With ex-President now Prime Minister Vladimir Putin looking on (right) Russian President Dmitry Medvedev (C) watches the military parade on the Red Square. EPA/Yuri Kochetkov
by Frank James
The Russians had a military parade the likes of which we haven't seen for 17 years, with goose-stepping soldiers, some in Second World War throwback uniforms, marching through Red Square to celebrate Victory Day, the 63rd anniversary of the Soviet Union's defeat of Nazi Germany.
The military festivities, reminiscent of the Cold War, were a continuation of new Russian President' Dmitry Medvedev's coming-out party which began earlier in the week when he assumed the presidency from Vladimir Putin.
But Putin, the new prime minister is, of course, literally and most assuredly still in the picture, as photos from Friday's ceremonies show.
The Russia experts say the parade was all about showing the world, especially the U.S., that Moscow is the center of a power that mustn't be taken lightly. That message is a bit contradicted by the wide knowledge that the Russian military is still down at the heels, despite all of that nation's oil and gas wealth. The Russian military hasn't purchased a new plane in ten years, for instance.
(Photo: Yuri Kadobnov/AFP/Getty Images)
(Photo: Yuri Kochetkov/EPA)
In the old days of the Cold War, American Kremlinologists used to examine who was standing atop the reviewing stand and what their relative position was to the general secretary who headed the Soviet state.
Asked about Kremlinology yesterday, Defense Secretary Robert Gates, who headed the Central Intelligence Agency near the end of the Cold War, recalled those days:
SEC. GATES: Oh, yeah. I mean, we devoted enormous effort to that. I mean, not only looking at the equipment that was going by, because they'd run some of their newer stuff out -- they don't have a lot of new stuff now -- but sure; and looking at who was standing next to whom and who was more heavily bundled up than the next geriatric. (Laughter.) (Laughs.) So, you know, and we probably made a lot more of it than was warranted, but yes, we spent a lot of time on it.
Russian strongman Vladimir Putin has made it so much simpler; few people doubt that he still runs the government even though he's no longer president. So the Kremlinologists in the CIA were probably able to knock off work early.
• 
• 
• 
• 
Comments
I am absolutely ecstatic at Russia’s continued resurrection.
Certainly, in the near term, we can expect to see increased trade with them as with their
Communist Chinese allies, certainly, as the balance of economic power continues its shift from West to East.
I never, ever thought I would have anything to thank dick and bush for, but certainly, I can thank them and their policies, and thank them deeply, for awakening the great Bear.
Posted by: theantibush | May 9, 2008 8:11 PM
These guys would make mince meat out of Obama.
It took a Republican to beg JFK to fly the U2 over Cuba just as they were about to install nuclear war heads on their Soviet missiles....and Obama is no JFK...Obama would of wanted to talk instead of taking action.
Paulo
Posted by: Paulo | May 9, 2008 10:07 PM
Yes, Russia is flexing its muscle. It is saying the "MOTHER" wants to be taken seriously. Maybe thats what is needed as we enter the Brave New World of the 21st Century a balance in the force.
The question for the voters come this November is who do you want to keep the "MOTHER" in balance.
McCain or Obama
My vote is McCain, he is the "BETTER" choice for Commander in Chief.
Posted by: VJ Machiavelli | May 9, 2008 10:48 PM
Posturing over the Caspian Sea oil reserve?
We need a new energy plan.
NO new farmland turned into 'housing'---rail transit built for HUMANS, solar panel credits.
Posted by: Putin--bush's Crawford friend | May 10, 2008 9:05 AM
Yeah, their army looks outdated for sure; but, it's the strength of your alliance and how many alliances do you have that dictates if one country is formidable or not. I think that's the reason the Russian can afford to have an oudated military because they are forging alliances.
Posted by: Lou | May 10, 2008 12:02 PM
Wonder what a President Obama would do if the the Russians started rolling thier army thru their former Soviet Satilite countries?
Would defending those countries, many in NATO now, be a proper use of the US military?
Posted by: Terry | May 10, 2008 1:27 PM
Well, after Pres. Obama brings our SOLDIERS HOME--and rebuilds the military that BUSH BROKE--maybe we could discuss WHAT IS ACTUALLY IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE U.S..
Howzabout some bridges? Education? Health Care?
Solar Panels?
Who Killed the Electric Car?
Posted by: Wake Up! | May 10, 2008 8:13 PM
*****
Posted by: theantibush | May 9, 2008 8:11 PM
Oh no. No. No. No.
This time you are wrong to blame Duh'bya and Co. for what's going on or going wrong in Russia. While he hasn't helped to make things much better, the problems we now have with Russia is the product of the nine years of neglect (1991 - 2000) which preceded Duh'bya's election. Many western European countries, especially Germany, worked hard to forge economic ties to Russia during this time, and they largely succeeded. So did China and a number of other countries upon which we frown.
During that same nine year period, the United States didn't do squat to get involved in forging a meaningful friendship with Russia. We gloated over our "victory" in the Cold War and laughed at Boris Yeltsin, whom we viewed as a harmless caricature. Without our involvement, Russia had to look elsewhere for markets and friends. They weren't going to wait for us because they couldn't wait forever to eat. That's why they formed the alliances they have.
I'll admit that I believe Duh'bya's policies toward Russia haven't been good. Instead of being friendly toward a country that been wide open to us, we have become needlessly hostile. Taking the side of questions antagonistic to Russia in our foreign policy, as if by default, has not helped. Yet, as I said before, these are not the cause of the problem. They have only made it worse.
Posted by: John W. | May 11, 2008 8:52 AM
*****
Posted by: Wake Up! | May 10, 2008 8:13 PM
Why it is the federal government's responsibility, rather than the States', to build bridges, educate our young and deal with health care? I don't see that stuff in the Constitution among Congress' powers. And why do you insist on making the most inefficient and expensive government do all this stuff? Or, just maybe, you are dying to pay more in taxes. Is that it?
Posted by: John W. | May 11, 2008 9:00 AM
Don't worry about Russia ... if Hussain wins the White House you'd better worry about the terrorists having their way within this Country.
Posted by: gyrenemoe | May 11, 2008 10:23 AM
News for "wake up". If Obama is elected there is a good chance that The Draft will have to come back because many of those serving, who have not served long enough to protect a pension, will not re-up with him as Commander-In-Chief
Posted by: usmc5821 | May 11, 2008 11:01 AM