Hi,

In light of the G8 summit the differences between Russia and the United States should be seen from a social cultural aspect. America on one side paranoid about security oblivious of European inter-relationships. Russia having just come out of the cold with a democratic polished government is insecure, the old colonies running away. Probably the best solution is for the America government to face elections and Mr. Putin (Russia) to become a member of the European Union. Returning to the “cold war” on the basis of personal animosities does not make sense.

Terence Hale, Zandvoort, Holland

I think Russia is pretty safe behaving the way it behaves. It is a nuclear power nevertheless and no one would dare to do anything to Russia in the next 20 or so years. Bush leaves Putin no choice. Making allies out of CZ and Poland leaves nothing else to Russia but to respond the way it intends to respond. I'm sure Bush administration would do the same if Russia were to place the missile system in Venezuela. It is a fine political game on the part of the US. It's not about Iran or North Korea, otherwise, this system would be considered for installation in Turkey. It's sad that the political situation is so unpleasant, but I don't think it's a real threat. In 1.5 years things will change. After elections in the US and preudo-elections in Russia, new leaders are likely to behave more diplomatically. Another cold war is way too expensive and useless. Look at what's going on now as a short-time unpleasant situation:).

Leeza, London, UK

Putin is already historic figure. Not because he is so great - he was put (placed) there with purpose and he is fulfilling (with certain efficiency) this purpose. I agree with the author about general trend in current situation of Russia. But! Do not underestimate Russians! Read history. Especially if the next leader will be more harismatic and wise then such completely out-of-Russian-type character as Putin.

Sergey Kobelev, Greensboro, NC, USA

Putin has been a remarkably effective president for Russia.
After the mess of Eltsin's presidency Russia is back up from its knees, economically in the first place. Its GDP has quadrupled over the course of Putin's presidency and continues to grow at a good pace. Standards of living are incomparably higher. Now it's the ninth biggest economy of the world and will definitely rank higher in the future. Despite the claims by the ignorant reporter who wrote this article, its military budget has also quadrupled and the military reform is progressing successfully. The Western world does not seem to recognize the fact that Russia today is not the weak Russia of the nineties. It is a Russia that can stand its ground and rightly so on the areas of its national interest without imperialist ambitions, which Putin is fully well aware of will be damaging to its further development (cutting gas supplies to those who steal it or want it below market price has nothing to do with imperialism).

Serguei, Minsk, Belarus

I do not know where Mr. Neil Glass bases his above comment regarding Russia and Turkey? I have lived approx 2 years in Russia for my work and experienced a strategic alliance with Russia is far beyond our horizon.

Orhon Anit, Enschede, The Netherlands

It is one thing to say that Russia has no budget for increases in defense spending but unfortunately the relative cost of building more nuclear warheads is cheap compared with running a large conventional force.
You could build hundreds of nuclear weapons for the cost of fielding one conventional brigade in the field. Ask the Pentagon how much that costs.
China of course has no such budget problem.
It would be easier for Iran or North Korea to place a nuclear device in a private launch, sail it to NY, and blow it up in or near the harbour rather than making themselves a target.
I still fail to see the point of fielding an air defense system when it is only capable of shooting down missiles not only not equipped with decoy technology but which have to have "here I am" beacons to aid interception and are fired on a known trajectory.
One senses the push for these weapons has more to do with corruption of the military-industrial estate rather than for a useful military system.

Jeff Larsen, Chch, NZ

"The bottom line is that Russia is in little position to hit back if the US and Europe press ahead with their aims"

Russia have a huge amount of missiles and nuclear devices at their disposal. I disagree with your article suggesting Russia does not possess the military might to pose a threat to the US & Europe!

What occured in Cuba? Were the Russians bluffing then?

In my opinion, their president is correct to dispute the USA placing 'nuclear deterents' on their doorstep - apparantly to stop Iran from harming US of A patriots? What a load of rubbish! The US are well aware that their current position as the worlds only superpower is under threat, not now but in 20 years or so.

I dont think Russia will be the competition but a combination of Russia and especially China will. Has no-one noticed the technology sharing and improvements in relations which has taken place between these giants?

'Genius George Bush' vs Ex KGB leader Mr V Putin. Lets hope it doesnt turn to war

jay, test, test

I am a rocket scientist and I had made some important contributions to optimal rocket trajectories (BSGoh SIAM Journal on Control 1966, USA). I developed new mathematics and I independently proved that for optimal rocket trajectories in the solar system the rocket engine must be on at maximum thrust or off.
NATO must not ignore Russia's concerns on the proposed anti-missiles systems. If NATO is genuine that the main threat is Iran then it can place the proposed anti-missile system more effectively in the Southern parts of Russia. USA & NATO must cooperate with Russia and China to maintain peace in the world.
This "differential game" problem in defense analysis is like driving a car. You cannot insist the other driver must drive in a manner to suit you. You have to drive in response to actions of the other drivers. Hence NATO must response positively and correctly to Russia's concerns.
Iran is a very serious threat to the world with its continued actions to make nuclear bombs

BS Goh, Perth, Australia

Russia might not be that powerful anymore economically but militarily it still carries quite a punch, second only to the US. The writer seems to forget how dependent Europe is on Russian gas. If they choose to turn off the tap, Western Europe will be on its knees within a few days.

Abid Khan, Milton Keynes,

So, the anxiety of Putin seems to have reason but, according the article, Russia is too weak to take it (the anxiety) into account.

Mikhail Kononov, St. Petersburg, Russia

Russia (and Mr. Putin) want so much to be taken seriously by the other members of the G8. The thing is...other than OIL Russia is an economic basketcase. Most of its military is rusting away and/or technically backward! I have no idea why Russia is even part of the G8 anyway. Mr. Putin and the current crowd in the Kremlin pretended to be Democrats when it suited them...but as we have seen recently listeneing to those with different opinions is no longer "fashionable" in Moscow. I can only speak for myself but I would guess most world leaders are tired of Mr. Putin...his big mouth...and his omnipresent NEPOLEON COMPLEX. Like Mr. Bush, his exit from the world stage won't come a minute too soon...peace to all.

Mark Willmott, Kitchener, Ontario, Canada

It is in our strategic interest to invite Russia to join the European Union and not waste time on Turkey. Moreover, we have much more in common with Russia. It seems incredible that not one of our politicians has the foresight to see this and courage to propose this.

neil glass, london, uk

I have long argued that the root cause of many of todays world problems is the absolute dependence on oil and gas for energy by the worlds major economies. This gives inordinate power to those who control it, many being states with little or nothing else to offer the world. When will the developed world realise that the only way to purge these constant disruptions is to focus all possible resources on developing alternatives to oil and gas (or making effective the alternatives that already exist). Considering the costs of the various conflicts that regularly occur in oil-rich areas, it would probably also make financial sense

Bob Finbow, Haverhill, England