Russia annexed a country trying to join Russia and didn’t regard global economic cooperation once so ever. They made this move despite international condemnations and don’t seem to be phased by the slap on the wrist sanctions we have issued. This is sending a signal of negativity for other former Soviet Union member countries wanting to join the EU. This was a huge breech of trust and international law that will prepare and raise awareness in us that if we eventually mend this relationship, we can try and forgive but we certainly shouldn’t forget.
But the help of the US wasn't just a gift; America had something they got out of the help they were providing in building the Russian economy. All big American companies went to the Russian market. "American firms are convinced of Russia's extraordinary potential as the market for US trade and as a host for investments" (Pickering 102). ... ... middle of paper ... ...ometimes media writes about the United States as the country that wants to ruin Russia. "Americans who operate exchange programs and conduct research in Russia are concerned about a report attributed to a government agency there that characterized such US-sponsored activities as espionage" (Desruisseaux A44).
The Western media condemns Russia for the anne... ... middle of paper ... ...nternational community, but isolating the government does not mean isolating the people of Russia, because of the current technological development that was not present on time, even though the government is trying to suppress the freedoms. (McFaul, 2014) The current events showed that there are far more potential shatterbelts in the World that it may seem at first. The Ukrainian shatterbelt although is still potential, it created a deterioration in international relations that they have not seen since the Cold War. Russia’s economy cannot potentially last another Cold War. The current events will most likely lead to Russia’s relative isolation from the international community and lead its economy to stagnation, because there is no sight that Russia will give up Crimea.
Simultaneously it is important that we begin forming a strong trade relationship, focusing on limiting the Ukraine’s need for Russia, by providing an alternate means for goods. It is important that the U.S. insures Ukrainian independence from Russia. If the Ukraine became part of Russia, not only would Russia obtain the worlds leading supplier of ICBMs, But other countries part of the former Soviet Union are at risk of losing their independence. Russia’s interest in the region has recently come to light during the election scandal of 2004. Russia’s president, Vladimir Putin strongly supported candidate Yanukovych in the election.
This paper firstly aims to define the problems, which conditioned the absence of such agencies and firms in Washington intended to lobby Russian interests systematically and on regular basis and evaluate the perspectives for their creation. Obstacles for Russian Lobby in the USA One of the most significant reasons which hamper the creation of lobbying groups i... ... middle of paper ... ...y Russia has practically no leverage. Waiting for the Obama administration to do the job of the non-existing pro-Russian lobby, Russia only shows that, unfortunately, it doesn't understand the rules Washington is playing by. What people caring about the state of U.S.-Russia relations should realize is that the notorious "reset" is not a law and not even an officially declared U.S. foreign policy objective. It's a political trend adopted by the current administration that may well be thrown away by the next, most likely Republican, president.
If it feels that it is being regarded lightly, it will shut itself off from the rest of the world and positive change will not occur. This means that using Russia to augment the United States’ security needs at no benefit to Russia needs to end. The West must recognize the differences in Russia and work around those differences in order to find a system that works for them. A realist approach is clearly not the answer as it only fuels negativity, and does nothing to encourage Russia to fix their internal problems which are hindering the country. If the West can engage productively with Russia, an era of cooperation will ensue which will be essential in solving the globes security problems.
The main difference between the two wars was the catalyst for the war, but the underlying reasons for going to war were very similar. President Boris Yeltsin decided to invade Chechnya due to a perceived need to demonstrate that the Russian government was strong and capable of suppressing such an uprising. Yeltsin had a political agenda in which the priority was to institute a federal state where local governments took on a larger role compared to the former soviet state (Hughes, “From Federalisation to Recentralisation,” p. 129). Yeltsin was decentralizing power by granting more legislative powers to the regional governments, but Yeltsin still needed political support from the regional governors in order to pass legislation in the upper house of the Duma (Zhuravskaya, “Federalism in Russia,” p. 61). So Yeltsin started granting selective concessions to carefully... ... middle of paper ... ...r’s position.
In reviewing the applications of where and how the power is being used in Russia, the levels of analysis will help to clarify each level of government’s powers hard and soft. At the International System level of analysis one for Russia the Non-Government Originations and the Government Organizations the government organizations are higher. Russia as an international power based on our text is bipolarity. Russia in recent years has join alliances with Brazil, India, and China this alliance is called BRIC. This alliance would be a hard power to help each of these states to have a greater influence on the global policy future and the international economy (Kegley and Blanton).
Nicholas on the other hand made a significant impact on Russian history by introducing democracy to the Russian people, through the October Manifesto. Even though the political system was shadowed by Nicholas' unwillingness to fully democratise, through the fundamental laws (1906) Nicholas had begun to transform Russia into a modernised industrial power. When compared with Alexander's political inactivity, it can be deduced that Alexander was more autocratic than Nicholas. When examining which Tsar was more autocratic, the role of opposition and how it was dealt with should not be overlooked. Alexander introduced mass repression, which included executions and other forms of torture in order to regain political stability.
He did not only worsen the condition of the peaceful demonstration, but he was also oppressing the people's rights of freedom of speech. The government's sole purpose is to serve the nation and its people and look after their best interests, not to secure their power in the office. This is the biggest mistake any government would or has done. The crisis in Ukraine should be an eye opener to the Malaysian government to make the best decisions in order to maintain the sovereignty of our country and its people. As Alan Moore wrote "People should not be afraid of their governments.