The definition of insanity is trying over and over something that doesn't work expecting the same results. Russia's government is insane for thinking the West has best intentions for Russia.

"TWO NORMAL STATES..." Mr Lavrov says. But that isn't how the Conservative leaders think of Russia. The current British defense secretary is a man called Liam Fox. In 2009 Mr Fox described Russia as "A gangster state". What he actually said was "what we are dealing with in Russia is a gangster state..."And in that case what role does Prime Minister Putin play or President Medvedev. The Conservative government is desperate for any foreign business that might in any way offset the results of the public expenditure cuts it is about to introduce. And so it is touting for contacts that might lead to contracts. However the Conservative Party is Russia phobic and this attitude pervades its leadership. The Russian government might find friends in the Governments of Germany,France,Italy or Spain. It will find none in the current British government.

I can agree that the Mandelson-Deripaska yachting bonding may not be repeated. However, there is a realistic chance to build something constructively positive even in our austerities time. Symbiotic business interests are always promising and may lead to further understanding. The Litvinenko case must be downgraded to non-political and dealt with by the criminal law. The Berezovsly's and others extradition requests should be put aside for now as Britain is governed by "innocent until proven guilty" jurisprudence. If the CPS is silent on any charges brought from the Russian counterpart, there must be an independent arbitration in place. Mr Lavrov is the only Russian official from the Kremlin who demands respect and lacks criticism in Britain. Diplomacy in its finest is required.

I don"t understand, why jornalists at RT, russian polititians and mr Lavrov are not talking about the fact that convicted terrorists and criminals responsible for comiting terrorist acts and crimes ageinst people of russia, are hevig such good time in London. If any one should expose end dvell on wrong doing it should be russia.

Alex, to resolve any terrorists' issues between Russia and the UK, it would require major changes in our Immigration and Asylum Laws. Neither Russia nor Britain are capable of that at the moment, until the Palace of Westminster becomes a sole law-maker and closes our 'open borders' within the EU. The UN Convention on the Status of Refugees (1951 and the amendments of 1967) requires to admit everyone who claims asylum and keep them during a lengthy legal process that will determine their claim to refugee status. Britain and other signatories to this Convention follow these requirements to a degree of being abused. There are more frequent calls in the UK to restore our faith in the integrity of the system to a point of either abolishing the automatic right to asylum or to withdraw from the Convention. Considering that some who arrive to the UK are not from "internationally recognised Democratic countries", or countries "hosting British, NATO and the UN Peacekeeping troops", or where the British Embassy is present, they are entitled to apply for asylum and wait for acceptance of settlement. We all know that among those applicants are genuine and bogus refugees. Applications of some are refused, if not, they may be recognised as refugees granted exceptional leave. Under the Convention's provision no one should be sent back to their country where there is an imminent danger of death, torture or unlawful prosecution. We can only hope that the EU will relax its position on having a tight grip on its members legislation. Only then we can regain control without offending other countries.

October 14, 2010, 08:20, alex wrote > I don"t understand, why jornalists at RT, russian polititians and mr Lavrov are not talking about the fact that convicted terrorists and criminals responsible for comiting terrorist acts and crimes ageinst people of russia, are hevig such good time in London. If any one should expose end dvell on wrong doing it should be russia. I challenge you to name a single convicted terrorist enjoying political asylum in London who is guilty of crimes anywhere, let along in Russia. As far as the British Conservative Party is concerned, they talk the talk on human rights in opposition, but the fear amongst progressive political forces in Russia is that they will sell their principles for the sake of dodgy business deals. The omens are not good already.

SVETLANA the excuses you gave for england not to relise criminals and terrorists to ansver to people of russia were never a reoson not to extradite sitezens of england (born or imigrans) to the US for far lesser crimes. SEVODNYA_NET. Chek it out bud Zakaev, Berezovskiy (just to mention a few) were convicted by Russian courts, for commitng terrorist and criminal activities

Alex, if those alleged terrorists were not on the Interpol wanted list at the time of their arrival and application for asylum, they are subjects to standard immigration and asylum procedures like everybody else who has chosen to do so. Later, if new previously undisclosed evidence emerged, they still have the right of legal representation to challenge allegations against them in the courts of law. It's time to establish some real objectivity behind the reasons, of what many Russians believe, 'Britain is a haven for terrorists'. Britain doesn't invite them and in Britain everyone is innocent until proven guilty. Hardly an excuse, the law and only. And don't forget, Alex, some can afford better lawyers than others.