I am not a notorious scholar but I have written to RT several similar analyses which were not published. What is explained in that topic is correct but actually with bad leadership Russia is loosing touch with realities like: START treaty, drugs, increased numbers of US military installations all over the world (over 1000 worldwide) etc. Consequently, in 2010 Humanity will spend 1,5 trillion $ for her self-destruction (nearly one trillion for America alone). Over 60trillions $ were wasted in the past 60 years... Recently, Russia and her BRIC associates have missed a great opportunity to initiate a change in World' s politics. Will that chance come again ! I don't know. One certitude: There is little chance that this comment be published...Sorry Future Generations...Sincerely...Jean-Claude Meslin

So when Russia works against its interests and accomodates American interest, it becomes an influential global player? WHAT A LOAD OF NONSENSE!!!!! Russia's interests are regional first of all. Second, the efforts Russia puts toward's the American coined term "reset" has brought little in return. It is just a political good feeling that Medvedev thinks boosts his ratings. I have seen no progress in Russia since Medvedev's presidency. Prices continue to rise out of control and infrastructure remains untouched. All that is changing is Russian companies being bought out by American companies, Western Mega Corporations setting up shop, and other various forms of syphoning wealth out of a region. There is nothing beneficial except cooperation in educational spheres and increasing bilateral relations to prevent conflict.

. This analyst is saying that Russia is “unwilling to exert influence” in the world. Russia is primarily focused on consolidating its ties with close strategic and commercial partners and she seems to be making great strides in these efforts. Russia has done well by not joining the U.S/EU/ NATO imperial project. I do think there are places where Russia can assume greater role such as multi-lateral based peace building, global warming and forging new multi-polar global security architecture but these efforts require broader cooperation between the EU and the U.S, China and other rising powers such as India and Brazil. But as longer as the U.S is blindly pursuing imperialistic goals and Europe is blindly following the U.S, Russia will not be able to unilaterally restore peaceful global order. One major problem I have with the current Russia’s leadership that it does not include leaders from the global south in its economic and political forums in meaningful and significant way. For example, let us take the meeting underway in Yaroslavl [ Global Policy Forum on Democracy and Governance]. This forum is a venue where Russia takes lectures from the leaders of the neo-liberal West. The aim appears to be creating an atmosphere where the West can exert influence on Russia. This is pity. I have closely looked at all the keynote speakers at the current Yaroslavl Forum in the Russia Today website and in the Voice of Russia and not a single speaker from the Global South has been featured so far. Therefore, in my view, this forum reflects Russia current tendency to appeal to the neo-liberal west. I see this as a weakness for Russia. Russia, unlike China and even India, has not been cultivating dialogue with Africa and Latin America to the extent of China. Russia’s influence in the global south seems to be limited to narrow bilateral economic deals.

Meslin I do hope that you do not mean that your views are similar to the once expressed by this “expert”. This woman did not make a single credible idea in this 12 minutes rant. For example, she was not able to explain why Russia must speak to Europe through the United State? Europe is Russia's number one trading partner. So why must Russia deal with Europe via the United States? The Cold War is over and has been over for more than 20 years. This "expert" was not able to come terms that the U.S no longer wields global dominance in the economic sphere and its military runs on borrowed money from China and to some extent Russia. Her suggestion of Soviet era "North South technology transfer" that seems to imply a technology transfer from the U.S to the Soviet Union. This is rich! The Soviet Union sent the first dog, first man and the first woman to space. The Soviet Union was able to produce cutting edge scientific innovations. It is true that, at present, some members of Russia ruling elite seem to have inferiority complex and see "modernising Russia" in terms of copying the neo-liberal west. Of course, Russia needs to cooperate with independent Europe, the U.S and China on equal bases. The U.S represents greater challenge for Europe than Russia. The best option for Russia at the moment to carefully maneuver between Europe, the U.S and the global south and wait until Europe can assert itself as independent bloc. By then we can have North America, South America, Asia, Europe in a new multi polar world order and Russia can act as a bridge between Asia and Europe. Russia has an option. Russia can decide whether to tilt toward Asia or toward Europe. Europe does not have this option. Therefore why would Russia acquiesce to joining Europe that is under the control of the U.S?

The event in Yaroslavl is itself a relic of the past. It has started as a forum for excahange of ideas, mostly a preaching forum for western neoliberal experts and an eager, ready to be rich Russian elite-in-the-making. But times have changed. While Russia did not make progress on all fronts, it certainly did in some. But the time has also proven the old expression right: that we all love to teach what is least usefull to learn. Neoliberalism still tries to make pretty noises on reforms (whatever that is), while they have messed up the affairs in their own homes. Rather then putting their own houses in order, they still go around, Barnum style, hoping that somewhere out there, a sucker is born every day. The organizers of this, and many other forums in Russia, need to stop and think. Expertese from G30 would be a great deal more beneficial to a country in transition.

I got two interesting items from this article. First, the observation that USA and Europe have become "more aligned" in how to approach Russia could mean that the old neocon chickenhawks lost, and the current leadership in both regions is slightly more sane when it comes to relations with Russia. Second, there is still a vain wish that Russia will "get in line" with USA foreign policy, and because Russia is not, then she is "unwilling to exert influence". That must be code for saying "me too!" whenever USA State Department makes a pronouncement, perhaps against Iran. But Russia already is exerting influence in world affairs, by acting as a check against lunatics who seem to want to start World War III. If that means certain plotters in my country get their toes stepped on, oh well. I guess I can live with that. Literally.

MEJanssen I do not think that this suggest that the neocons are out of the loop. Indeed, if Europe and the U.S are speaking to Russia with "one voice", then nothing has changed from the days of the Cold War. Europe and the U.S have been speaking to Russia with one voice since the end of WWII.

PR101, I think the current administration is a little more civilized than the previous one, which blatantly said "my way or the highway". Bush officials also dissed "Old Europe" at one point, although they learned to their cost that Europe still has influence in the world. Russia has to be careful, of course, but I think Obama is not quite as warlike as Bush. The plotters are still influencing policy, though, and Obama has to be careful about members of his own administration, too. So it is a mixed bag, but compared to 2008, the rhetoric here in USA has calmed a little. (although the New York Times editorials are still rather shrill concerning anything in Russia)

PR101. You are absolutely right what Angela Stent say mean nothing. She appreciate Russian cooperation when it is done for American interest. Otherwise, it means nothing. I agree that for the sake of mankind, Russia and the USA must cooperate; but on a 50-50 basis not 90-10 as it is now. That is why I mentioned all the subjects above. This shows that there is absolutely no SINCERITY in N-PiPO Obama's actions and I think that Mr Medvedev (business-lawyer like the US president and our French "clown" does not have the capabilities to master the situation. That is all ! Best Regards... Jean-Claude Meslin PS: A small detail bother me: Why can all comments be signed by the writers real names, as I do. I am no hero but I fully assume what I print. Those pseudos show an evident lack of courage...

Meslin I am sure you do know that we are being watched and minored. So, nothing is secret. Also, it is pertinent to stress that, in the final analysis, what matters is not name but the idea. If the idea is credible, useful and based on fact, then, it is the idea that matters. The fact you sign your real name does not make your comment less or more credible. People have all sorts of reasons why they might want not sign their real names. RT is moderated which is really great system because the mods can double check and evaluate our comments before posting them. This is the reason why RT is clean from personal attacks.