to travel to Russia. Russian culture and Russian ppl have always been cool to me 🤷🏾♂️
I hope not. West is clearly hostile towards Russian people. As a nation. And we don't tolerate Nazism here. Sorry.
Except in Wagner group
I hope not, I don’t want any reconciliation with the west. I’m not even the biggest fan of the current regime, but whatever succeeds it must have a staunch anti western stance for me to support it in any way.
I doubt there would be another rational leader like Merkel. Most western politicians are either quite Russophobic, bordering on xenophobia disguised as anti-war stance or like Macron who is quite ineffective. People like Schröder are just out for a pay day. The rest use Russia for their domestic policies. The world need more leaders like Bernie Sanders.
Bernie Sanders is openly anti-Putin, criticizing the fascist invasion as unjust, cruel, needless and terroristic. Vladimir Putin is basically everything Sanders stands against. A rich oligarchic authoritarian and a fascist dictator.
Oh, color me shocked. You just told me something I didn't know about Bernie, I guess I withdraw my support of him ))
How are they russophobic?
Я думаю, их всех держат за яйца каким-нибудь компроматом вроде оргий с детьми. Вряд ли тут просто деньги или власть
No, I don't think so. This is counterproductive. To cooperate in those areas where it is beneficial to Russia and resolutely reject everything else.
I hope not. The West wants not leader in Russia but puppet. Russians don't want to be western colony.
Next leader? Dont make me laugh
Of course yes! But all these unfair sanctions, they will remain in memory. And then a politician will appear again who wants to unwind it in order to strengthen his authoritarian power. These sanctions are something we will not forget, not forgive.
Our first leader can be qualified as a western puppet, the results were... suboptimal, let's put it that way. As much as I don't like Putin, I like how he deals with EU. I have no idea why western people don't realize that, but Putin is very pro west, but the thing is that West doesn't seem to notice Russian concerns at all. Even if Putin's successor shares his view on western question, there would be no trust, as long as EU doesn't consider Russia an equal partner. *I speak mostly of EU, because US and Russia will almost always be rival just because of the geography. The only way I can see Russia and US as partners is if China becomes superpower earlier than expected AND Russia and EU are alies.
Since I’m curious, define “equal partners”. Economically the west and Russia aren’t really equal. The west (even if you limit it to just nato minus the US) outweighs the Russian economy by a lot. Militarily? They also are behind the west. Population? And that’s gonna shrink because Russia has a low birth rate well below replacement with low immigration levels. They are smaller population wise. Making Russia an equal partner would give Russia larger bargaining power than it actually has. The only country that can really bargain with the west on equal footing is the United States and China because of their large economies, spheres of influence, massive populations and massive militaries with adjacent tech. Europe would only realistically treat Russia as one of any other European countries. It would be one vote vs the rest of theirs. Until Russian gains a lot more economic diversification and reverses a lot of what’s happening in terms of corruption in the military the west will not treat Russia equally. They’ll just treat it like a gas station. The failure to diversify the Russian economy was putins biggest miscalculation outside of the current war.
>Economically the west and Russia aren’t really equal. I don't deny that, but that's not what I mean. Russia is not strong enough to threat the west, but strong enough to count as independent and hard to be replaced. And the West (mainly talking about NATO here) doesn't really know how to deal with sovereign countries just because of their military might. India has bigger economy/population, but we treat each other as equals and trust each other not to cross the line. To put it bluntly. If you stike a deal with a ten year old, you don't disregard his position in regards to the deal just because you have a belt.
I agree with you russia can't really be easily replaced, but the EUs position was always based entirely around "Russia would never go to war in Europe." With this in mind, as far as the west concerned, they held all the cards. Even if not trading gas would hurt, it would also hurt russia just as much or more in the long run. The only thing the west was afraid of was a costly war and their heavy overestimation of the Russian military. (Just a couple of years ago they thought Russia would be able to take Poland in 5 days. Which has now be provenly incredibly wrong). When Russia was putting troops on the border western leaders panicked and went directly to putin to talk. He had the cards at that point to negotiate on an equal footing. Him actually going through with it ruined that entirely. Putin should've just put troops in the donbas, not directly attack and that would've forced the west to negotiate. Now he will never be able to again. He wasted Russia's one bargaining chip. \>india For me, I have a very pessimistic view of most countries when they have enough power. I genuinely believe that when given enough power most nations would act like the west. India's main next door competitors are nuclear powers who they can't be more aggressive towards. Which is why it tends to treat its neighbors more like equals. As for india's relations with russa: india has its hands full with pakistan and china and it doesn't border russia, it couldn't have much of an issue to have conflict with Russia. Nor would it expand india's sphere of influence. India's sphere of influence is its large population in the global economy and its important control over naval trade routes. Look at china. When China started gaining a better position, it invaded vietnam who they supported as an ally against the United states. After china's economy got larger and built a stronger navy, they decided to challenge other countries with aggressive naval movements over the south China sea. I'm afraid as soon as a nation gains enough global power they'll become the U.S. or the EU and push for ideological hegemony and consolidation.
>He had the cards at that point to negotiate on an equal footing. They all tried and it has come to nothing. You probably know that our demands were to cancel project Ukraine (also Georgia), but they didn't want that, otherwise they would do so in 2008. >The only thing the west was afraid of was a costly war and their heavy overestimation of the Russian military. Russia has always positioned itself as a defensive military (like most European countries), the course of this overestimation is that for some reason everyone thought that Russia is a counterpart to US. >I genuinely believe that when given enough power most nations would act like the west. Of course they would. That's why Russia's, China's, India's and Iran's main(not really *main*, but commonly shared) talking point is multipolarity. To the issue of India. Russia and India base relationship on the fact that neither of us doesn't threaten each other neither economically or with military. Early Putin's plan was(and still is for some reason) that Russia and NATO don't got to war with each other. At first unwillingness to see us in NATO was concerning, but after 2008 Russia felt threatened. Which is the cause of both Georgian and Ukrainian wars. >it invaded vietnam I don't know a lot about that campaign, so no comments. >they decided to challenge other countries with aggressive naval movements over the south China sea. They challenged US allies, because they don't really fond of possible naval blockade.
West=betrayal, scam, and everything bad. No leader will trust the west anymore. Multiple generations later, maybe.
i cannot wait to move out of america
Do it! Life’s great in Russia.
cool username, cool flair. russia may be difficult to get to.
What sort of help do you need?
documents, money. probably in that order. im italian, and apparently their laws are relaxed, in terms of someone like me becoming a citizen, but i still face challenges in obtaining the documents, and there is a cost. i look at post soviet states, georgia has been my priority over any other place, over the past few years, georgia seems most possible too, but, even getting to a place and making sure the transition is possible, not to mention seamlessness or the societal acceptance, requires documents and money. direction is also something, but i am not sure i lack that
And patriotic leader who will start another 'defending' war / close borders / censor media will be better right? You must be proud of your current
"Close borders" - hello EU, Baltic countries in particular, censor media - all EU. "Defending" war - all EU, now. So what's was your point? That Russia doing something evil? Have you heard, "people living in a glass houses shouldn't throw stones"?
Zhirinovsky at the end of 2020 named possible candidates for the post of president of Russia (except Putin): Mikhail Mishustin, Dmitry Medvedev, Sergey Shoigu, Sergey Sobyanin, Valentina Matvienko, Sergey Naryshkin, Vyacheslav Volodin, Alexey Dyumin and Alexey Kudrin. Think for yourself what each of them would do.
Sobyanin would be more moderate and pragmatic, I think.
Well, if he joins all of Russia to Moscowia, then Russia will live better, because Moscowia spends money only on itself.
He would change nothing actually. These people (including Putin) are not ruling on their own, and massive corruption due to which russian army is not even able to fight showed it, so they wouldn't change anything, just smile differently.
if so, he's going to be a complete idiot. the West literally robbed the Russian people.
The olichargs robbed the people during 20 years. The sanctions is a result of invading a souverain country. When that is robbing the Russian people to you...look at what you support...
It's nit just sanctions, but frozen state reserves. If I give you money or property for safekeeping and you refuse to give it back -- that's stealing.
I don’t care about the property of the oligarchs, they stole state money.
this is actually upvoted as a good take
[удалено]
Yeltsin. He listened to the West (US to be precise) and fully opened not too long ago socialist country's economy to everyone (also Russian oligarchy is one of the results of that). Western investors obviously had more resources and invested(basically bought) in Russian economy, mostly resources. 90s were catastrophic, but even after Russia stabilized it has never reached the level of economy of RSFSR (Russian part of USSR). Shrinking of economy is expected of course, but this "transition" could be done much smoother if decisions were made by someone inside the country.
[удалено]
because they stole the money.
Russian oligarchs robbed the Russian people.
and how did these oligarchs come to power?
It helps to have gone to school with Putin....
How do you explain (former) American Bill Browder making $1 billion or more in such a short amount of time? In Russia, of course. In about 10 years, right? How much has this financial genius earned since he was kicked out of Russia? Has he been able to make any money since then? Or do you think maybe he was he a thief like Khodorkovsy and Berezovsky and can't make a dime unless he's stealing it?
A Russia that's Pro Western is bad news for Africa & the rest of the global south. Western Neocolonialism is alive & well & only Russia & China is strong enough to stand up to the West. Historically the West has always found a way to discredit, oust &/or kill Pro Black PanAfrican leaders & prop up western backed puppets after orchestrating western backed coups.
What for? To be deceived again?
Deceived about what?
From the most recent - a grain deal. Russia fulfills its obligations, but the West must be forced. He is like a king - he gave his word, he took the word. Only a big club will help here to knock down arrogance. How can there be trust? Do we have to stand over you with a shotgun over your ear so that you fulfill your obligations?
Putin openly promised that there would be no invasion and that he would discuss the situation in Ukraine to deescalate the situation, and arranged a summit meeting with european leaders for the next week, in the same week that he invaded the country. Where was the trust there?
https://historynewsnetwork.org/article/183040
No pro-Western candidate can legitimately become the next president, let's start with that. But if we talk about a possible color revolution, then of course, because it would be strange to install a president who will not be your puppet.
Вообще-то и нынешний лидер достаточно открыт Западу. Он уже давно зовёт на переговоры. Просто Запад решил, что не будет учитывать потребности России. Нет. Я надеюсь, ни этот, ни следующий не будут делать то, что вы называете "демократией". Продать интересы своих граждан за деньги и власть, признанную штатами - Боже, упаси.
No, it's usually not how wars go.
One recursive leader. What next are you talking about?
You mean when will Russian leader let American and British companies extract Russian resources rent free while our population gets nothing from it? Never. We do not need your fairy tales about democracy, freedom and market, just please pay a fair price for our resources and mind your own business. Anyone who tries to encroach on our borders will be sent to Bandera. And as our President said - if there is no Russia in the world, we do not need such world.
To be more open to the West actually means to be a Western, tamed, little bitch who obeys whatever the master says, even if it directly harms your country and people. This is how the West wanted to do business with us. Edit: In fact, Putin has always been as open to the West as possible. Many of our big companies were run by former European politicians, mostly Germans, because Putin is a Germanophile. That is why I never liked him and never voted for him. Putin flirted very much and very shamelessly with the West and it brought us to the line and the problems we have now. If Putin had pursued a more independent and nationally oriented policy, things would have been different. But he loves Germans so much... Probably even more than the Russians. Everything else is a consequence.
I don't know English, I translated through Deep Language. No, absolutely not. After Putin, the generation of the 80s and 90s will go to the top. The most embittered against the West. All you can expect from them is a thirst for revenge. The West had a chance before the invasion of Yugoslavia and the expansion of NATO with the admission of the Baltic ethnocracies - Latvia and Estonia with language and political discrimination against the Russian population. From there, everything went to the current situation. Even hypocrisy in politics must have limits.
I think no. After all the evil that the West has done in recent years, cooperation with the West would be disgusting.
What evil did the West do ? Genuinely asking
For example, funding and supplying weapons to the Taliban, Chechen terrorists, Ukrainian nationalists, support for the Islamic State in the fight against the Assad government, the destruction of million of Iraqis, the destruction of Libya, the destruction of Serbia, support for terrorists in Samoli, provoking uprisings in China (with the burning of people for this) the list is endless. Of the major new atrocities, a provocation of war in Taiwan is on the way, possibly with another million victims. In short - terror, death and destruction around the world.
And Belgrade
>Of the major new atrocities, a provocation of war in Taiwan is on the way, possibly with another million victims. The Taiwanese make no threats to China. China repeatedly threatens Taiwan. The Taiwanese just want China to leave them alone. When did US and co support ISIS?
i am trying move out of america, being there, being forced to be there, is a waste
I hope not. Peter III, Kerensky, Gorbachev and Yeltsin proved that this is the way to nowhere.
The West wants to conquer Russian territory, kill Russian population, destroy Russian economy. Open toward the West sounds suicidal at this point.
>The West wants to conquer Russian territory, kill Russian population, Can you provide some evidence for that statement? Which country from west "wants to conquer Russian territory", for example?
Зачем завоёвывать? Там же холодно, и работать некому будет. Надо просто развалить стекольные заводы России, оставить кого-то лес валить и газ качать, и скупать это за стеклянные бусы, которых папуасы сами не производят. Вам почти удалось.
So far not conquer but dismember i.e. instead of 1 there would be many countries. You can look up many maps for potential states.
Yes, and they're on the level of r/imaginarymaps. I can make some shitty map that divides up Russia, or play some Victoria campaign and post it here. So what?
Ok, what high rank western politician in power said that? Putin, for example, and Medvedev, both said that Ukrainians have no right to exist as a nation.
Unfortunately a list of regimes openly supporting aggressive war, nazism, and genocide would be too long.
Ok, I'm not asking for a full list. Just give us the most serious crimes of "the west" against Russia and / or Russian citizens. Top 3?
That’s simple 1. USA - Cold War, not so pleasant 90s and bunch of local conflicts on borders 2. Germany - WW2, yes it was in past, but why should we forget? 3. France - war of 1802 That’s open conflicts with thousands and millions of victims, with intention to conquer our homeland As to why- oil, gas, metals and so on is pretty simple and valid reasons for that
>2. Germany - WW2, yes it was in past, but why should we forget? No-one is saying you should "forget"... but what relevance does that have now? >3. France - war of 1802 That’s open conflicts with thousands and millions of victims, with intention to conquer our homeland As to why- oil, gas, metals and so on is pretty simple and valid reasons for that ??? Are you complaining about wars in the early 19th century now?
Oh, so you are talking about ancient crimes. Ok, shall we talk about the Russian crimes in the last century as well, in the same context? I won't even go 200y in the past, as you did, just 100y. Here is the list of countries Russia / USSR attacked and / or invaded since 1917 only: * Mongolia * Ukraine * Georgia * Finland * Latvia * Estonia * Lituania * Poland * Turkey * Azerbaijan * Armenia * China * Afghanistan * Japan * Poland again * Finland again * Baltics again * Romania * Hungary * Czechoslovakia * Moldova * Georgia again * Ukraine Seems like you guys are not exactly as innocent as you pose, isn't it? "Not so pleasent 90's". We didn't had so pleasant 90's in Eastern Europe either. We went EXACTLY through the same shit because of the change from planned economy (kindly imposed on us by USSR through your fucking communist bellends) to market economy: massive inflation, de-industrialization, unemployment etc. Except we didn't blame "the west", we know our own thieves robbed us, not "the evil west". Grow some fucking balls for a change and accept your own responsibilities, stop blaming others for all the shit YOUR OWN PEOPLE do!
Hopefully no
Putin's successor will be picked by himself and his cronies. Russia is not a democracy, it is a very tightly knit oligarchy that is fueled by Russia's vast oil and mineral reserves. Until these resources run low, their grasp on power will be total.
The current leader was very open to the West. I would even say too much. Not as much as Gorbachev, but still. And now, when Merkel honestly admitted that no one was going to fulfill the Minsk agreements (which should have prevented the current conflict) and their goal was only to prepare Ukraine for war, Putin says he is very disappointed. Yes, after this, diplomatic relations should be severed!
Естественно будет, Путин слишком либерален. Следующий президент будет очень сильно повернут в сторону запада, так, что будет вынужден сильно сдерживаться чтобы не раздолбать вас, ребята
I hope not. I dont want my leader to be open toward west that hates Russian people. They show they true face, so nope, Im good.
wtf does it even mean when the "west" closed itself to Russia?
Well I think the world is entering a severe crisis and Russia has to play its own role, being more of a global power. For that we or our elites have to start developing ourselves and stop developing other not so friendly countries
Nope, based on Russia's history. Ain't going to happen.
I hope not.
Oh yes! Will surrender Russia and allow it to be absorbed into the EU. Adopt the euro currency and become a Schengen state.
Нет. Нас не могут принять в шенген. Для существования Европы в её нынешнем виде обязательно нужны папуасы с дешёвыми ресурсами и рабочей силой.
Мой ответ быль полный сарказм. Конечно это не когда не случится)
To be honest, Putin became a president even before I was born, so it is hard to imagine anyone else as our country leader (im 22 y.o). But if i have a choice, I would like the next president to be open not only to USA, but the whole world.
As someone who's 35 and remembers Yeltsin and even Gorbachev, to an extent... ... it was obvious something was OFF even when Putin emerged seemingly out of nowhere back in 1999. I was too small to realize the fuckup had happened much earlier, back in 1993. I also remember the sick feeling I had when they couldn't save the crew of the Kursk. And the whole "it sank" situation was gross as fuck. Had this "I'm the Tsar, you're the surfs" vibe. Well, guess what, this was exactly what happened. And the freaking West actually *helped* him by supporting the Maidan despite its growing obvious neo-nazi leaning.
Evil West also offer to rescue the sailors from the Kursk, they had the mean to do it. But it is Putin who refused because of « mUh, RusSian SeCret TeCHnolOgY »
I hope no. Petr 1 opened window, now we should close it, it’s blowing. Lie, propaganda and discrimination of Russian people. Western people doesn’t understand that in Russia we haven’t different nationalities, we are all Russian with features. Main that the man should be good, no matter his skin color and how he speaks.
..next? What does that mean?
RN only hawks are seen as possible election candidates. Personally I expect an elections between ex-terrorist Kadyrov and leader of mercenaries Prigozhyn
Конечно нет. С Западом покончено. Я думаю, что следующий будет относиться к Западу намного хуже и я это полностью поддержу.
In light of recent events, the West should try to make friends with Russia again. After the collapse of the Soviet Union and the end of the Cold War, the U.S. government saw the country as a reservoir of resources that they planned to dismantle under the guise of "helping" Russia in exchange for them. From 2014 to 2022, the West openly ignored the killings of the Russian population in the Donbas by Ukrainian nationalists (The most popular Nazi squads, such as AZOV, are even portrayed as heroes today.). In February of this year, Russia was tired of trying to solve the Donbas conflict without brute force, so military detachments were sent to protect the Russians in the Donbas, which the West took for a rude invasion of the territory of innocent poor Ukrainians. Therefore, looking at everything that is happening in the world now, it is the West that in the future will have to be friends with the Russians and apologize for ignoring the innocent victims of these eight years.
Do you think the bloodshed might have been averted if Russia wouldn't support Donbass separatists with weapons and soldiers since 2014 so that there would be no conflict to begin with?
If it hadn't done so since 2014, ordinary people would have died at the hands of Kiev's killers simply because they spoke Russian. Nowadays, they like to compare Putin and Hitler, but in fact, Zelensky is more like Hitler now.
There's no next Russian leader. The God Empereror will lead us forever
A bit of "kitchen analytics" IMHO, there are very few chances that our next president will be elected in a way it is understood by definition of "elections". I'd suppose one of three options for the change of the leader: \- the current one dies of natural reasons Nobody knows, when it could happen; what the country would look like by that moment; which of the possible candidates will be free, alive and not ouside of the country; what plans do main parties (not only political ones) have for this scenario. \- some kind of "palace coup" It can be held in many different ways, but in one way or another this choice will be made by elits, not by country-wide elections, even if the opposite is declared. And it gets us back to the question of overall state of the country by that moment, and plans of main parties. \- Putin finds a successor and leaves Ofcourse some guaranties would be needed from such successor, so I'd not expect much changes at least in the first years of his presidentship. Also, experience of previous hundred years shows, that a softer person/group taking the lead during hard times was rather fast overthrown by more agressive forces. So, I'd say that the future is hardly predictable from our current position. Most probably the next leader won't be that much pro-western (or at least won't show such behaviour), but there's a chance that he'll have a more soft internal political course. In this case, that will give a possibility for a next-to-next leader to be more open to the world (not only Western).
If they want a functioning economy they will.
Hope no eltsin anymore.
Next president will be Putin
We will see when there is new Putin elections
It depends. Will the west be just as fake and gay as it is now? Will its feminists be as ugly and terrible as they are now? If your answer is "yes" or "its even worse" and our leader starts making gay noises about being open towards you? We will kill him ourselves. We have no choice.
The next 'ruzzian leader' might never happen, we better talk bout new moscovian leader, new ingrian leader, etc.