Johnson's Russia List
2015-#188
28 September 2015
[email protected]
A project sponsored through the Institute for European, Russian, and Eurasian Studies (IERES) at The George Washington University's Elliott School of International Affairs*
www.ieres.org
JRL homepage: www.russialist.org
Constant Contact JRL archive:
 http://archive.constantcontact.com/fs053/1102820649387/archive/1102911694293.html
JRL on Facebook: www.facebook.com/russialist
JRL on Twitter: www.twitter.com/JohnsonRussiaLi
Support JRL: http://russialist.org/funding.php
Your source for news and analysis since 1996n0
*Support for JRL is provided in part by a grant from Carnegie Corporation of New York and the Open Society Foundations to the George Washington University and by voluntary contributions from readers. The contents do not necessarily represent the views of IERES or the George Washington University.

"We don't see things as they are, but as we are"

"Don't believe everything you think"

You see what you expect to see 

In this issue
 
  #1
CBSNews.com
September 27, 2015
All eyes on Putin
At a time of icy relations with the U.S., Russian President Vladimir Putin gives a rare -- and surprising -- interview to 60 Minutes

The following is a script from "Putin" which aired on September 27, 2015. Charlie Rose is the correspondent. Andy Court, producer.

There aren't many world leaders who have generated as much interest as Russia's Vladimir Putin. All eyes will be on Putin when he speaks at the U.N. tomorrow and meets with President Obama, at a time when he has placed himself and his country in the middle of the most pressing issues of our times. He helped the U.S. and its Western allies broker the nuclear deal with Iran, and now, with a Russian buildup of aircraft, military equipment and personnel in Syria, he has put himself and his country at the center of that civil war and the fight against ISIS.

Now, when his relations with the United States seem to be at a post-Cold War low, suffering under Western economic sanctions imposed on Russia, Putin may be looking for a way to restore his international influence and gain the respect he seeks for his homeland.

Just before his trip to the U.S., Putin invited us to meet him at his state residence outside Moscow where we found him characteristically confident and combative as he made the case that the focus in Syria should be on fighting ISIS rather than removing Syrian President Assad.

Charlie Rose: So you would like to join the United States in the fight against ISIS? That's part of why you're there. Others think that while that may be part of your goal, you're trying to save the Assad administration because they've been losing ground and the war has not been going well for them. And you're there to rescue them.

President Putin: Well, you're right. We support the legitimate government of Syria. And it's my deep belief that any actions to the contrary in order to destroy the legitimate government will create a situation which you can witness now in the other countries of the region or in other regions, for instance in Libya where all the state institutions are disintegrated. We see a similar situation in Iraq. And there is no other solution to the Syrian crisis than strengthening the effective government structures and rendering them help in fighting terrorism. But, at the same time, urging them to engage in positive dialogue with the rational opposition and conduct reform.

Charlie Rose: As you know some of the coalition partners want to see President Assad go first before they will support.

President Putin: I'd like to recommend to them the following. They should send this message to the Syrian people. It's only the Syrian people who are entitled to decide who should govern their country and how.

Charlie Rose: President Assad, you support him. Do you support what he is doing in Syria and what is happening to those Syrian people, those many millions of refugees and the hundreds of thousands of people that have been killed, many by his own force?

President Putin: Well, tell me, what do you think about those who support the opposition and mainly the terrorist organizations only in order to oust Assad without thinking about what will happen to the country after all the government institutions have been demolished? Today, you have repeatedly said that Assad is fighting against his own population. But look at those who are in control of 60 percent of the territory in Syria. It's controlled by either ISIS or by others--

Charlie Rose: Al-Nusra?

President Putin: --such as al-Nusra and other terrorist organizations. They are recognized as terrorist organizations by the United States, by other states and by the United Nations.

Charlie Rose: Are you prepared to put Russian combat troops on the ground in Syria if it's necessary to defeat ISIS?

President Putin: Russia will not participate in any troop operations in the territory of Syria or in any other states. Well, at least we don't plan on it right now. But we are considering intensifying our work with both President Assad and with our partners in other countries.

Charlie Rose: I come back to the problem that many people look at. And they believe that Assad helps ISIS. That his reprehensible conduct against the Syrian people using barrel bombs and worse is a recruiting tool for ISIS and that if he was removed, transitioned, at some point, it would be better in the fight against ISIS, al-Nusra and others.

President Putin: Well, speaking in a professional language of intelligence services I can tell you that this kind of assessment is an "active measure" by enemies of Assad. It is anti-Syrian propaganda.

Charlie Rose: Much is being read into this including this, that this is a new effort for Russia to take a leadership role in the Middle East and that it represents a new strategy by you. Is it?

President Putin: Not really. No. More than 2,000 fighters from Russia and Ex-Soviet Republics are in the territory of Syria. There is a threat of their return to us. So instead of waiting for their return, we are better off helping Assad fight them on Syrian territory. So this is the most important thing which encourages us and pushes us to provide assistance to Assad. And, in general, we want the situation in the region to stabilize.

Charlie Rose: But your pride in Russia means that you would like to see Russia play a bigger role in the world and this is just one example.

President Putin: Well, it's not the goal in itself. I'm proud of Russia, that's true. And we have something to be proud of, but we do not have any obsession with being a superpower in the international arena.

Charlie Rose: But you are in part a major power because of the nuclear weapons you have. You are a force to be reckoned with.

President Putin: I hope so. I definitely hope so. Otherwise why do we have nuclear weapons at all?

Recent tension between the United States and Russia began after Ukraine's president Yanukovych was overthrown and fled to Russia. Putin responded by annexing Crimea, leading the U.S. and Western allies to impose tough economic sanctions against Russia.

President Putin: Ukraine is a separate and major issue for us. It is our closest neighbor. We've always said that this is our sister country. It's not only a Slavic people. We have common history, common culture, common religion, and many things in common. What I believe is absolutely unacceptable is the resolution of internal political issues in the former USSR Republics, through "color revolutions," through coup d'�tats, through unconstitutional removal of power. That is totally unacceptable. Our partners in the United States have supported those who ousted Yanukovych.

Charlie Rose: You believe that the United States had something to do with the ousting of Yanukovych, and he had to flee to Russia.

President Putin: I know that for sure.

Charlie Rose: How do you know that for sure?

President Putin: I know those people who live in Ukraine. We have thousands of contacts with them. We know who and where, when, who exactly met with someone and worked with those who ousted Yanukovych, how they were supported, how much they were paid, how they were trained, where, in which countries, and who those instructors were. We know everything.

For the record, the U.S. government has denied any involvement in the removal of the Ukrainian leader.

Charlie Rose: You respect the sovereignty of Ukraine?

President Putin: Sure. But we want countries to respect the sovereignty of other countries and Ukraine in particular. Respect for sovereignty means to not allow unconstitutional action and coup d'�tats, the removal of legitimate power.

Charlie Rose: How will the renewal of legitimate power take place in your judgment? How will that come about? And what role will Russia play?

President Putin: Russia has not taken part and is not going to take part in any actions aimed at removing the legitimate government.

Charlie Rose: You have a military presence on the border of Ukraine. And some even argue that there have been Russian troops in Ukraine.

President Putin: Well, you do have a military presence in Europe?

Charlie Rose: Yes.

President Putin: American tactical nuclear weapons are in Europe. Let's not forget that. What does this mean? Does it mean that you've occupied Germany or that you've transformed the occupation forces into NATO forces? And if we have our military forces on our territory, on the border with some state, you believe this is a crime?

What Vladimir Putin thinks about America and about President Obama might surprise you. That, and some insights into his personality, when we come back.

President Putin, part two

Vladimir Putin has wielded power in Russia for more than 15 years, longer than many czars. He has not only reshaped his own country, but has begun to play a larger role in international affairs, as an occasional ally, but more often foe of U.S. policy.

Presidential candidates have portrayed him as a bully, a gangster or pragmatic opponent who can be bargained with.

One thing we found: a strong personality who will engage in a conversation with blunt talk, charm and wit.

Charlie Rose: You're much talked about in America. There's much conversation. More so than any--

President Putin: Maybe they have nothing else to do in America but to talk about me.

Charlie Rose: No, no, or maybe they're curious people. Or maybe you're an interesting character. Maybe that's what it is. They know of a former KGB agent who came back and got into politics in St. Petersburg and became deputy mayor and then came to Moscow. And the interesting thing is they see these images of you bare-chested on a horse. And they say, "There is a man who carefully cultivates his image of strength."

President Putin: You know, I'm convinced that a person in my position must provide a positive example to people. And those areas where he can do this, he must do this.

Charlie Rose: You enjoy the work, you enjoy representing Russia and you know-- you've been an intelligence officer. Intelligence officers know how to read other people. That's part of the job, yes? Yes?

President Putin: It used to be. Used to be. Now I have a different job and that's been for quite a long time.

Charlie Rose: Somebody in Russia told me there is no such thing as a former KGB man. Once a KGB man, always a KGB man.

President Putin: Well, you know, anything that we do, all this knowledge we acquire, all the experience, we'll have it forever and we'll keep that. And we'll use it somehow. So, in this sense, yes. They're right.

Charlie Rose: A CIA operative once said to me that one of the training you have is you learn the capacity to be liked as well because you have to charm people. You have to charm people, you have to, yes, seduce them. Let me--

President Putin: Well, if the CIA told you then that's the way it is because they are an expert on that.

Charlie Rose: You have a popularity rating in Russia that would make every politician in the world envious. Why are you so popular?

President Putin: There is something that I have in common with everycitizen of Russia, the love for our motherland.

Charlie Rose: Many of us were moved by an emotional moment at the time of the World War II memory because of the sacrifices Russia had made. And you were seen with a picture of your father with tears in your eyes.

President Putin: My family suffered very major losses during the Second World War, that's true. In my father's family, there were five brothers. I think four of them died. On my mother's side the picture was pretty much the same. Russia has suffered great losses. And of course we can't forget that. And we must not forget that. Not to put blame on somebody, but to prevent anything like this from happening in the future.

Charlie Rose: You also have said that the worst thing to happen in the last century was the collapse of the Soviet empire. There are those who look at Ukraine, especially Ukraine and Georgia, and they believe that you do not want to recreate the Soviet empire, but you do want to recreate a sphere of influence, which you think Russia deserves because of the relationship that has existed. Why are you smiling? Why?

President Putin: You're makingme happy, because we're always suspected of some ambitions. And they always try to distort something. I indeed said that I believe that the collapse of the USSR was a huge tragedy of the 20th century. You know why?

Charlie Rose: Why?

President Putin: Because, first of all, in an instant 25 million Russian people found themselves beyond the borders of the Russian state, although they were living within the borders of the Soviet Union. Then, all of a sudden, the USSR collapsed -- just overnight, in fact. And it's turned out that in the former Soviet Republics -- 25 million Russian people were living. They were living in a single country. And all of a sudden, they turned out to be outside the borders of the country. You see this is a huge problem. First of all, there were everyday problems, the separation of families, social problems, economic problems. You can't list them all. Do you think it's normal that 25 million Russian people were abroad all of a sudden? Russia was the biggest divided nation in the world. It's not a problem? Well, maybe not for you. But it's a problem for me.

Charlie Rose: There are many people who are critical of Russia, as you know. They say that it's more autocratic and less democratic. They say that political opponents and journalists have been killed and imprisoned in Russia. They say your power is unchallenged. And they say that power and absolute power corrupts absolutely. What do you say to those people who worry about the climate, the atmosphere in Russia?

President Putin: Well, there can be no democracy whatsoever without compliance with the law. Everyone must observe the laws. This is the most important thing which we must bear in mind. As for these tragic events, such as the death of people, including journalists, unfortunately they do occur in all countries of the world. But if they happen in our country, we do the utmost to find the criminals and to punish them. But the most important thing is that we will continue to improve our political system so that every citizen can feel that they do influence the life of the city, of the country and of the society and so that the authorities will feel responsible with regard to those people who trust them during election campaigns.

Charlie Rose: If you, as a leader of this country, insist that the rule of law be adhered to, if you insist that justice be done, if you because of your power, then it could go a long way to eliminating that perception.

President Putin: Well, a lot can be done. But not everyone succeeds with everything from the very start. How long did it take the democratic process to develop in the United States? Do you believe that everything is perfect now from the point of view of democracy in the United States? If everything was perfect there wouldn't be the problem of Ferguson. There would be no abuse by the police. But our task is to see all these problems and to respond properly.

Charlie Rose: So the people who killed Nemtsov will be prosecuted to the fullest?

President Putin: Yes. I said it right away that this is a shame for our history and criminals must be prosecuted and punished.

Charlie Rose: Are you curious about America? More than simply another nation that you have to deal with?

President Putin: Of course we are curious about what's going on. America exerts enormous influence on the situation in the world, as a whole.

Charlie Rose: What do you admire most about America?

President Putin: I like the creativity.

Charlie Rose: Creativity?

President Putin: Creativity when it comes to your tackling problems. Their openness, openness and open-mindedness. Because it allows them to unleash the inner potential of their people. And thanks to that, America has attained such amazing results in developing their country.
#2
Kremlin.ru
September 27, 2015
Interview to American TV channel CBS and PBS

Vladimir Putin gave an interview to American journalist Charlie Rose in the run-up to his address at the UN General Assembly's 70th session.

Full text of the interview will be published on September 29.

CHARLIE ROSE: You will speak to the United Nations in a much-anticipated address on Monday. It will be the first time you have been there in a number of years. What will you say to the UN, to America, to the world?

VLADIMIR PUTIN: Since this interview will be aired prior to my speech, I do not think it reasonable to go into much detail about everything I am going to speak about, but, broadly, I will certainly mention some facts from the history of the United Nations. Now I can already tell you that the decision to establish the United Nations was taken in our country at the Yalta Conference. It was in the Soviet Union that this decision was made. The Soviet Union, and Russia as the successor state to the Soviet Union, is a founding member state of the United Nations and a permanent member of its Security Council.

Of course, I will have to say a few words about the present day, about the evolving international situation, about the fact that the United Nations remains the sole universal international organisation designed to maintain global peace. And in this sense it has no alternative today. It is also apparent that it should adapt to the ever-changing world, which we discuss all the time: how it should evolve and at what rate, which components should undergo qualitative changes. Of course, I will have to or rather should use this international platform to explain Russia's vision of today's international relations, as well as the future of this organisation and the global community.

CHARLIE ROSE: We are expecting you to speak about the threat of the Islamic State and your presence in Syria that is related to that. What is the purpose of your presence in Syria and how does that relate to the challenge of ISIS?

VLADIMIR PUTIN: I believe, I am pretty certain that virtually everyone speaking from the United Nations platform is going to talk about the fight, about the need to fight terrorism, and I cannot avoid this issue, either. This is quite understandable because it is a serious common threat to all of us; it is a common challenge to all of us. Today, terrorism threatens a great number of states, a great number of people - hundreds of thousands, millions of people suffer from its criminal activity. And we all face the task of joining our efforts in the fight against this common evil.

Concerning our, as you put it, presence in Syria, as of today it has taken the form of weapons supplies to the Syrian government, personnel training and humanitarian aid to the Syrian people. We act based on the United Nations Charter, i.e. the fundamental principles of modern international law, according to which this or that type of aid, including military assistance, can and must be provided exclusively to legitimate government of one country or another, upon its consent or request, or upon the decision of the United Nations Security Council. In this particular case, we act based on the request from the Syrian government to provide military and technical assistance, which we deliver under entirely legal international contracts.

CHARLIE ROSE: The Secretary of State John Kerry said that the United States welcomed your assistance in the fight against the Islamic State. Others have taken note of the fact that these are combat planes and manpad systems that are being used against the conventional army, not extremists.

VLADIMIR PUTIN: There is only one regular army there. That is the army of Syrian President al-Assad. And he is confronted with what some of our international partners interpret as an opposition. In reality, al-Assad's army is fighting against terrorist organisations. You should know better than me about the hearings that have just taken place in the United States Senate, where the military and Pentagon representatives, if I am not mistaken, reported to the senators about what the United States had done to train the combat part of the opposition forces. The initial aim was to train between 5,000 and 6,000 fighters, and then 12,000 more. It turns out that only 60 of these fighters have been properly trained, and as few as 4 or 5 people actually carry weapons, while the rest of them have deserted with the American weapons to join ISIS. That is the first point.

Secondly, in my opinion, provision of military support to illegal structures runs counter to the principles of modern international law and the United Nations Charter. We have been providing assistance to legitimate government entities only.

In this connection, we have proposed cooperation to the countries in the region, we are trying to establish some kind of coordination framework. I personally informed the President of Turkey, the King of Jordan, as well as the Saudi Arabia of that, we informed the United States too, and Mr Kerry, whom you have mentioned, had an in-depth conversation with our Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov on this matter; besides, our military stay in touch and discuss this issue. We would welcome a common platform for collective action against the terrorists.

<...>

CHARLIE ROSE: Are you ready to join forces with the United States against ISIS and is it why you are in Syria? Others believe that it might be part of your goal, that you are trying to save President al-Assad's administration because they have been losing ground and the war has not been going well for them, and you are there to rescue them.

VLADIMIR PUTIN: That's right, that's how it is. We provide assistance to legitimate Syrian authorities. Moreover, I strongly believe that by acting otherwise, acting to destroy the legitimate bodies of power we would create a situation that we are witnessing today in other countries of the region or in other regions of the world, for instance, in Libya, where all state institutions have completely disintegrated.

Unfortunately, we are witnessing a similar situation in Iraq. There is no other way to settle the Syrian conflict other than by strengthening the existing legitimate government agencies, support them in their fight against terrorism and, of course, at the same time encourage them to start a positive dialogue with the "healthy" part of the opposition and launch political transformations.

CHARLIE ROSE: As you know, some coalition partners want al-Assad to go before they can support the government.

VLADIMIR PUTIN: I would like to advise or recommend them to forward this suggestion to the Syrian people. It is only up to the Syrian people living in Syria to determine who, how and based on what principles should rule their country.

CHARLIE ROSE: Do you support what President al-Assad is doing in Syria and what is happening to those Syrians, to those millions of refugees, to hundreds of thousands of people who have been killed and many - by his own force?

VLADIMIR PUTIN: And do you think that those who support the armed opposition and, mainly, terrorist organisations just in order to overthrow al-Assad without thinking of what awaits the country after the complete destruction of state institutions are doing the right thing?

Time and again, with perseverance worthy of a better cause, you are talking about the Syrian army fighting against its people. But take a look at those who control 60 percent of Syrian territory. Where is that civilised opposition? 60 percent of Syria is controlled either by ISIS, Jabhat al-Nusra or other terrorist organisations, organisations that have been recognised as terrorist by the United States, as well as other countries and the UN.

CHARLIE ROSE: Would Russia deploy its combat troops in Syria if it is necessary to defeat ISIS?

VLADIMIR PUTIN: Russia will not take part in any field operations on the territory of Syria or in other states; at least, we do not plan it for now. But we are thinking of how to intensify our work both with President al-Assad and our partners in other countries.

CHARLIE ROSE: As we come back to the problem of many people considering that al-Assad is helping ISIS, that his terrible attitude towards the Syrian people and the use of barrel bombs and other actions are helping ISIS, and if he is removed, the transition period would be better at some point for the purposes of fighting ISIS.

VLADIMIR PUTIN: In secret services' parlance, I can say that such an assessment is a blatant act by al-Assad's enemies. It is anti-Syrian propaganda.

CHARLIE ROSE: This wording is very broad, among other things, it can mean new efforts by Russia to take up the leadership role in the Middle East and it can mean that it represents your new strategy. Is it really a new strategy?

VLADIMIR PUTIN: No. There are more than 2,000 militants in Syria from the former Soviet Union. So instead of waiting for them to return back home we should help President al-Assad fight them there, in Syria. This is the main incentive that impels us to help President al-Assad.

In general, we want the situation in the region to stabilize.

CHARLIE ROSE: You are proud of Russia and it means that you want Russia to play a more significant role in the world. This is just one of the examples.

VLADIMIR PUTIN: This is not an end in itself. I am proud of Russia. We have much to be proud of. But we have no obsession that Russia must be a super power in the international arena.

CHARLIE ROSE: But you are a major power because of the nuclear weapons you possess. You are a force to be reckoned with.

VLADIMIR PUTIN: I hope so (laughing), otherwise what are these weapons for?

The Ukrainian issue is a separate huge issue for us, I will tell you why. Ukraine is the closest country to us. We have always said that Ukraine is our sister country and it is true. It is not just a Slavic people, it is the closest people to Russia: we have similar languages, culture, common history, religion etc.

Here is what I believe is completely unacceptable for us. Addressing issues, including controversial ones, as well as domestic issues of the former Soviet Republics through the so-called coloured revolutions, through coups and unconstitutional means of toppling the current government. That is absolutely unacceptable. Our partners in the United States are not trying to hide the fact that they supported those opposed to President Yanukovych.

CHARLIE ROSE: You believe the United States had something to do with the ousting of Yanukovych, when he had to flee to Russia?

VLADIMIR PUTIN.: I know this for sure.

CHARLIE ROSE: How can you know for sure?

VLADIMIR PUTIN: It is very simple. We have thousands of contacts and thousands of connectionswith people who live in Ukraine. And we know who had meetings and worked with people who overthrew Viktor Yanukovych, as well as when and where they did it; we know the ways the assistance was provided, we know how much they paid them, we know which territories and countries hosted trainings and how it was done, we know who the instructors were. We know everything. Well, actually, our US partners are not keeping it a secret.

CHARLIE ROSE: Doyou respect the sovereignty of Ukraine?

VLADIMIR PUTIN: Certainly. However, we would like other countries to respect the sovereignty of other states, including Ukraine, too. Respecting the sovereignty means preventing coups, unconstitutional actions and illegitimate overthrowing of the legitimate government.

CHARLIE ROSE: How does the renewal of the legitimate power take place in your judgment? How will that come about? And what role will Russia play?

VLADIMIR PUTIN: At no time in the past, now or in the future has or will Russia take any part in actions aimed at overthrowing the legitimate government.

CHARLIE ROSE: Did you have to use the military force to accomplish that objective?

VLADIMIR PUTIN: Of course, no.

CHARLIE ROSE: Russia has military presence on the borders with Ukraine, and some argue that there have been Russian troops in Ukraine itself.

VLADIMIR PUTIN: Do you have a military presence in Europe?

CHARLIE ROSE: Yes.

VLADIMIR PUTIN: The U.S. tactical nuclear weapons are in Europe, let us not forget this. Does it mean that the U.S. has occupied Germany or that the U.S. never stopped the occupation after World War II and only transformed the occupation troops into the NATO forces? And if we keep our troops on our territory on the border with some state, you see it is a crime?

CHARLIE ROSE: As you know, you are very much talked about in America.

VLADIMIR PUTIN: Do they not have anything else to do? ( Laughs.)

CHARLIE ROSE: Or maybe they are curious people? Or maybe you are an interesting character, maybe that is what it is? They know that you were the KGB agent, who retired and got into politics. In St. Petersburg you became deputy mayor, then moved to Moscow. And the interesting thing is that they see these images of you, bare-chested man on horseback, and they say there is a man who carefully cultivates his image of strength.

You enjoy the work, you enjoy representing Russia, and I know you have been an intelligence officer. Intelligence officer knows how to read other people; that's part of the job, right?

VLADIMIR PUTIN: It used to be my job. Now I have a different job and for quite a while already.

CHARLIE ROSE: Someone in Russia told me, "There is no such thing as a former KGB man. Once a KGB man, always a KGB man."

VLADIMIR PUTIN: You know every stage of your life has an impact on you. Whatever we do, all the knowledge, the experience, they stay with us, we carry them on, use them in one way or another. In this sense, yes, you are right.

CHARLIE ROSE: Once, somebody from the CIA told me that the training you have is important, that you learn to be liked as well. Because you have to charm people, you have to seduce them.

VLADIMIR PUTIN: Well, if the CIA told you so, then it must be true. They are experts on that. (Laughing)

CHARLIE ROSE: The popularity rating you have in Russia, I believe, makes every politician in the world envious. Why are you so popular?

VLADIMIR PUTIN: There is something that unites me and other citizens of Russia. It is love for our Motherland.

CHARLIE ROSE: It was an emotional moment at the time of the [World War II Memory], because of the sacrifices Russia had made. And you were staying with a picture of your father with tears in your eyes.

VLADIMIR PUTIN: Yes, my family and my relatives as a whole suffered heavy losses during the Second World War. That is true. In my father's family there were five brothers and four of them were killed, I believe. On my mother's side the situation is much the same. In general, Russia suffered heavily. No doubt, we cannot forget that and we must not forget, not to accuse anyone but to ensure that nothing of the kind ever happens again.

CHARLIE ROSE: You also said that the worst thing that happened in the last century was the disintegration of the Soviet Union, the Soviet empire. There are those who look at Ukraine and Georgia and think that you do not want to recreate the Soviet empire, but you do want to recreate a sphere of influence, which, you think, Russia deserves because of the relationship that has existed. Why are you smiling?

VLADIMIR PUTIN: (Laughing) Your questions make me happy. Somebody is always suspecting Russia of having some ambitions, there are always those who are trying to misinterpret us or keep something back. I did say that I see the collapse of the Soviet Union as a great tragedy of the XX century. Do you know why? First of all, because 25 million of Russian people suddenly turned out to be outside the borders of the Russian Federation. They used to live in one state; the Soviet Union has traditionally been called Russia, the Soviet Russia, and it was the great Russia. They used to live in one country and suddenly found themselves abroad. Can you imagine how many problems came out?

First, there were everyday issues, the separation of families, the economic and social problems. The list is endless. Do you think it is normal that 25 million people, Russian people, suddenly found themselves abroad? The Russians have turned out to be the largest divided nation in the world nowadays. Is that not a problem? It is not a problem for you as it is for me.

CHARLIE ROSE: As far as we know, you are very popular, but, forgive me, there are many people who are very critical towards you in Russia. As you know, they say it is more autocratic than democratic. They say that political opponents and journalists had been killed and imprisoned in Russia. They say your power is unchallenged. And they say that power, an absolute power corrupts absolutely. What would you say to those people who worry about the climate, the atmosphere in Russia?

VLADIMIR PUTIN: There can be no democracy without observing the law and everyone must observe it - that is the most basic and important thing that we all should remember.

As for those tragic incidents as losses of lives, including those of the journalists, unfortunately, it happens in all countries around the world. But if it occurs in Russia, we take every step possible to ensure that the perpetrators are found, identified and punished. We will work on all issues in the same way.

But the most important thing is that we will continue improving our political system so that people and every citizen will feel that they can influence the life of state and society, they can influence the authorities, and so that the authorities will be aware of their responsibility before those people who gave their confidence to the representatives of the authorities in the elections.

CHARLIE ROSE: If you as the leader of this country insist that the rule of law be observed, if you insist that justice be done, if you because of your power do that, then it could go a long way eliminating that perception.

VLADIMIR PUTIN: A lot can be done, but not everyone immediately succeeds in everything. How long has it taken the democratic process to develop in the United States? Since it was founded. So, do you think that as regards democracy everything is settled now in America? If this were so, there would be no Ferguson issue, right? There would be no other issues of similar kind, there would be no police abuse.

Our goal is to see all these issues and respond to them timely and properly. The same applies to Russia. We also have a lot of problems.

CHARLIE ROSE: Are you curious about America more than simply another nation that you have to deal with?

VLADIMIR PUTIN: It is interesting for us to know what is happening in the US. America has a strong influence on the situation in the world in general.

CHARLIE ROSE: What do you like most about America?

VLADIMIR PUTIN: America's creative approach to solving the problems the country is faced with, its openness and open-mindedness which make it possible to unleash the potential of the people. I believe that largely due to these qualities America has made such tremendous strides in its development.

CHARLIE ROSE: What do you think of President Obama? What is your evaluation of him?

VLADIMIR PUTIN: I do not think I am entitled to assess the President of the United States. This is up to the American people.

CHARLIE ROSE: Do you think his activities in foreign affairs reflect a weakness?

VLADIMIR PUTIN: Why? I do not think so at all. The point is that in any country, including the United States, may be in the United States even more often than in any other country, foreign policy is used for internal political struggle. An election campaign will soon start in the United States. They always play either Russian card or any other.

CHARLIE ROSE: Let me ask you this question: Do you think he listens to you?

VLADIMIR PUTIN: I think that we all listen to each other when it does not contradict our own ideas of what we should and should not do.

CHARLIE ROSE: You said Russia is not a super power. Do you think he considers Russia an equal? Considers you an equal? Which is the way you want to be treated?

VLADIMIR PUTIN: (Laughing) Ask him, he is your President! How can I know what he thinks?

CHARLIE ROSE: Are you watching the republican political debates?

VLADIMIR PUTIN: If you ask me whether I watch them on a daily basis - I would say no.

CHARLIE ROSE: Marco Rubio is running for a Republican nomination and he said you were a gangster.

VLADIMIR PUTIN: How can I be a gangster, if I worked for the KGB? It is absolutely ridiculous.

CHARLIE ROSE: Are people in Russia fearful of you?

VLADIMIR PUTIN: I do not think so. I assume most people trust me, if they vote for me in elections. And it is the most important thing. It places great responsibility on me, immense responsibility. I am grateful to the people for that trust, but I surely feel great responsibility for what I do and for the result of my work.

CHARLIE ROSE: As you know, some have called you a tsar.

VLADIMIR PUTIN: So what? You know, they call me different things...

CHARLIE ROSE: Does this title fit you?

VLADIMIR PUTIN: No, it doesn't. It is not what your supporters, friends or your political adversaries call you that matters. What is important is what you think you must do in the interests of the country, which put you in such position, such post as the Head of the Russian State.

<...>
 
 
 #3
Putin pledges to improve Russian political system so that people may influence authorities

MOSCOW, September 28. /TASS/. Russia's political system will be improved for ordinary citizens to be able to influence authorities, Russian President Vladimir Putin said in an interview with US TV anchorman Charles Rose for the CBS and PBS channels.

"The most important thing is that we will continue improving our political system so that people and every citizen will feel that they can influence the life of state and society, they can influence the authorities, so that the authorities will be aware of their responsibility before those people who gave their confidence to the representatives of the authorities in the elections," Putin said.

"A lot can be done, but not everyone immediately succeeds in everything. How long has it taken the democratic process to develop in the United States? Since it was founded. So, do you think that as regards democracy everything is settled now in America? If this were so, there would be no Ferguson issue, right? There would be no other issues of similar kind, there would be no police abuse," he said.

"Our goal is to see all these issues and respond to them timely and properly. The same applies to Russia. We also have a lot of problems," Putin said.
 
 #4
Washington Post
September 28, 2015
The Daily 202: Putin trolls Obama ahead of United Nations showdown
By James Hohmann and Elise Viebeck

THE BIG IDEA:

Vladimir Putin and President Obama are meeting formally for the first time in two years today, after the Russian president delivers his first speech to the United Nations General Assembly in a decade.

Their relationship is as frosty as ever. Russia, invoking the specter of ISIS as an excuse to prop up murderous dictator Bashar al-Assad, has deployed hundreds of soldiers, 28 fighter juts, helicopters, tanks and artillery into Syria.

The show of military power seems mainly designed to distract both the West and Putin's own people from the mess he's created in Ukraine, which triggered damaging economic sanctions.

Regardless of why he's doing it, Putin's engagement has made Syria's multi-front and multi-player war even more chaotic and complicated to solve. We've come a long way since Obama drew that meaningless "red line" in August 2012.

Ahead of his sit-down with Obama, Putin mocked the failure of U.S. efforts to arm Syrian rebels on "60 Minutes." In an interview with Charlie Rose that aired last night, the Russian pointedly mentioned embarrassing revelations about a costly three-year program to train and equip moderate rebels fighting Assad. Last week, it emerged that one rebel commander handed over a substantial part of the U.S.-provided military equipment to an Islamic State intermediary. "The initial aim was to train 5,000 to 6,000 fighters, then 12,000, but it turns out that only 60 were trained and only four or five are actually fighting," Putin said. "All the others simply ran away with their American weapons to Islamic State!" The full transcript of the Putin interview, plus Charlie's 10-minute package, is here. The Post's diplomatic correspondent, Carol Morello, has more in her story from the U.N. meeting.

Russia further asserted itself in the Middle East this weekend by inking an intelligence-sharing agreement with Iraq. Iran and Syria are also involved. "The Iraqi military said in a statement that the new agreement was necessary because thousands of volunteers who have joined the Islamic State have come from Russia," per the New York Times' Michael R. Gordon. The move wasn't coordinated with the U.S., which John Kerry complained about and discussed yesterday with the Russian foreign minister on the U.N. sidelines. The deal not only puts Russia in a position to support Assad militarily, the Times notes, but it could enable the Kremlin to influence the choice of a successor if Assad eventually leaves.
Click here for more information!

Meanwhile, U.S. officials remain uncertain about Putin's Syria strategy and confused about how to respond. "Administration decisions on a series of proposed adjustments to its strategy against the Islamic State have been put on hold pending more information about Russia's intentions in Syria and President Obama's desire for clarification of the proposals themselves," senior administration officials tell The Post's Karen DeYoung. "Putin's moves have further delayed and complicated decision-making on plans that include sending U.S. arms directly to Kurdish and Arab rebels in northeastern Syria ... For now, officials said, Obama's goal is to hear Putin out, to stress U.S. policy goals and warn against interference, and to determine whether there is room for cooperation."

On the American side, the players are changing in the power struggle over U.S. policy: The State Department and Pentagon often clash, with diplomats demanding a more muscular approach and the military urging caution. DeYoung, our senior national security correspondent, notes that Joint Chiefs of Staff Chair Martin Dempsey retired on Friday, replaced by Marine Gen. Joseph Dunford, commander until last month of the U.S. and international force in Afghanistan. State's ISIS special envoy, retired Gen. John Allen - frustrated by the Pentagon's reticent to use more force - is due to leave this fall.

Russian context: Putin's entry into Syria, like almost everything else that he does, is part of his own bid to stay in power, Anne Applebaum explains in a smart column for today's paper. "You and I might assume that the prospect of a Russian street revolution is far-fetched, but Putin, having watched what happened in East Germany in 1989 from his KGB office in Dresden, and having then watched what happened to Moammar Gadaffi in 2011, clearly worries about it quite often. ... The arrival of Russian troops, some in transit directly from the Ukrainian border, is designed to reinforce this message: Putin is ready to help another dictator reestablish dictatorship, reassert control and imprison all of his enemies, in Syria and, if needed, in Russia too."

As a signal of the popular unease with Putin, just yesterday the Kremlin-backed contender for governor of the Irkutsk region of Siberia lost to a communist candidate. It's a rare and surprising defeat, per the AFP's Moscow reporter. See a slideshow of the most awkward photos from Obama-Putin bilats here.


 
 #5
Washington Post
September 28, 2015
Live from New York: It's Putin Speech Bingo
By Andrew Roth
Andrew Roth is a reporter in The Post's Moscow bureau. He previously reported on Russia and the former Soviet Union for The New York Times.
[Bingo card here https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2015/09/28/live-from-new-york-its-putin-speech-bingo/]
 
Russian President Vladimir V. Putin is set to give a highly anticipated speech at the United Nations General Assembly on Monday as relations with the West have fallen to their worst since the end of the Cold War. Dive into the psyche of the Russian leader with this handy guide to his favorite foreign policy rhetoric.

1) Syria - This is the gimme. Syria and a proposed anti-Islamic State coalition are widely expected to be the main focus of Putin's speech, making it the center square of our bingo.

2) The expansion of NATO - Putin has portrayed NATO expansion into the former Soviet Union as an act of Western aggression and an attempt to encircle Russia. Putin will likely say that NATO is a destabilizing force in Europe, and may add that the West broke a (disputed) 1990 promise that NATO would not expand "one inch to the east" if a re-unified Germany joined the military alliance.

3) Provocation - A popular, flexible Russian word that can mean anything from a biased news article to a false-flag military attack. Basically, it is something that makes you look bad. In Russia's conspiratorial worldview, provocations are everywhere. Putin sees them too.

4) Terrorists with Foreign Backing - Expect Putin to accuse the United States and Europe of backing some of the Islamist groups fighting in Syria. Putin has previously accused the West of orchestrating the Colored Revolutions of the early 2000s (Georgia, Ukraine, Kyrgyzstan), the Arab Spring, and the 2014 revolution in Ukraine that overthrew President Viktor F. Yanukovich.

5) Multipolar World Order - For almost a decade, Putin has regularly called for a new "multipolar" world order that includes the rise of new centers of power, including China and India, as an alternative to a perceived U.S. hegemony.

6) Anti-sanctions - We are fairly sure that Putin will attack the United States' use of sanctions as a tool of international pressure (his foreign minister said so). So to keep it interesting, let's see if he mentions the Russian tit-for-tat response: banning many food imports from the European Union and United States, a measure that was meant to punish Western farmers but also drove up inflation in Russia. Collectively, Russia has called the measures "antisanctions."

7) Our Western Partners - A needling, ironic phrase that Putin enjoys using for countries that, at least for the moment, are definitely not his partners.

8) National Interests - Russia has deflected criticism of its actions in Ukraine by saying it must defend its national interests. Expect Putin to use the U.N. stage to tell the West to mind its own business.

9) Information War - A shorthand accusing Western news agencies and other media of harboring anti-Russian bias. This term came into vogue during the height of the fighting in Ukraine, but Putin has believed the Western media is out to get him since long before that.

10) Superpower or Hegemony - Putin regularly attacks the United States as a global hegemony and says that Russia has no aspirations to become a superpower.

11) Historical justice (in Crimea) - Not a good bet in a speech where Putin wants to avoid Ukraine, but if he does mention Crimea, expect him to discuss the annexation through the lens of the peninsula's (disputed) referendum and the restoration of "historical justice" by returning Russian control over the region.

12) Western intervention - Expect Putin to rail against the results of Western intervention in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Libya, and portray that as a key motivation to back Bashar al-Assad's government in Syria.

13) Ferguson - There's an outside chance. Putin mentioned Ferguson in an interview with Charlie Rose that aired last week to deflect criticism about Russia's democratic shortcomings. He could do the same in Monday's speech. You could call this an example of Whataboutism.

14) "We defeated the Nazis together..." - An appeal to historical solidarity between Russia and the West that Putin uses in many of his international appearances.

15) Sovereignty - A staple of Putin's speeches since the beginning of his presidency and the closest thing he has to a concrete foreign policy doctrine. For Putin, sovereignty is the principle that rejects the Arab Spring and Colored Revolutions, as he portrays those revolutions as products of foreign intervention (see "Terrorists with Foreign Backing").

16) American Exceptionalism - A dark horse. Putin made a dig at American exceptionalism in his 2013 New York Times op-ed about Syria, calling it "dangerous to encourage people to see themselves as exceptional, whatever the motivation." The argument went that people who view themselves as exceptional believe they are above international law. With Putin's sudden return to the Syria crisis, we shall see if he picks up that narrative again.

17) Refugee Crisis - Another no-brainer.  Putin knows that the refugee crisis is putting pressure on Europe to make a deal on Syria. Expect him to address this explicitly.

18) Donald Trump - Trump has said he would like to meet Putin in New York, but Putin's spokesman said that the Russian president would likely not have time. Expect Putin to play the Trump card if he wants to take a jab at the upcoming U.S. elections.

19) Russian Spirituality/"Spiritual Staples" - To deflect Western criticism of some of his government's more illiberal policies, Putin has said that Russia's unique cultural and historical development should be respected. In particular, he has used this claim to respond to attacks over anti-gay rights legislation passed in Russia in 2013. Putin coined a peculiar phrase, "spiritual staples," which, to many Russians, still sounds strange.

20) Fascism - The painful, collective and still-raw memory in Russia of World War II can make a reference to fascism a compelling argument here. It is often used as an umbrella term for far-right extremists and radicals in Europe, and Putin is likely to employ it.

21) Import Substitution - This would probably play better with Russians than world leaders, but Putin may try to brag about Russia's self-sufficiency and its ability to withstand U.S. economic pressure (and the destructiveness of its own anti-sanctions policies). Import substitution, replacing imports with domestically produced substitutes, is an integral part of that policy.

22) Yalta - At the 70th anniversary of the founding of the United Nations, expect Putin to wax historical. The Yalta conference, attended by Churchill, Roosevelt, and Stalin in February 1945, helped define the post-war European order and was an important step toward the founding of the United Nations. Some political commentators have said that Putin now wants a "new Yalta" agreement that will define Russia's sphere of influence in Eastern Europe. Russia annexed Yalta, along with the rest of the Crimean peninsula, last March.

23) Sochi Olympics - Putin might mention the 2014 Sochi Olympics as a status symbol heralding Russia's resurgence. The end of the games were largely overshadowed by the Ukrainian revolution, but the opening ceremonies "bordered on colossal."

24) Nukes - With references to the new Cold War swirling and the recent conclusion of the Iran nuclear deal, it's a solid bet that Putin will discuss nuclear non-proliferation at least in passing.

25) Cold War - Is it the new Cold War or isn't it? Putin has generally rejected this term, as have many Western leaders, but the sudden chill in relations between Russia and the West make this the go-to comparison. Expect him to bring this up, if only to knock it down.
 
 #6
Washington Post
September 27, 2015
book review
Searching for the roots of Russia's aggression
By Daniel Treisman
Daniel Treisman is a professor of political science at the University of California, Los Angeles, and director of the Russian Political Insight project.

IMPERIAL GAMBLE
Putin, Ukraine, and the New Cold War
By Marvin Kalb
Brookings.
287 pp.$29
PUTINISM
Russia and Its Future with the West
By Walter Laqueur
Thomas Dunne/St. Martin's.
271 pp. $27.99
THE NEW TSAR
The Rise and Reign of Vladimir Putin
By Steven Lee Myers
Knopf. 572 pp. $32.50

A generation after the Cold War ended, Russian fighter jets are again probing NATO's defenses in the skies around Norway and Portugal. Russia has dismembered one of its neighbors, annexing part of its territory. A McCarthyite frenzy has gripped the country's elite as investigators target an imaginary fifth column of national traitors.

The vehemence of Russia's recent turn against the West has shocked observers and prompted a scramble for explanations. Marvin Kalb, a veteran foreign correspondent and Russia hand, believes the key to the current crisis lies in the region's history, specifically the interwoven pasts of the countries now called Russia and Ukraine. In "Imperial Gamble," he provides a primer on the important events and personalities of the past 12 centuries. His narrative ranges from Mongol invaders to Kiev's pro-Europe protesters, from the facade villages of Grigori Potemkin to the ersatz democracy of Vladimir Putin.

In this part of the world, as Kalb reminds us, territories, cultures and languages have melted into one another over time: One can cross empires without leaving home. Consider Crimea, which, before ending up in an independent Ukraine in 1991, was passed from the Byzantines to the Mongols, Ottomans, Russians and Soviets. This intertwined past, in Kalb's view, made Putin's land grab in Ukraine in 2014, if not inevitable or justifiable, at least understandable: "There is no escaping history."

Of course, a history of intimacy does not preclude separation, as divorce lawyers can attest. And the two countries had been "divorced" for 23 years, even signing a Friendship Treaty in 1997. If Putin found this unacceptable, he had many previous opportunities to act and more promising paths to integration, through either diplomacy or covert subversion. Why he struck when he did - and how, uniting most Ukrainians against him and speeding Kiev's flight to the West - is hard to deduce from the distant past.

The eminent scholar Walter Laqueur suggests in his book "Putinism" that the Russian leader can be understood by looking at the history of ideas. To explain current policies, one must examine the strange mix of philosophers and polemicists that Kremlin officials have been reading.

Laqueur singles out two writers in particular. Alexander Dugin, a onetime neo-Nazi and now a sociology professor, is the new prophet of the doctrine known as Eurasianism. Originally hatched among anti-Soviet emigres in the 1920s, Eurasianism posits an irresolvable conflict between Russia, the center of a "timeless steppe empire," and the "Romano-Germanic" West.

A frequent guest these days on Moscow talk shows, Dugin certainly has admirers in the Russian elite. But it is not known whether Putin is among them. Laqueur does not claim this, suggesting only that Dugin's ideas are popular among the country's military planners. In fact, Dugin may have become too extreme for the Kremlin. He was fired from his university job in June 2014 after posting a clip encouraging Russians in Ukraine to "Kill, kill, kill!" He has accused Putin of "pathological wavering."

A second philosopher, Ivan Ilyin, is a known favorite of Putin's. The president has quoted his work, told regional governors to read his books, even arranged his reburial in a Moscow monastery. A refugee from the 1917 revolution, Ilyin was horrified by Bolshevik totalitarianism and equally so by the "mechanical, quantitative, formal" democracy of the West.

Putin clearly admires Ilyin's writing, but it's unclear what in that writing he admires. Ilyin's ideals were eclectic, embracing both autocratic monarchy and personal liberty. What resonates might be the philosopher's warnings of a German project to dismember Russia - a notion perhaps less strange right after Hitler than it is today. But such warnings are not what Putin quotes in his speeches. What he recited to the parliament last December was Ilyin's impassioned plea for "freedom for the Russian people, freedom for all of us: freedom of faith, of the search for truth, creativity, work, and property."

Laqueur is right to note the authoritarian tone of current political discourse. The chairman of the Constitutional Court regrets the passing of serfdom. The head of the Central Electoral Commission speaks wistfully of monarchy. A pro-Kremlin newspaper prints a column praising the "good" early Hitler. Meanwhile, the Duma is busy banning American adoptions, homosexual propaganda and synthetic lace panties. It seems like parody, but no one is laughing.

With a connoisseur's eye, Laqueur dips into the murk and fishes out evidence of dark trends: zapadophobia (fear of the West), confabulation (believing impossible things), messianism. Yet how seriously should we take all this philosophical posturing if, as Laqueur notes, most Russians "are not motivated by ideology; their psychology and ambitions are primarily those of members of a consumer society"?

The trouble with history - whether of nations or ideas - is that its lessons are ambiguous. The opposition leader Vladimir Ryzhkov, a historian by training, told me recently of an exchange he had with Putin in late 2013. Russia's past showed, Ryzhkov told the president, that "when you tighten the screws too much, it leads to revolution." But Putin has a different take, as Ryzhkov discovered when the Russian leader retorted: "To me, Russian history shows something else - that if you give too much freedom, it leads to chaos and instability."

Knowledge of the past illuminates what happens. By itself, it cannot reveal why it happened. To Kalb, for instance, events from Mongol autocracy to Catherine the Great's conquests set the stage for Putin. But history sets many stages. Only later do we find out which of them we should have watched.

Besides the histories of nations and of ideas, the stories of individual leaders may hold clues. Steven Lee Myers's "The New Tsar" is not the first biography of Putin, but it is the strongest to date. Judicious and comprehensive, it pulls back the veil a little from one of the world's most secretive leaders. What is most striking, given the aura of steely consistency that Putin cultivates, is how he has changed over the years. Myers reprints the famous picture of Yeltsin leaving the Kremlin in December 1999. Putin stands beside him, so pale he looks as though he has food poisoning. It is hard to imagine this nervous apprentice galloping bare-chested across the steppes, as pictured some years later in Kremlin publicity shots.

Even as he brings national television and the oligarchs under his control, he surprises advisers with his economic liberalism - slashing tax rates, paying down debt, husbanding oil revenue. Myers sees Putin as genuinely committed in the early years to a rapprochement with the West. This is the Putin who races to commiserate with George W. Bush after 9/11, closes military posts in Cuba and Vietnam and overrules his defense minister to accept American bases in Central Asia, the first U.S. troops in former Soviet territories since World War II.

He even appears to accept NATO. "We do not see a tragedy in its existence," he said in 2001, and suggested that Russia should be allowed to join. Later, he disregarded communist protests and established a NATO supply route to Afghanistan through Russian airspace.

Putin seems to have believed he had a personal chemistry with Bush - "My God. This is beautiful," he gushed when the president showed him the Oval Office - at least enough to feel betrayed when Bush dumped the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty and embarked on a global crusade to spread democracy by force. Then came the angry years. Myers shows how Putin grew bitter as he aged, undergoing plastic surgery, divorce and rounds of increasingly dubious elections. His circle narrowed as he weeded out independent thinkers, replacing them with athletes, washed-up Western celebrities, Silvio Berlusconi and old friends from St. Petersburg or the KGB, who became wealthier by the year.

In Russian, one says of a politician who has grown arrogant and remote that he has become "bronzed," like a statue. Putin's mentor, the liberal St. Petersburg mayor, Anatoly Sobchak, implored him, "Voldya, don't become bronzed." But Putin did. "He has a good sense of humor," Sobchak's widow told a newspaper interviewer, looking for something nice to say. "At least, he used to."

Myers leaves the covert invasion of Crimea as the climax of his book. He is convinced the decision was sudden: "Putin had not planned to take his country to war," he writes. "Nor had he prepared his country for it." Throwing caution to the wind, he started making decisions "alone and off the cuff."

Myers misses one important detail. Putin apparently did not oppose the late-night, European Union-brokered deal under which Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych promised to step down early. Yanukovych, a Putin ally, had been resisting demands from pro-Europe protesters that he resign. According to then-Polish foreign minister Radoslaw Sikorski, who was there, it was a call from Putin that persuaded Yanukovych to agree. When the Ukrainian opposition leaders and their E.U. supporters failed to implement this agreement, resulting not in early elections but in the chaotic collapse of the regime and the flight of Yanukovych to Russia, Putin felt he had been tricked.

The great strength of Myers's book is the way it shows how chance events and Putin's own degeneration gradually cleared the path to the Ukraine crisis. All the troubling tendencies were there from the start, but it took years for Putin's resentment and frustration to explode in February 2014.

Putin emerges as neither a KGB automaton, nor the embodiment of Russian historical traditions, nor an innocent victim of Western provocations and NATO's hubris, but rather as a flawed individual who made his own choices at crucial moments and thereby shaped history.
 #7
New York Times
September 27, 2015
Putin's Credo: Never Let Them See You Sweat
By STEVEN LEE MYERS
Steven Lee Myers is a Washington correspondent for The New York Times and the author of "The New Tsar: The Rise and Reign of Vladimir Putin."

LONG ago, at the inception of his rise to power, Vladimir V. Putin recounted a memory of growing up in the late 1950s in a Soviet communal apartment in Leningrad, as St. Petersburg was then known. For kicks, he and his friends would chase rats in the building's dismal hallways. It was what passed for a game until the time a cornered rat hurled himself at a surprised and frightened young Vladimir, who turned and ran away.

The anecdote, vivid as a nightmare, was meant to highlight the hardscrabble roots of Russia's future president, but in the years since, self-effacing recollections like these have all but disappeared from Mr. Putin's official biography.

Instead, Russians have ingested a regular diet of televised acts of leadership and machismo, from hectoring bureaucrats and oligarchs to excelling at sports, including his latest form of kicks, ice hockey, which he took up with remarkable determination when he was turning 60. It has made him a caricature of the man of action, of the benevolent but remote leader, of the steely patriot delivered by providence to restore Russia to its rightful destiny after the collapse of the Soviet Union.

Yet the rat story, and its vanishing, echo a recurring theme in episodes through Mr. Putin's childhood and his formative years as a minor officer in the K.G.B., during his unexpected ascent to the presidency in the 1990s and his steady consolidation of power since 2000: namely, his insecurity and fear of displaying weakness.

Although he liked to portray himself as a young tough raised in Leningrad, he took up martial arts as a slight boy, by his own account, to protect himself from courtyard bullies.

His most searing experience in the K.G.B. came in East Germany in 1989 when the sclerotic Soviet state proved, in his mind at least, irresolute in the face of the protests that brought down the Berlin Wall and ultimately the Iron Curtain. When a crowd of protesters reached the K.G.B.'s villa in Dresden, where he was stationed, he confronted them alone and unarmed and, without any orders from Moscow, warned that those inside would open fire. In his recollections the "mob" was terrifying, though it amounted to only a few dozen people.

In the wild 1990s, when a convulsion of violence and crime accompanied the advent of capitalism in the newly renamed St. Petersburg, he once sent his daughters out of the country for their safety. During the re-election campaign for his boss in St. Petersburg, Anatoly Sobchak, he took to carrying an air pistol - "It won't save me," he told a friend, "but it makes me feel calmer."

"We demonstrated weakness," Mr. Putin said in another context, "and the weak are beaten." That was in 2004, following the terrorist siege of a school in the southern Russian town of Beslan, which ended after two and a half days with the deaths of 334 hostages, 186 of them schoolchildren. To him, the attack - which he insinuated, without evidence, had been orchestrated by Russia's enemies abroad, not the Chechen terrorists who actually carried it out - and its aftermath signified neither resilience nor resolve but utter vulnerability.

He exploited the horror of the attack to tighten his control of the political system.

The fear of displaying weakness has become a shrewd pillar of Mr. Putin's political identity. And to the dismay of the country's democrats and world leaders with whom he interacts, it has made him extraordinarily popular and powerful, even though in moments of candor and, of course, in private, officials in Russia acknowledge the overwhelming problems the country faces.

On Monday, Mr. Putin will swagger through New York, delivering a speech at the United Nations for the first time in a decade, meeting with an evidently reluctant President Obama and seeking to regain the spot on the world stage he believes he has been unjustly denied by his rivals in the West. In Russia's sycophantic official media, this is another triumph, of course, but even The Wall Street Journal's editorial writers could not resist the schoolyard bravado, saying the Russian leader was "stealing Mr. Obama's lunch money."

Andrei Kolesnikov of the Carnegie Moscow Center recently noted that "rising from one's knees" was a "distinctively Russian metaphor" for restoring dignity and national pride. And on their knees is where many Russians believe they spent the years following the collapse of the Soviet Union - until Mr. Putin single-handedly wrenched them back to their feet.

What Mr. Putin has succeeded in doing is persuading Russians that the hardships they now face - many of them a result of his own decisions - are evidence of efforts by Russia's enemies to keep the nation weak.

"Following the collapse of the Soviet Union, many citizens felt humiliated by defeat in the Cold War," Mr. Kolesnikov wrote in an essay published on the center's website. The annexation of Crimea in 2014, the defiance of Western sanctions, and now even the exertion of Russian military power in Syria are all antidotes to the country's ills. "These past humiliations have been obliterated by the construction of a besieged fortress within the country's expanded borders."

He concluded, as many have, that Mr. Putin's tactics have been strong - often compared to his training in judo - but that he lacked a strategy. A year and a half after the occupation and annexation of Crimea, Mr. Putin has never been as isolated politically and diplomatically. He has few foreign allies and faces a withering economy at home, battered by the low price of oil and economic sanctions imposed in retaliation for the Kremlin's involvement in the war in eastern Ukraine.

The latest intervention in Syria, more than four years after the war there began, signals a growing desperation about the fate of Bashar al-Assad's government - and the Kremlin's own concerns about what its fall might mean. And in part it may be a move to distract attention from Russia's disastrous intervention in eastern Ukraine and looming questions over its culpability in the downing of Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 in July 2014, which killed 298 people.

And yet as he has always done, he has responded to weakness by daringly ignoring it, even defying it. Throughout his 15 years at the center of Russian politics it has worked.
#8
The National Interest
September 28, 2015
Face-to-Face: Obama Meets Putin
"The likelihood of negotiating settlements in Ukraine and Syria could be increased if President Obama uses the meeting with Putin to underscore a reality to Putin: Russia is exposed."
BY Zalmay Khalilzad
Zalmay Khalilzad was the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations 2007-2009.

President Obama has agreed to meet with Russian president Vladimir Putin during the UN General Assembly meeting. Against the backdrop of a forward Russian strategy in Syria and Ukraine, and the uncertainty about Russian objectives in both theaters, the summit could be a success if it leads to a conceptual agreement for a balanced settlement to one or both of these conflicts. Failure should lead to a significant adjustment in U.S. strategy in both conflicts to increase pressure on Russia.

Russian actions in Ukraine and Syria pose a serious challenge to the United States and its allies. In Ukraine, Moscow's campaign has resurrected the threat to Europe from the East and has called into question Europe's commitment to its allies and partners. Russia's actions in Syria, meanwhile, have contributed to bringing home to Europe a conflict that it sought at all costs to avoid. With a wave of refugees descending on the continent, a distant humanitarian crisis has become a domestic security threat touching on fundamental questions about European identity. Challenges from the East and South are exacerbating Europeans' dissatisfaction with the project of European integration. A fractured Europe furthers Russian goals by denying the United States a strong, reliable partner in the world.

Putin has also exposed the limits of American will. In Syria, Russian backing for the Assad regime is pushing Sunnis into the hands of the Islamic State. At the same time that Russian policy fuels the Islamic State, Moscow is justifying its expanded military presence in the Middle East by citing the threat from Sunni extremism. Russia's decision to send troops and equipment to Syria may be seen as a last-ditch effort to shore up its politically bankrupt client. However, the scale of Russia's expansion into the heart of the region suggests that Moscow's ambitions are not limited to the Syrian crisis. Russia may very well be poised to rekindle Cold War tensions by challenging the United States in a critical region from which it has been largely absent since the Cold War. In light of President Obama's call for Assad's ouster, the longer Russia can keep Assad in power, the more it can draw attention to unenforced U.S. redlines and undermine U.S. standing in the region.

President Obama's most salient challenge is to discern whether Putin's moves in Ukraine and Syria are driven principally by limited Russian interests in both theaters, or by a larger geopolitical design against the West.

If the former, the Obama-Putin meeting could outline the contours for settlements in Ukraine and/or Syria and lead to expert-level meetings to work on details. In Ukraine, a reasonable settlement means building on the Minsk II agreement and implementing a federal arrangement inside Ukraine that allows pro-Russian East Ukrainians to run their own internal affairs without undermining Ukraine's ability to function effectively. Externally, the two sides could discuss Ukraine's relationship with NATO, but otherwise, Ukraine would be free to develop independent relations with the West.

Syria provides an even broader opportunity for U.S.-Russian cooperation towards a balanced settlement. The conflict has morphed into a global proxy war with clashes across the full array of ethnic, sectarian and ideological divides in the Middle East. With the notable exception of ISIS, the conflict does not appear to be producing any winners. Like the 1648 Treaty of Westphalia, which brought the religious wars of Europe to an end, a U.S.-Russian brokered settlement that secures the buy-in of regional and global powers could at least provide guarantees on key redlines and set the stage for a more stable regional order.

Differences over issues like the fate of the Assad regime could be overcome given the reality that all parties would lose if Syrian state institutions totally disintegrated. Besides broadening the coalition against ISIS and intensifying the war against it, the key to a settlement is a unity government at the center that shares power in a balanced way among Syria's myriad communities. Securing buy-in for a power-sharing agreement will require Assad's departure, decentralization to ensure that Syria's communities are guaranteed greater autonomy, and a timeline for the establishment of a new government. It will also require withdrawal of foreign forces including "advisors." These conditions should be amenable to Moscow as long as Washington recognizes Russian access to the port of Tartus. A broad understanding between Russia and the United States should lead to expanding future meetings at lower levels to include Saudi Arabia, Iran and Turkey-the key regional players. A U.S.-Russian understanding will improve prospects for bringing the regional players along.

If, however, Moscow's agenda is more ambitious and primarily directed against the West, a breakthrough with Putin is unlikely. Instead, the president will leave the meeting facing greater pressure to increase the costs to Moscow for its current policies. This will involve steps that the administration, heretofore, has resisted, but which would be necessary to press Moscow into meaningful negotiations at a later date.

In Ukraine, the United States will need to arm and train the Ukrainian armed forces and ramp up financial sanctions on Russia. Other necessary measures to increase NATO-Ukraine cooperation, promote economic reform in Ukraine and isolate Russian-dominated regions of Ukraine would require coordination with European allies who may not be on the same page as the United States.

Difficult negotiations lay ahead in Syria as well if Washington has to increase pressure against Moscow. The only way at that point to bolster the non-ISIS opposition to Assad would be to impose a no-fly and no-drive zone in coordination with Turkey and the Gulf States-which would also limit Russia's air support to the regime.

The likelihood of negotiating settlements in Ukraine and Syria could be increased if President Obama uses the meeting with Putin to underscore a reality to Putin: Russia is exposed. It would not take much for the United States to turn Moscow's short-term gains into a generational defeat for the Russian leadership. Putin's cohort-nostalgic for the days of the Cold War-needs no reminder of the devastating toll that the Reagan Doctrine inflicted on Soviet ambitions. If U.S. aid to anti-communist insurgents around the world could defeat the Red Army, there is every reason to believe that the model could be replicated against today's relatively weaker Russian force.

In this scenario, Putin may agree to reasonable settlements in Ukraine and Syria if President Obama can convince him that time favors the United States. Russia took advantage of a decade of high oil prices to reconstitute the core of its military, but once again faces severe demographic and economic challenges. If current trends continue, it is a matter of time before domestic realities force cuts in Russian military power. The key is to convince Russia to make a difficult choice: Cooperate with the United States now, or risk a quagmire in two conflicts that could redound against Putin at home.

If nothing else, the Obama-Putin summit will serve as a clarifying moment, revealing which side, if any, has a coherent strategy to deal with the mess in Ukraine and Syria.
 
 #9
Kyiv Post
September 28, 2015
That was one lousy interview with Putin, Charlie Rose
By Brian Bonner
Chief editor

Russian President Vladimir Putin is wasting hundreds of millions of dollars a year with his vast worldwide propaganda networks such as Russia Today.

All he needs to do is find more unprepared, ill-informed and poor interviewers such as Charlie Rose of the American "60 Minutes" news program on the CBS network. There are plenty of them out there.

Rose interviewed Putin at his state residence outside Moscow for a program broadcast on national TV in America on Sept. 27, a day ahead the Russian president's speech before the United Nations General Assembly and a private meeting later U.S. President Barack Obama.

Three digressions:

* I hate criticizing fellow journalists, fell members of the lodge, because most of us -- including Rose, a respected veteran -- work hard and work honestly and all of us are imperfect.

* "60 Minutes" used to be the gold standard of American television journalism, back in the days when Dan Rather was young and Mike Wallace was alive. It has slipped considerably, another reason why I don't miss the noise, superficiality and self-promotion of broadcast journalism. I find the printed word so much more efficient and informative. But since this is a television world, and Rose is one of the stars, he's big and tough enough to take criticism.

* Unfortunately, it's not just journalists like Rose who don't know how to treat Putin. The paralysis extends to politicians and diplomats all over the world, including the frequently flummoxed U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry. Unfortunately, the world's governments and institutions -- including the UN - don't know what to do about he criminal in their midst.

Now to the criticism:

Either Rose didn't do any research beforehand or his researchers and producers let him down. Either way, he's to blame. He also conducted the interview in an alternatively fawning and silly manner.

Rose played incessantly to Putin's over-sized ego, saying that he is a force to be reckoned with in the world partly because of his nuclear weapons.

"I hope so," Putin responded. "Otherwise, why do we have nuclear weapons at all?"

Here's some of the other softballs from Rose:

Rose: "You're much talked about in America."

Putin: "Maybe they have nothing else to do."

Rose: "Maybe they're a curious people."

Putin silence.

Rose: "Maybe you're an interesting character. They see these images of you -- bare-chested on a horse -- and say there is a man who carefully cultivates his image of strength."

And others from Rose in the category of how not to conduct an interview:

Rose: "You have been an intelligence offer. Intelligence officers know how to read other people. It's part of the job, yes?"

Rose: "A CIA operative said to me - you learn the capacity to be liked as well - you have to charm people, you have to seduce them?"

Putin: "If the CIA told you that, that's the way it is, they're an expert on that."

Rose dropped all pretense of being a serious journalist with this one:

"You have a popularity rating in Russia that would make every politician in the world envious. Why are you so popular?"

Then, when Rose was unable to figure out for himself what to ask, he reverted to the third-person plural "they said" when posing "tough" questions. He compounded his idiocy by further attributing to Russia what "they" accuse Putin of being.

Rose: "Many people who are critical of Russia, they say it's more autocratic, less democratic. They say political opponents have been killed and imprisoned in Russia. they say your power is unchallenged and they say that power and absolute power corrupts absolutely. What do you say to those people who worry about the climate and atmosphere in Russia?"

After Putin ate Rose's lunch with the answer, the questioning got even more pitiful with Rose saying that if Putin -- "because of your power" -- insisted on rule of law in Russia, "it could go a long way to eliminating" the bad perceptions that "they" have.

Rose, unable to come up with any substance throughout the long interview, then tried to get the warm-and-fuzzy Putin to open up about his feelings regarding America and Obama, with little success.

Rose: "Are you curious about America..."?

Putin: "Of course, we're curious..."

Rose: What do you admire most about America?"

Putin: "I like the creativity..."

Rose: "Let me ask you what do you think of President Obama. What's your evaluation of him?"

Putin: "That's up to the American people."

Rose: "Do you think his actions in foreign affairs reflect a weakness?"

Putin: "...I don't think so..."

Rose: "Does he listen to you?"

Putin: "I think we listen to each other in a way, especially when it comes to something that doesn't go counter to our own ideas about what we should and should not do."

(Editor's Note: In other words, they only listen to each other when they agree with each other.)

Rose: "Does he consider you an equal, which is the way you want to be treated?"

Putin: (laughs) "You ask him. He's your president. How can I know what he thinks?"

Then Rose decided to channel Republican presidential candidate Marco Rubio, who called Putin a "gangster."

Putin: "How can I be a gangster if I worked for the KGB. Come on. That does not correspond to reality."

(Editor's Note: Actually, working for the KGB should be one of the dictionary definitions of being a gangster.)

Rose: "Are your people afraid of you?"

Putin: "I think no, they're not. Most people trust me if they vote for me in the election."

Rose: "As you know, some have called you a czar?"

Putin: "So what? People call me different things."

Rose: "Does the name fit?"

Putin: "No it does not fit me."

This happens all too often in public discourse throughout the world, unfortunately. Politicians, not only dictators like Putin, either own their own very controllable news organizations or they seek out pliant, friendly journalists who ask weak questions, send questions in advance or allow the sources to approve the way an interview is edited.

I can put together a list of dozens of top-notch journalists who would be more capable of interviewing Putin than Rose, but obviously Rose's cluelessness is exactly what the Kremlin needed.

Until politicians are willing to take the tough questions from tough but informed and fair journalists, working for organizations whose publishers support editorial independence, then democracy and free speech will continue to suffer.

You can make up your own minds by watching the interview here:
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/vladimir-putin-russian-president-60-minutes-charlie-rose/