Cyrill Vatomsky, Where All Politics Are Global: Does Putin want Iran to have nukes and extend Presidential term to seven years?

Does Putin want Iran to have nukes and extend Presidential term to seven years?

Posted At : June 3, 2007 5:42 PM | Posted By : Cyrill Vatomsky
Related Categories: Russia,Free Speech,Putin

I am not sure how to take this yet. The tone of the Kommersant article just released this Monday morning (it is still Sunday in California) is most certainly in jest. But it does refer to the interview Russian President Putin gave to world media before the G-8 summit.

Here are some puzzling excerpts:

"Would you mind if Iran came top possession of nuclear weapons" - asks on of the journalists.

"I sure don't" answers Putin absorbed in the process of eating strawberry soup.

Does this sound like an incredible revelation? Am I missing something? Strawberry soup?!

And how about this:

Further, closer to the end of the interview, the President stated that an "appropriate" extension of the presidential term length might be five or even seven years instead of the current five.

Is this the "STOP THE PRESSES" comment or what?

There was a strange and unclear reference to Ghandi in that article, here is an explanation from Times Online. The man is either delusional or he has departed from reality, which is basically the same thing:

“Of course, I am a pure and absolute democrat,” he said. “But you know what the problem is – not a problem, a real tragedy – that I am alone. There are no such pure democrats in the world. Since Mahatma Gandhi, there has been no one.”

Once again, it is apparent to me that when leaders clamp down on free press, they become hostages of their own making. When pressed about democracy, Putin answers:

“Let us not be hypocritical on human rights and democratic freedoms,” he said in a swipe at other countries, which is his favorite rebuttal technique. “Let us look what is happening in North America. It is horrible – torture, the homeless, Guantanamo, detention without normal court proceedings.” In Europe, he said, “we can see violence against demonstrators, the use of gas to disperse rallies”.

As if the last 30 years did not happen. The man is living in the past as well as in the sky. No wonder he laments the demise of the USSR. And he absolutely does not understand that order does not tramp freedom:

“If people want to express disagreement, they should have that right. But they should not impede people going to work, normal urban life – then the Government must take measures to restore order.”

Strangely, there is nothing in the Times piece to corroborate quotes from the Kommersant article. Quite possibly these statements were not interpreted adequately or misunderstood by foreign reporters.

Here is more. One of the callers asked me this question and I have to admit, I was not aware of this yet :

In an interview published by Italy's Corriere della Sera on Sunday, Putin also suggested that Russia could respond to the threat by aiming its nuclear weapons at Europe.... "If the American nuclear potential grows in European territory, we have to give ourselves new targets in Europe," he was quoted as saying. "It is up to our military to define these targets."

Does he understand what is he saying? Over the last several months and since the Litvinenko affair Russia must have gotten precious little of good coverage in the international media. Most of what Mr. Putin's administration has done over the last year or so in terms of international politics were a string of unmitigated disasters as if deliberately designed to alienate everybody. His Munich speech, his clumsy attempts at comparing US with Nazi Germany, Russia's hysterical assaults on Georgia and Estonia, all of the widely covered internal problems with freedom and now right before he goes to meet with the G-7, he smugly threatens to aim missiles at Europe, while comparing himself to Ghandi?

Go figure.