Politics and Government of Russia

Russian Insider wrote:Putin-Medvedev Divorce? It's Only a Matter of Time

President Putin is about to dismiss Prime Minister Medvedev over the latter's appeasing attitude towards the West, according to Panorama, Italy's leading political weekly

Daniele Pozzati Wed, Jan 28

Putin regards Medvedev as “too soft with Barack Obama and the European leaders," writes Panorama's Moscow correspondent Cristina Giuliano.

She quotes, among others, Russian political scientists Alena Ledeneva of University College London: “Medvedev might even resign, maybe not immediately, but as soon as the economic situation will stabilize a little”.

Medvedev originally fell out of favor with the Siloviki—Kremlin's strong men, whom The Saker refers to as “Eurasian sovereignists”—during the 2011 Libya crisis, when Western intervention led to the toppling of Muammar Gaddafi.

A Russian documentary film on the Libya crisis openly accused him of “treason” for his compliant, pro-Western handling of the crisis, and supine acceptance of its outcome.

Among the first Siloviki to point the finger at Medvedev were Evgeny Primakov, former prime minister and head of Russia's foreign secret services, and Vladimir Chamov, Russian ambassador to Libya at the time of the crisis, removed for objecting to the very toppling of Gaddafi.

Retired general Leonid Ivashov said during the Libya documentary: “Unfortunately Russian presidents cannot be prosecuted for treason”.

Putin's comeback as President was especially cheered by the Siloviki during the 2013 Syria crisis. Had Medvedev been there, another area under Russian influence would have been “sold out” to the West.

How the US reacted to Russia stop playing balls with an ever-expanding West we learned last year: by organizing a coup next to Russian borders, and turning Ukraine into a neo-Nazi killing ground.

And, as we have recently reported, there are signs that Russia has stopped believing in the essential goodwill of the West. The offensive carried out by the rebels in Mariupol on Sunday was followed by Putin describing the Ukraine army as a “NATO legion aimed at restraining Russia.”

In this rapidly deteriorating climate, a pro-Western prime minister is simply not the right man for the job. With the likely demise of Medvedev, the West has again done its cause yet another disservice.

Is a possible rebel takeover of the whole of Donbass what a tough Russian prime minister would like to force upon the West? If so, exciting times lie ahead!

Panorama also mentions “a series of scandals with the Medvedev government: from bed time affairs and corruption that have ensnared former Defense Minister Anatoly Serdjukov, as well as Education Minister Dmitry Livanov’s troubles. His dismissal has been requested even by the staid Academy of Sciences.”

According to Panorama's source, “Medvedev himself has tight relationships with the West. And the West plays on them to advance its desires. All of this cannot please Putin's men.”

Who will take over? Rumors abound.

A much-talked about candidate is Alexei Kudrin, a semi-liberal, and former Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance.

Other rumors point to Dmitry Rogozin, the current Deputy Prime Minister, and a hardliner.

Or maybe Andrej Vorobiov, born 1970, current governor of the rich Moscow region. TIME recently described him as the rising star in Putin's United Russia party.

Medvedev's eventual resignation could follow what Panorama's source calls: “a sortie à la Yeltsin, because in Moscow we don't wash our dirty laundry in public”.

max steel wrote:   Russia's chief investigator stands for canceling supremacy of international law      

. The chief of Russia’s Investigative Committee, Alexander Bastrykin, has suggested amending Article 15 of the Russian Constitution to remove from it the supremacy of international law over national legislation . "Back in 1993, when the current Constitution was to be adopted, supremacy of international law was presented to us by advisers from the United States as the fundamental value of a state ruled by law. It may look ridiculous, but in a report on the draft Constitution that was published in Rossiiskaya Gazeta in 1993 it was stated with pride that its provisions had undergone foreign scrutiny," Bastrykin recalled.

About the ratio of international and national law he said that "the criteria must be determined exclusively by the country’s status in the international scene, and also by its strategic and geopolitical interests."


This is overdue. The West exempts itself from rules it seeks to impose on others. Russia should consider all international treaties void unless or until the West is prepared to abide by them. Their actions over Libya , Syria and Ukraine are not consistent with claiming moral ascendency.

Russia cant play by rigged rules of a game that the US Hegemony and its allies don't play by .



http://tass.ru/en/russia/792004

Werewolf wrote:

max steel wrote:   Russia's chief investigator stands for canceling supremacy of international law      

. The chief of Russia’s Investigative Committee, Alexander Bastrykin, has suggested amending Article 15 of the Russian Constitution to remove from it the supremacy of international law over national legislation . "Back in 1993, when the current Constitution was to be adopted, supremacy of international law was presented to us by advisers from the United States as the fundamental value of a state ruled by law. It may look ridiculous, but in a report on the draft Constitution that was published in Rossiiskaya Gazeta in 1993 it was stated with pride that its provisions had undergone foreign scrutiny," Bastrykin recalled.

About the ratio of international and national law he said that "the criteria must be determined exclusively by the country’s status in the international scene, and also by its strategic and geopolitical interests."


This is overdue. The West exempts itself from rules it seeks to impose on others. Russia should consider all international treaties void unless or until the West is prepared to abide by them. Their actions over Libya , Syria and Ukraine are not consistent with claiming moral ascendency.

Russia cant play by rigged rules of a game that the US Hegemony and its allies don't play by .

Just like i said the russian constitution under Yeltzin had alot of writing and defenition made by US and CIA and there are two that did not want to believe it but it still remains a fact.

GarryB wrote:

This is blustering by the gentleman, since we all know, abiding or not by the IL isn't something the US can impose on a fellow UNSC member.

The US regularly ignores international law when it suits them... and with their veto in the UNSC there is no practical way for Russia or anyone else to do anything about it.

This is just a change to Russian law to allow them to ignore international law too and with their veto there wont be much the US and the west can do about that either...

At best the west might decide to rethink the veto and UNSC system so that international law can be properly enforced for everyone and not just a chosen few and will be willing to renegotiate the current mechanisms which clearly don't actually work.

At best there might be a change so everyone is subject to international law with no exceptions, and at worst the Russians will be freed up to do as they wish the way the US does... of course only if it suits their interests... they may choose to simply abide by international law anyway, but now they wont actually have to if it does not suit them.

Go ahead, deliver in your claims.

He is entitled to his opinion.

Obviously without hard evidence it would be easy to dismiss claims as just opinion, but I personally think if "civilian contractors" and "weapon inspectors" in all sorts of international bodies are infiltrated by the CIA to subvert their work to Americas interests that when US firms are given advisory roles to the Russian government you could bet your ass quite a few will be on the CIA payroll if not actually agents.

If the roles were reversed I would expect the same from the Russian secret services...

sepheronx wrote:http://rt.com/politics/258113-russian-elections-churov-helsinki/

So 5th coloumnists who are funded by an NGO, Golos, who refuses to sign up to counter foreign agent law or even to follow Russian laws, is demanding this guys resignation.

I say, if they are refusing to register, kick them out of the country as they are illegal. I have no, NO idea why Russian gov is so reluctant in punishing these NGO's, especially foreign funded ones, for committing illegal activity. Are they incompetent, lazy? Or they just want to keep an open eye on them while helping them destroy their own image?

According to this: http://tass.ru/en/russia/794403 They know how much money from US goes to NGO's and who gets what. So they are not oblivious of the activity.

sepheronx wrote:OK, thats fine but they are not even going after them, even the ones not willing to register! So there seems to be a real lack of any enforcement on the authorities side of things. Can anyone commit a crime and get away with it in Russia? The NGO laws should stipulate all organizations need to provide transparency in their fundings and activities through documentations. As well, any NGO caught providing financial support to a political party gets stripped of its NGO status. None registerers should be fined and either jailed or deported (depending if they are a foreigner or local citizen), with a ban (can be lifted by courts if challanged) on the organization.