Thus, as one can see, Gaza Strip is not a subject of international law, so in this case Israel can’t apply the rules of naval blockade in a time of armed conflict between states. But Gaza Strip is not also a part of Israel. And even if it were, in case of a civil war naval blockade can’t go further than territorial waters. Thus, though Israel declared Gaza Strip some obscure enemy territory, many international and humanitarian organizations keep on regarding it as an occupied territory.

All these facts make the blockade of Gaza Strip and impediment for supplies of humanitarian cargo violating the international law, moreover concerning that the mentioned above Resolution 1860 of UN Security Council “calls for the unimpeded provision and distribution throughout Gaza of humanitarian assistance”. Israeli attack on Freedom Flotilla may be regarded thereby as an act of hostility towards the countries, which owned the vessels with humanitarian aid and passengers of which became victims of the conflict. In turn, the actions of crew members and passengers of Mavi Marmara can be regarded as a rightful attempt to resist the attackers of the ship on the high sea.

Yemen is considered to be the cradle of the Arab world. In the north Yemen borders Saudi Arabia, narrow part of the western border falls on the Red Sea area, the southern border faces the Gulf of Aden while the Oman is in the east. Political system of Yemen allows the country to maneuver among the endless mosaic of tribes that are characterized by the different degree of the territorial independence. Tribal differences are also connected to the division of the country population onto Sunni — who make up the majority with the insignificant superiority in numbers — and the Shia who make up about 45% of population.In the recent year Shiaz have undergone numerous attacks from the governmental troops.
In November 2009 the conflict was first internationalized. Air Forces of Saudi Arabia bombed the Shiites’ positions at Jebel Duchan. Saudis were afraid of the Shiites’ strengthening — in Saudi Arabia itself they make up the oppressed minority.
The USA are playing their own political game in the region. They are interested mostly in one question: who will control Bab-el-Mandeb strait?
Bab-el-Mandeb strait between Yemen, Djibouti and Eritrea is a key to the “oil path” between Africa and the Middle East — it connects the Mediterranean Sea with the Indian Ocean. Every day 3.5 million barrels of oil “float” through it to the USA, Europe and Asia. Besides that, oil fields in the Masila and Shabwa basins are also located in Yemen, which neighbors the Saudi Arabia. Geopolitical significance of Yemen and Somali turn these countries into the sphere of the U.S. strategic interests.
Americans have outstripped China that has also stated the need to create a military base in the western part of the Indian Ocean. For now, only Iran is open for China in that region as long as the rest of the countries have already been pulled inside of the NATO orbit. Control over the Aden port in Yemen brings huge benefits to the Americans and opens the infinite possibilities for maneuver in front of them.
China, on its part, is trying to improve its influence in Sri Lanka and Burma in order to form the new transport paths in the Persian Gulf, Africa and Middle East area. Recently, British press media reported that the USA promised to delete Burma out of the “axis of evil”-countries list if it stops “playing on the Chinese side”.
Thus, it is unlikely that the political games in the regions will cease in the nearest future. On the contrary, American desire to control everything possible might lead to another outbreak of instability in this already instable part of the world.

http://www.eastwest-review.com/article/africa-clash-american-and-chinese-geopolitical-interests

Twenty years ago Soviet troops were withdrawn from Afghanistan, and eight year ago NATO forces were deployed there. The state has passed through two occupations against the background of the never-ending civil war, has become the main supplier of heroin to the global market, the symbol of international terrorism, famine and devastation. Soviet administration, planning the expedition, didn’t expect Pashtun guerillamen, equipped with old British rifles – the trophy of Anglo-Afghan wars – to occasion well-trained and armed troops of the USSR a lot of troubles. However in the 80s Afghanistan was foreordained to become the last range territory for the Cold war: with the help of the USA the opposition succeeded in outfighting the great neighbor and gaining independence.

Contemporary advocates of democratic Afghanistan don’t face such challenges. Today's guerillamen are equipped with self-made machine guns, which are made of locally available material in the north of Pakistan, with Russia preserving friendly neutrality. Ample resources are directed to the humanitarian aid, the conduction of free elections and maintenance of security. How come no positive shift has taken place in the past eight years? The famine has not been overcome, the war is still in progress, the drug production is increasing.

The greatest disillusionment of the NATO operation is caused by political and social situation in modern Afghanistan. It is still the poorest country in the world. The large part of the population shifts with less than one dollar a day while the international community spends millions on tackling this problem. Cultivation of opium poppy and production of heroin amount to more that 60 percent of GNP of modern Afghanistan.

That’s about the situation in modern Afghanistan, which is officially controlled by NATO. The country has changed a lot in the course of eight years but the question is if it has become less dangerous for the global community, for Europe and Russia? To what extent the presence of the USA is profitable for Afghanistan?

The USA succeeded in gaining predominance in Central Asia region with the complete approval of the global community. Nineteen new military bases, which are located in the territory of Iraq, Afghanistan and former Soviet republics – Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, were opened after 2001. It gives an opportunity to control from the East and from the West one of the main declared hostiles of the USA – Iran, as well as China, Pakistan and Russia.

American cynicism is not typical for the Europeans. If the promotion of democracy, tackling social problems and the war on terror are just propagandistic clichés for the USA administration, the European treat this terms seriously. They are ready to wage the war on international terror, threatening both the USA and the West European countries, on Islamism radicalization, which can have negative influence on spirit among immigrants, or at least they are ready to struggle for universal democratic ideals. After eight years of occupation there is clash of views of Europe and the USA on the possible policy in Afghanistan. This clash can lead to the split in the coalition.

Public polls in Russia and some European countries show the negative influence of anti-terrorist operation conducted by the USA on the global situation and the necessity of making new decisions on Afghanistan in co-operation with Europe and Russia. Can we expect it in the short-run? I doubt so as Afghanistan issue is again off the top priorities of today's political agendas due to never-ending economic troubles suffered by many countries due to Afghanistan and other useless expenses.

http://www.eastwest-review.com/article/afghanistan-apple-discord-or-field-co-operation

From the historical point of view, Soviet regime was a more appropriate structure then a preceding archaic and ignorant epoch. One can’t totally reject the Soviet period, at least because the government managed to teach to read and write the nation illiterate on the whole in a very short period of time. In the same time, one can’t worship it unconditionally, because it proved impossible to teach to understand what was read and written in such short time, with all implied consequences.
There is, truly, a problem of terrible legacy. The terrible thing about it lies in the human type left as a legacy, a type of an underdeveloped person of no principles, an incubatory conformist, incapable of demonstrating common consistency and integrity in social matters.
Today a total breakup with the Soviet past is suggested to us by the government - with smashing the monuments and banning Soviet symbols. Before smashing the monuments like a Barbarian one shouldn’t forget that there are leaders, and then, there are leaders. Lenin’s rule is the one thing, Stalin’s is another, and Chrushchev’s is completely different.Besides, political renovationists suggest nothing to replace the Soviet ideology which, in all its ugliness, was a very strong one.
There is no other post-Soviet country where the government would like the people to forget their Soviet past completely, and the reasons of that are quite obvious. And if it’s so, wouldn’t it be wiser not to spit in the well of the past, but to study it impartially and thoroughly making vital conclusions with consideration of all light and dark sides? Perhaps, that will help us to deal with the present and, finally, to start building the future.

http://www.eastwest-review.com/article/long-farewell

Sixty five years ago in the Crimea the second conference of the Allies took place, including marshal Joseph Stalin, the prime minister Winston Churchill, and the president Franklin Roosevelt. It is often stated that Yalta is the turning point in the history of modern Europe: there the borders have been established which remain unchanged till now; “spheres of influence” of the West and the USSR have been determined, which has later caused the appearance of two military blocks; and the fate of post-war Germany has been determined, as well. The Yalta system has proved stable; and until recently none has dared to argue the existing borders in Central and Eastern Europe. As for the scheme of balance between the East and the West, it still exists despite the collapse of the Soviet Union and NATO expansion to the East.

How serious may be consequences for Europe and Russia, if the main principles of the Yalta agreements are undone? A point of view has appeared that these decisions are to be revised. The answer is obvious: such revision, especially the one of state borders, may cause a new global catastrophe. Those who call upon “finishing Yalta for ever” hardly realize what terrible daemons they may summon.

http://www.eastwest-review.com/article/yalta-system-and-central-europe-1945-2010

It is funny that the Russian word “csar” is frequently used in American political lexis. During the last two decades the necessity appeared to appoint a person who would control sophisticated bureaucratic structures in the US administration and report directly to the president. There are csars for emigration, finance, ecology, etc. Richard Clarke was such a “csar” for counterterrorist activity during the presidency of George H. W. Bush, Clinton, and in the first administration of George Bush Jr. He worked for many years in governmental departments, headed counterterrorist activity in the United States National Security Council. In the top of his career Clarke was a member of the president’s cabinet.

Clarke believes that the USA is quite vulnerable facing the threat of the Internet war. He suggests drastic changing of Internet providers system, so that the government could take control in order to protect the country in case of a serious cyber attack. Among his other duties, Clarke was the special advisor to the president on cyber security in 2001, which adds more weight to his predictions. Clarke is sure that the level of the current concealed cyber war is dangerous indeed, that it can turn into a full scale military conflict any time. When asked about his prognosis of the outcome of the war after one of his lectures, he answered that “America may lose the first cyber war”.

http://www.eastwest-review.com/article/cyber-war-already-part-1

Here you will find an interview with Alexander Rahr, a well-known political scientist, the son of Russian emigrant, who has been living in Germany. In 2000 he published a book "The German in the Kremlin" about Vladimir Putin. Today he answers several questions about his vision of Russia and Russia's role in the modern Europe.

http://www.eastwest-review.com/article/interview-famous-political-scientist-director-programs-russia-and-cis-german-society-foreign

The next year is to become a momentous event for cooperation between the Russian Federation and the Socialist Republic of Vietnam. The republic will celebrate the 65th anniversary of independence, the 35th anniversary of the country’s union (the two events the USSR was directly involved), as well as the 60th anniversary of Vietnam independence recognition by the USSR and establishing of diplomatic intercourse between the two countries. According to the data of the Vietnamese government, within 60 years specialists form the USSR and Russia have actually created basic industry branches, built about 250 industrial objects; in higher education institutes of Moscow and other Soviet cities more than 52 thousand of the Vietnamese citizens obtained qualification. Now they form political, scientific, cultural, and economic elite of the country. After the collapse of the Soviet Union there was a slight stagnation in cooperation between the two countries. However, it was in this period (1994) that an Agreement concerning the basic principles of relations between Vietnam and Russia was developed and signed. Later, alongside with a later adopted Declaration of strategic partnership between the two countries, it became a solid foundation for further development of bilateral relations...

http://www.eastwest-review.com/article/new-prospects-russian-vietnamese-cooperation

During 5 years of Yushchenko being president sociologists used to inform the language issue wasn’t the priority for Ukrainian citizens. But the first week of Viktor Yanukovich in office has proved it wrong – the language issue stays as one of the most painful problems of the country’s social being. On 5th of March, during his first visit to Moscow, Viktor Yanukovich promised he wouldn’t postpone the adoption of statutes aimed to protect the rights of Russian-speaking population in Ukraine. “We’ll adopt all the necessary laws. I promise to the Ukrainian people to implement this program decision. The issue will be settled in the nearest future”, Yanukovich stated at the press-conference in Kremlin answering the question about solving the problem of protection of Russian language in Ukraine.

http://www.eastwest-review.com/article/yanukovich-and-mines-language-issue

In the middle of May in Teheran a new summit of G-15 took place, the organization including 19 developing countries of Asia, Africa, and Latin America. During the talks foreign affairs ministers and leaders of Iran, Brazil, and Turkey have achieved a very important agreement concerning Iranian nuclear program. A following exchange alternative has been discussed: Iran is to receive fuel for Teheran research reactor in return for a half of Iranian supplies of low-enriched uranium. Despite that the USA has proposed the UN Security Council a project of resolution imposing new sanctions against the Islamic republic.

According to the statement signed on May 17, 2010by the USA, France, Russia, and the IAEA Iran is to deliver 1200 kilos of low-enriched uranium to Turkey. This uranium is to be kept by Turkey; however, it is to remain the property of Iran and may be supervised both by representatives of Iran and IAEA. After the low-enriched uranium is delivered to Turkey, it is to be exchanged for 120 kilos of nuclear fuel necessary for Teheran research reactor within one year.

After the document was signed, Turkey, Russia and China claimed that there was no more need in imposing sanctions against Iran. The Western community, however, reacted different. The USA are still drafting a resolution aiming at “further efforts in order to bring pressure on Iran”.
If new sanctions are to be adopted and come into force, it would lead to further confrontation and failure of the compromise found by Brazil, Turkey, and Iran. Thus, a new coil of this vicious circle will begin, putting off an efficient solution of Iranian question to uncertain future.

It is clear that the USA are afraid that Turkey and Brazil will get too much political credit, having once shown themselves the succeessful negotiators. But isn't it the time to put ambitions aside in order to heal this long-itching wound?

http://www.eastwest-review.com/article/uranium-exchange-agreement-and-project-new-sanctions-against-iran

Today's Turkey is one of the most dynamically developing economies in the world. The underdeveloped agrarian state turned into the member of G20, lying in the 15th place in the rating of the greatest global economies. In 2002-2009 the average GDP was 6-9 percent, the figure was doubled in five years. Now it is 880 billion dollars (the nearest competitors are South Korea, Mexico and Australia). Turkey expands its international influence, seeking to gain the role of informal leader of the Middle East and the Balkans. It may lead to the revival of the new Ottoman Empire. How did it happen that the poor state turned into politically, economically strong entity?

The elections of 2002 shocked both Turkey and the international community: the Islamists came to power! However, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, the new Turkish leader proved to be a clever man. Aspiration to full-fledged EU membership and reforming legislation to meet its standards represented one of the main directions of the political program. This step was very successful and the party still enjoys its dividends. Having quickly understood that the main danger is posed to his party from inside the country - mainly from traditionally secular military and civil officers who head the Constitutional Court and the Council for National Security- Erdoğan took care of their non-involvement in political life of his country. According to the incumbent Constitution of 1982 these bodies are completely entitled to dissolve any political force which could be accused of attempted violation of secular bases of the society. Amendment of legislation towards europeization would deprive the army from this right. Slogans of democratization and europeization provide strong support from abroad.

Many other home reforms found approvement of the EU leaders and bodies and clever foreign policy made Turkey one of the new leaders of emerging world order. I guess almost every country could find some useful example to take from this country's policy, but will any? I doubt as despite these achievement Turkey is still perceived by most Europeans as a  second chop state.

http://www.eastwest-review.com/article/turkey-nature-national-modernization-essay-1

Russia and Turkey were “Historical enemies” for ages. There were 11 russo-turkish wars, centuries of competition and hostility. This policy resulted in enormous economical and demographic losses and formation of Independent Balkans – zone of instability, hostile to both empires. The last russo-turkish war destroyed Ottoman and Russian Empires. A short period of friendship in 20-30-es of the XX century was profitable for both Soviet Union and Turkey, but it finished with the beginning of the II World war.

Later on the relations were developing still rather poorly. For Russians, Turkey has remained, as before, the primordial contender on the Caucasus and Black sea, the carrier of a hostile culture and alien values, the instrument of American policy and NATO`s sentinel on the southern flank of the weakened Russian empire. For Turks, Russia, as in the old days, has been associated with threat – “the northern bear” – unpredictable, dangerous, and capricious.

At the beginning of the new century the situation changed quickly and dramatically. The russian and turkish business opened numerous projects and tens thousands of Russian tourists chose Turkey the best place to spend summer vacation.

The turning point is observed in political relations as well. The clear Eurasian policy of both states, the far-fetched threat of American intervention and common economic interests pulled Moscow and Ankara together, leveling regional contradictions between them. Turks and Russians relied on cooperation with each other and ousting the USA from the region. Putin’s and Erdogan`s policy makers came to the conclusion that both countries could not cardinally change the regional balance of forces, but together were able to resist American involvement. Vexing questions remain, but they are not causing as much concern as before and are currently viewed in the common context of geopolitical partnership. Ankara is still dissatisfied with the Russian military presence at Georgia and Armenia, and Moscow feels uncomfortable with Georgian-Turkish and Azeri-Turkish military cooperation.

History shows that hidden or neglected problems do not often disappear by themselves, they still have to be solved. Will this Moscow-Ankara based balance of power in the Central Asia last for long?

http://www.eastwest-review.com/article/relations-between-turkey-and-russia-new-eurasian-alliance

The threat of American ABM system initiative for military security of the Russian Federation is apparent and is put under the question only by the participants of its implementation. The Russian point of view concerning the issue was expressed by the chief of General Staff of military forces of the Russian Federation Nikolaj Makarov, who, in particular, claimed that “in an extreme case, if Iran places its warhead against a certain state, we know where this warhead will go – it is not Poland or the Czech republic, that’s why the deployment of the facilities in these states make us concerned”. “Regarding imaginary threat from North Korea and Iran, this facility is not capable to reach these countries. We are really concerned that this system is against Russia” – added the chief of General Staff. The concern of Russia is caused also by the involvement of the Baltic states in the process. Such a scenario of the further course of events is not rejected, particularly, by the Russian military expert Vladislav Shurygin: “The USA reconfigures its ABM , turning away from land-based objects. It is easy to destroy them by cruising missiles at the very beginning of military operation. Only land-based tracking stations will be deployed in Romania. Washington places its stake on naval ABM, which can be easily moved from one region to another and in elaboration of which the USA advanced greatly. If the intend to deploy similar elements in the Baltic region or somewhere in the north is the determining factor.

It is obvious that the USA needs a new security system to protect itself from potential terrorist groups and unstable countries like North Korea or Iran. But it is also obvious that it is not only an American challenge but a challenge shared by all civilized democratic world - including Russia. And it is not obvious why the USA a trying to play their own game instead of negotiating a common security system suggested by President Medvedev in 2008. In my opinion it could solve many problems in a short time.

http://www.eastwest-review.com/article/us-abm-system-europe-what-comes-next

The confrontation of historical approaches is somehow connected with blackening any more or less important historical events or personalities. The today’s historical memory on the post-Soviet territories is nihilistic and full of negative emotions. We haven’t created the respect for history, the respect for great personalities. Neither the blood of heroes, nor the tears of saints, nor the sweat of workers evokes our respect.

Historical nihilism and demonstrative obsession with history go usually together. Excessive and unhealthy attention to the issues and events that had happened ages ago is caused usually by inability to solve the problems of present day issues and events.

The article I link has to do something with the cultural diplomacy - a new invented kind of diplomacy that propagaed the necessity to learn your partner country's history and culture before concluding treaties or judging its deeds. Some of you may find the text interesting and applicable to yourselves.

http://www.eastwest-review.com/article/waves-historical-memory

The new Military Doctrine of the Russian Federation accepted in February of the current year by the ordinance of the Russian president Dmitry Medvedev attracted the public attention and caused fierce debates on the perspective of Russia-NATO relations. Experts’ opinions on the issue differ significantly, however, overlapping in the main field – the future of both regional European and global political systems dependa on the strategy selection. Please, read this article and express your opinions:

http://www.eastwest-review.com/article/russia-nato-there-room-maneuver

Acts of terrorism in Moscow subway and in Caucasus gave nationalists and liberals one more chance to talk about impossibility of maintaining of territorial integrity of the Russian Federation. Disputes concerning future of Russia and its integrity appear not only here, but also abroad. The main idea of separatists is that Russia can not keep peace in Caucasus, Russia does not need Caucasus, and Russia is either to turn into nation state, or to undergo all the stages of deconstruction in order to fully enter the family of European nations. Whether nationalism can stop terrorism? Whether Russians and peoples of North Caucasus become friends after a possible fragmentation of the state?

http://www.eastwest-review.com/article/place-north-caucasus-russia-and-disputes-concerning-new-identification

Main theme of the "Robin Hood" movie is concentrated around the event of no small importance for the English history – signing of the Great Charter or Magna Carta by the King John. This document limited the king’s power over his vassals. In order to understand its significance we should know that the British Empire, state with the ancient democratic traditions, has no constitution at all. That’s why recent words of a certain Russian liberal functionary, stating that in England the elections take place according to the constitution, were met with a sincere good-natured laughter. Indeed, what does the man who invented the automobile might need the instruction for? Leave these manuals to those who are willing to use this car.

Group of documents, which – at a stretch – may be referred to the principal laws of Great Britain, originates from the very Magna Carta. It has nothing revolutionary in it, though. From the legal point of view, the much-talked-about "Yaroslav’s Justice" which was in use in Russia for a long time then, was more "advanced" document of its period. English Magna Carta, however, became the sacred myth and the "foundation stone of liberty", whatever that word may mean. "Robin Hood" directed by Ridley Scott is the first – may it be the probing one – attempt to work with that myth.

In his vision Magna Carta is a document, the text, first of all. It is not a half-verbal agreement, based on traditions and representing the result of the years-long negotiations and mutual give-and-takes by the nobility and king himself. This is rather a text, written without any participation of these persons – by a simple mason, father of Robin Hood and a leader of the common folk. All the barons and the king have to do is to sign this text and go home. History turns into the theory of conspiracy.

In fact, main hero of all Scott's films (so loved by the Western audience) is the contemporary of ours – who, in an unknown way, fetched himself in the other period of time and discovers the events that take place around him. He shows the typical reactions of the white Anglo-Saxon man from the 90s. His position is strictly democratic and anti-clerical. He doesn’t understand the matters of nobility and sanctity, having preferred to cast them away in disgust.

In the "Robin Hood"a historian finds plenty discrepancies, blots and unlikely moments. However, we can not rob it of its grandour and attraction - attraction which made me with my PhD in History to browse Internet and printed encyclopedia in search for a more or less truthful facts about Robin Hood.

http://www.win.ru/en/movies/4487.phtml

After Israeli troops attacked the Peace Convoy in the morning of 31st of May it became obvious that it was the best moment for pressing upon Israel. During the recent years this country has been violating international law too openly: it uses British and Australian passports to carry out acts of terrorism in foreign countries, continues building of settlements in Palestinian territories, and now it has come to actual piracy. Information is to be spread extremely actively now; for example, photos of killed human rights activists or crates with cookies stained with blood. Formally, Israel is right: the blockade was launched long ago, the territories were occupied, and human rights activists were warned about possible responsibility.
A session of the Security Council is to be called for; sanctions, eliminating of the blockade, and launching of humanitarian missions are to be demanded. Pressing can be carried out using massive meetings in front of embassies, boycott of Israeli goods, and departing of Israeli diplomats.
In theory, it is high time for Russia to remember about its own concerns in the Middle East. Russian neutrality allows interfering the situation, condemning Israel, and proposing guarantees of peaceful reconciliation of the conflict. Together with Turkey, Russia is to call for a session of the UN Security Council and to bring this act of state-level terrorism to the highest level of international discussion. It would also allow to improve the authority of the UN, which the president Dmitry Medvedev is talking about so often.
In fact, Russia allows various foreign political powers to manipulate with Russian opinion concerning the current situation. Yevgeny Satanovsky, the president of the pro-Israel Middle East Institute, was the first to comment upon the event from the Russian side in his interview to official broadcasting station “Voice of Russia”. He named the attack righteous and called for an immediate occupation of the Gaza Strip by the Israeli forces. This means that, unlike Turkey, Russia does not have any strategy in the Middle East.
And if Russia stays aside fruitful actions are unlikely to be taken against Israel.

http://www.eastwest-review.com/article/israel-facing-new-intifada

Social protest against the canonization of Pope Pius XII gave rise to the violent discussion subjected not only to the very person of the saint-to-be but also the whole political activity of the Roman Catholic Church during the centuries of its existence. Not only representatives of the priesthood and professional theologists took part in the debates but also some conspicuous public and state figures, publicists did — long story short, the debate has turned into the widespread public discussion. The most surprising aspect of the story is not the fact that the Polish community is indignant with the future canonization of Pope Pius XII — who had a rather controversial reputation — and his becoming the one of Community of Catholic Saints. It’s almost for the first time when we’re hearing the voices that condemn the political role of the Catholic Church out loud.

For example, Wiesław Jaszczyński, well-known Polish public leader — in 1994-1998 he was the Deputy Health Minister in the government of Jerzy Buzek, today’s chairman of the European parliament — said the following: "No mixture in the world can ever be as dangerous to the humanity as the mix of religion and politics. Just the bloodiest wars and mass murders — including Holocaust — are born out of this mixture. History of the Roman Catholic Church is a striking example of that. During two thousand years of its existence and profound participation in the politics many terrible things happened: Crusades, murderous persecutions of Jews, inquisition, conquer, looting and the forceful conversion of the South America into the Catholicity. Whole sea of blood of innocent people has spilled just because of the fact that they were adherents of a different faith". One could hardly disagree with Jaszczyński - concerning the historical role of Vatican. In the newest history it changed - but only at first glance. Modern wars are still originate from religious issues roused by Vatican, despite all seeming attemps to promote ecumenism...
The article I link here is very long, but it is really worth reading and discussing.

http://www.win.ru/en/win/3504.phtml

News about another Taliban act of terror in Afghanistan are now perceived by everyone as another informational routine — an average man cares about it just as much as about the monotonous military reports from Iraq. But January 2010 events in Kabul showed the whole world something very important and remarkable: it took place in the very center of the capital, where a lot of international and local security forces were concentrated. It seemed to be the most invulnerable place of all Afghanistan but Taliban dared to send its suicide bombers to organize series of explosions there and even more than that — fierce fights lasted few hours. Despite the fact that attackers were finally killed, there were only 20 of them, according to the "Al-Jazeera" channel information. So Talibs made it absolutely clear that they can rule the roost whenever they want, even in seemingly secure Kabul and even having little number of fighters.

"Indestructible freedom" operation started in October of 2001. Terror attacks of 9/11 became the casus belli for the first Afghanistan bombing initiated by the George Bush Jr. administration. During the first two years of this armed confrontation America has reached some success: it has dislodged Talibs out of the Afghan territory and has established such political powers configuration that was convenient for the USA. But in 2003 Taliban started to revive gradually and finally regain the lost positions. Guerrilla war and numerous acts of terror became the main methods of the movement led by Mullah Omar. All of this caused heavy casualties among the NATO troops and civil population.

Tremendous growth of the opiates production and an increased drug export to the neighboring countries — including Russia where the drugs were trafficked through the territory of the Central-Asian states — became one of the mournful outcomes of the unfinished war. American set — closing their eyes to the massive heroin production of the occupied country — has largely contributed to the quite tolerant attitude of the civil Afghans. When Taliban was at power they’ve managed to control the poppy fields, having profiteered on that, of course.

But now Taliban is raising its head higher and higher and the latest proof of that has been recently given in Kabul. Offensive took place on the day when 14 ministers of the new government were to take the oath. This has just emphasized the well-known fact once again — Taliban is not afraid of the puppet leadership of the country, headed by Hamid Karzai, whom only the laziest ones haven’t blamed for corruptness. Earlier, in autumn of 2009 terrorists have attacked the UN building, also situated in the center of Kabul. 6 members of the UN legation were killed. This act has made the foreigners living in Afghanistan — including those who were really helping out the international forces — to think about the reasonability of their presence over there and few hundreds of them have actually left the country.
So what was it all for? What did NATO troops and Afghan children die for? What did the international community paid billions of dollars for? It seems to be a vicious circle: the more victims this war devours, the more unstable the situation becomes...

http://www.win.ru/en/school/3364.phtml

After all court procedures in the Supreme Administrative court, Viktor Yanukovich is now preparing for inauguration. The Party of Regions carries on complicated negotiations with different political powers about creating a new coalition and forming a “technical” government that will lead the Ukraine out of the crisis it had been drawn into by the Orange government. Timoshenko doesn’t intend to leave the prime-minister’s post and promises to fight the existing government “to the last ditch”. Nationalistic and quasi-nationalistic powers that lost the elections and are unable to oppose representatives of the regions in the field of economics start crusade against the Russian language. Yushchenko chooses for himself a governmental dacha, gives awards to his supporters and goes on his last tour across the country of exhibitions dedicated to the “fight of heroic Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists and Ukrainian Insurgent Army against the Soviet rule”. The West meanwhile discusses the after-election fate of the Ukraine.

“The Ukraine at least won’t insist on providing the prospects of membership either in EU, or in NATO. These questions of Yushchenko’s time stand no longer. Everybody understands that the issue of Ukraine’s joining NATO ceased to be an urgent one for now, and may be forever,” stated Arnaud Dubien, a prominent French political scientist and a leading researcher of IRIS.

Nevertheless, Arnaud Dubien doesn’t rule out the possibility of collaboration of Kiev with the West to be more efficient with Yanukovich at the helm, then it was during Yushchenko’s presidency, in case the situation in the Ukraine is not catastrophic. “We’ll be less talking about membership, prospects and dates and will deal more with boring but necessary issues, such as the adaptation of Ukrainian legislation and standard specifications to the European standards, and so on,” says the scientist. First of all, apart from the cooperation in energy sector, the West is interested in the relations between the Ukraine and NATO. As Arnaud Dubien says, the fact that the “golden age” of Ukrainian relationship with NATO has gone doesn’t impede the real army cooperation.

http://www.eastwest-review.com/article/president-yanukovich-and-nato

In this article you will find more or less truthful description of early May 1945 days in Prague. I strongly recommend to read it and to post comments:
"Today there is a chance that the events of early May, 1945 would be cleaned of political bargaining. But it would happen not in the nearest future, large debates between two states historians have been heating for many years. However, there are less people both in Russia and the Czech Republic who question the decisive role of the Red Army in Prague liberation. Finally, May 1945 should be differed from the Socialist epoch in Czechoslovakia. They should not be mixed. These events are not equal even if somebody wants it so much."

http://www.eastwest-review.com/article/did-red-army-or-vlasovrsquos-army-liberate-prague-nazi

Each period of chaos and violence in Somalia was caused by an attempt to create a centralized government from outside. The last such attempt took place when the Transitional Federal Government (TFG) was created in 2006 under the guidance of Ethiopia and the USA. Fight against TFG made the Islamic Courts Union (Al-Shabaab) stronger. Al-Shabaab managed to create an actual government and seize control of southern provinces and the former capital Mogadishu. In December of 2006 Ethiopian troops invaded Somalia, defeated Al-Shabaab and moved TFG to Mogadishu. TFG has actually no power and is not supported by any substantial part of population. Attacks against soldiers and officials loyal to TFG are happening eventually. It remains unclear, whether TFG manages to control the whole country.

Outbreaks of violence and military crimes took place in Somalia within ten years between the withdrawal of American troops and Ethiopian intervention. However, they can not be even compared to violence of the civil war and General Barre’s dictatorship.

Somalian customary law is based on traditions interpreted and followed by decentralized clan structure. Xeer appeared long before the colonial period and remained valid when Somalia was a colony. After Somalia became independent, the central government made attempts to replace Xeer with state law. However, people in rural regions and borderlands continued to follow the customary law. After the collapse of Somali state the majority returned to traditional law.

Xeer prohibits murder, assaults, burglary, robbery, theft, arson, blackmail, tortures, beating, causing severe injuries (including those due to negligence), rape, kidnapping, causing harm to property. Xeer is mainly focused not on punishments but on compensations for the damage caused. This is an outline of people who are famous as pirates of XXIst century.

http://www.eastwest-review.com/article/somalia-anarchy-order-part-i

Does the USA need a one-polar world? I don’t think so. It is hard to “be in charge of everything”. It is much easier and more advantageous to be “the first among the equal and a far from the centre”. Unlike vertical relations, horizontal ones do not suppress anybody and can not result in anybody’s fall. I believe that Obama’s shining smile is just the right thing: after statements made by George Bush Jr. concerning the issue of “who is in charge” it is important to remind the world about such notion as equality.
I do agree with the author of this article - it is always extremely hard to be superior as they are mostly afraid of, envied or hated. It looks more than a habit of achieving superiority that the USA inherited from the cold war era, isn't it?

http://www.eastwest-review.com/article/pax-americana-multipolaris

Nowadays oil product transportation at the international level is mainly carried out by sea.
Thus, the sea trade routes are even more important today than several centuries ago when there were a unique mean to carry goods in far distances.
It is ridiculous, though, that a small African country could seriously influence the world oil traffic, causing economic and political problems to many great powers and hastening world financial crisis.
In autumn 2008 Somalian pirates captured the Saudi tanker “Sirius Star”. As usual they wanted to get a considerable amount of money for freeing the ship. That time the Danish oil company “A.P.Moller-Maersk” had to send about 50 oil-carrying tankers around the Cape of Good Hope (according to experts evaluation, such a route change could increase the delivery term for more than 12 days and the price by 40%), the Norwegian company “Frontline” under the pressure exerted by goods owners had to refuse to use the Suez Canal to pass both its own and freighted ships. Transport companies throughout the world faced the problem of dramatic increase of the transported good insurance prices as well as decline in demand for rent of supertankers to transport goods in the water area of the Gulf of Aden. In light of the growing global financial crisis these complications in the field of sea shipping exacerbated the world economic slowdown.
Almost two years have passed and no oil tanker can feel itself safe in the near of Somalia coast. International institutions are too busy to solve "bigger "problems and do nothing to change the situation.
What do you think should be done there? Will military interference result in second Iraq?

http://www.eastwest-review.com/article/hostis-humani-generis-part-1

A couple of months ago a document was found in American military intelligence archives, which was lying there for 65 years and didn't arise any interest until the present day.

US Military Intelligence report EW-Pa 128which was dubbed “Red House Report” by the British media, was prepared by a French agent. This is a detailed report about the secret meeting, which took place at the Maison Rouge Hotel (“Red House”) in Strasbourg on August 10, 1944. According to this document, Nazi high command invited the elite group of German industrialists in order to plan the postwar recovery of Germany, to prepare everything to bring the Nazis back to power and to create a “strong German empire” — in other word, the Fourth Reich.

Three-page closely typed report marked “Secret” was copied for British authorities and air-mailed to Cordell Hull, U. S. Secretary of State. This report contains a detailed description of methods, which Nazis together with German industrialists were willing to use in order to re-build the German economy, e.g. transferring money through Switzerland. Later on they were going to wait for the right moment and seize the power in Germany once again.

There were representatives of such companies as Volkswagen, Krupp and Messerschmitt among the gathered industrialists. Top officials of the fleet and the Armament ministry were also present at this meeting. With a remarkable foresight they decided that the Fourth Reich should be an economic empire, rather than the military one — but this time it wasn't supposed to be solely German.

The ideas brought to life at this meeting seem quite alike to those that formed the basis of the European integration at the end of 1940-s. History often gives us ridiculous lessons, doesn't it?

http://www.win.ru/en/school/2450.phtml

What should the Europeans be afraid of today? Many still believe that the main threat is coming from Russia and try to install some powder kegs between itself and this potential enemy.
But much more real are threats coming from inside. In the first place — it's the unpredictable and inadequate behavior of the “new democracies” of Eastern Europe; their political climate is very favorable for the emergence of the ultra-nationalist regimes as if they were transferred by a time machine right from the 1930s—1940s. It is them who create the zone of conflicts around the Europe, which threatens the Old World with numerous troubles. The most outrageous example of them is Georgian troops invasion in Southern Ossetia in August of 2008. Only intervention of the Russian army saved the citizens of Ossetian city Tskhinvali from the genocide, which cannot be denied: Georgian tanks were firing directly to the residential houses, schools and hospitals. Recently Dmitry Medvedev made a public statement that if the effective international security institution, capable to stop the aggressor, existed in 2008, Georgia would have never taken the audacity to unleash the war against the people of South Ossetia.
There are yet other potential threats coming from inside - for example, economic crisis that can destroy European architecture so thoroughly built during the last decades.
It is therefore to unify all possible sources to improve the situation. And not the least of the actions needed is adoption of a common European security system.

http://www.win.ru/en/school/2891.phtml

In his book book "Lend Lease: Weapon for Victory" E. Stettinius conceived the following grounds of the after-war world and the peaceful U. S policy in it: "When we were not the United Nations and everyone was by himself, all we had were the misfortunes and defeats. Having become the United Nations, we’ve intercepted the enemy’s initiative and now we are winning. It doesn’t matter, how many months of struggle are ahead — until we’re together the day is undoubtedly ours.

What will we be capable of since we reach this victory — that depends from whether we’d be able to conclude peace the same way we’ve fought against the aggression, remaining to be the United Nations. For the last 30 months, since 11th of March, 1941 we’ve received plenty of evidences that our unity can work the miracles. We’ve avoided the catastrophe, which could’ve postponed the liberation for centuries and we’ve gained a great opportunity to achieve the better future for the humanity. We’d only be able to use this opportunity if we stay united.

One might ask why the matter of the possibility of our future cooperation is being raised at all. If we won thanks to our unity, it would be a terrible mockery if we’d suffer a defeat during the peace time, having failed to keep our unity! Then all our losses, all the sacrifices made by those who lived and fought for the victory, would be really in vain.

But if we’ve learned how to fight back-to-back, we still might learn how to cooperate after the war. Of course we’ll face difficulties, contradictions and conflicts of interests. But there’s really nothing new or incredibly awful in it. Such matters can be solved to the mutual benefit. I think that those Americans who doubt that — and that is very odd in my opinion — do not have the faith in our ability to use our power wisely and for the common good in the international relations.

What are we to be afraid of? Rivalry with the Great Britain? We’ll hope that it would be a fair competition — competition in fight for prosperity of our own and all the other countries. After the victory in this war our country can hardly be afraid of any competition. We would have the tremendous material resources and the industrial power at our disposal as the country that didn’t suffer from the enemy attacks, country whose citizens can make business with people all over the world, country that know a lot about the life of other nations thanks to the millions of our compatriots living abroad. The English fear of competition can be understandable as they’ve suffered heavy economic and military losses. However, Englishmen are great businessmen as well and they would find the strength to restore their economy and we are interested in them to succeed at that. Great economic prospects are opening up before everyone who lives in a free and prospering world.

"Are we afraid of the communism in Russia? Why on earth do we have to be afraid of it? Do we have so little faith in our form of leadership and don’t we understand how much good did the free entrepreneurship, regulated for the sake of democracy, brought to our country? We have been working on our experiment for more than 150 years already — and we will keep walking our way, so the Soviets are free to work at their own experiment. We don’t have a single reason to be afraid of Russia. We’d just benefit from the friendship and the mutually profitable cooperation with it".

Are we afraid of the revival of China? Of course, not. China has been the most peaceful of all the great nations for the last 2000 years. New China can be considered to be the moral leader of the United Nations in the sense of understanding of what should we do for the sake of establishing the international cooperation.

After concluding the peace, Americans would have nothing to be afraid of, except, probably, the lack of faith in themselves and their own country. If we’re ready to continue our wartime cooperation even during the peace time, the rest of the world will be glad to cooperate with us for the sake of the common benefit.

All the United Nations have subscribed to the goals, proclaimed in the Atlantic Charter and the Declaration of the United Nations that can be briefly formulated as the freedom of speech, religious freedom, and freedom from poverty and fear. We cannot reach these goals at once — the path that leads to them is long and thorny, but they are still as much worthy and real as the goals of our Declaration of Independence. We cannot reach the strong and lasting peace without reaching them. History of humanity gives us the evidence that peace and prosperity are incompatible with the tyranny, poverty and fear".
The article I link here goes further and offers possible scenarios of USSR development after the victory in the Second World war.

http://www.win.ru/en/Mysteries-of-History/3331.phtml

April of 2010 has been marked as an important milestone of German politics: for the first time a female German citizen of Turkish origin took the position of a minister. Although that was not a federal appointment – 38-year old Aygul Ozkan took the position of the minister for social issues and integration problems of Lower Saxony – the event immediately drew attention of German society. One of the reasons of such attention is a not very long but quite symptomatic political scandal Aygul Ozkan got involved into right after the appointment: she made a statement in which she demanded to remove roods from school classrooms. Both this appointment and the following scandal demonstrate quite peculiar tendencies of modern German politics, which are truly worth discussing.
Could this appointment be considered a similar milestone as Barack Obama's election to a sacred study in Capitolium? I doubt so: both German politicians and Mrs. Ozkan herself admit that her appointment should attract Turks' votes in coming Landtag elections.

http://www.eastwest-review.com/article/rood-quarrel

Any time when the subject of the disputable for Russia and Japan Kurile Islands is mentioned — no matter while having a mug of beer in a smoked up pub or during the “roundtable” in the shining halls — there are always some know-it-all persons (be it politicians or the average men) who know for sure what to do with these islands. It's same as with a football: few people are actually playing, but millions are, allegedly, know everything about the matter.
There are several wide-spread myths about what Russians should do with the Islands, which are situated so far even from the citizens of the Russian Far East that they are perceived like something abstract and almost unachievable for most of Russian citizens.

The first myth: these islands are four rocks in the middle of the ocean, which no one actually need.

The second myth: Russians may bargain these islands for a while and then profitably sell them to Japan for a huge amount of money, which later can be used to enrich Russians.

The third myth: Russians have to give up the islands, because they are not actually their — they've just allegedly occupied them during the transient war against Japan in August 1945. Note that nobody's talking about the returning of the Southern Sakhalin, which was occupied at the similar time. Perhaps, because Japan doesn't demand it, does it?

Everything is mixed up in these myths: views of the average citizens, plans of politicians, dilettantism of the journalists and even some of the scientists. The idea of selling the islands for a big sum of money can be easily rejected. Nobody in Japan is going to actually buy the islands. They are not willing even to discuss this matter! It is so because the Japanese demand to “return” them their “Northern territories” as they call the Southern Kurile Islands.
Not so bad a solution is to turn the Kuriles into a ecotourist paradise . Probably it could help not only to stop the border quarrels, but also to improve ecological situation in the region.

http://www.win.ru/en/school/2910.phtml

A curios case, having taken place at the meeting of the heads of foreign policy institutes, held on March, 6 2009, today is usually called symbolic. At that time the American delegation make a present for the Russian party, made in a form of red push-button, which reminded the audience about the “nuclear weapon” push-button and the Cold war confrontation. However, according to the author’s idea, the souvenir should have symbolized the beginning of the new age of US-Russian relations, for this it was planned to engrave the Russian equivalent to the word “reset” (“perezagruzka”). However there was a mistake in translation, and the Russian delegation was offered to “overload” the bilateral relations instead of “reloading” them. Against the background of the events, having taken place the last year, the linguistic error of the American administration seems to be prophetic – the relations of the two countries are really overloaded by the number of fundamental contradictions.
The questions on which the Russian and US politicians unsuccessfully try to reach compromise hardly could be called easily solved - they are too many and too complicated. Minor achievements on minor issues do not mean that overall "reloading" of US-Russia relations is gathering speed. Big unsolved problems like renewing European security system, Russia's accession to WTO, stagnant Russia-NATO dialogue are pulling our bilaterla relations to underworld.

http://www.eastwest-review.com/article/old-wrinkles-new-face-american-diplomacy