Here are the answers I have given to some questions about Russia, over on the Russia Insights website:

What are 3 positive things you would say about Russia?

Russia’s sense of itself – a quite different idea of scale, and what that means both for national policy and in historical and philosophical terms

Russian literature and intellectual life – ideas are taken seriously (see all those long arguments about agricultural policy reform in Anna Karenina!)

Russian logic and intellectual rigour – there is a certain steely objectivity in most Russian analysis, which again goes back to scale (and very high professional standards)

What are 3 negative things you would say about Russia?

Soviet Communism was a disaster for Russia, and the biggest disaster is that that the disaster was so vast it is hard for many Russians even now to accept it

A political tendency to judge the ends as more important than the means (communism again) – the very idea of (say) an independent judiciary is at best viewed with suspicion in far too many official quarters, and eg Prosecution lawyers and Judges are far too close

A predisposition or instinct towards ‘control by force’ rather than by persuasion (scale again – not easy to maintain any sort of unified policy approach over such distances). This plus the deep communist legacy plays over into an old-fashioned, hierarchical, etatistic view of how society and large organisations ‘should’ be run, which is inefficient plus it creates a context for corruption on a significant scale…

What does the return of Vladimir Putin as President mean for relations with (a) the UK, in light of Sergei Lavrov’s statement that relations with the UK are ‘normal’ again; and (b) the reset with the US?

Russia/UK: relations are said to be normal (enough) again, but that does not mean that they are as good as they might be. The two capitals differ sharply on some bilateral issues (above all the presence in London of various prominent Russians whom Moscow would like to see back in Russia) and that creates awkward tensions which are not going to recede easily. But it is good that trade is growing well and the general atmosphere is less unpleasant. These things come and go, and show that the two sides treat each other with hard-headed respect –a good thing

Russia/US: the so-called ‘reset button’ has not made too much difference, mainly because Russia defines its international power and status in large part by doing whatever the Americans don’t want Russia to do, thereby asserting their independence! President Putin looks set to stay in power for some time to come – a change of President in Washington could lead to sharp new problems especially if tensions grow over Iran/Israel or North Korea. However, these days Russia and the USA have many shared programmes and interests (above all strategic weapons reductions processes and their UNSC roles) which proceed in a fairly calm way, so life will go on…

How to you envision Russia’s relationship with the United Nations in regards to the situation in Syria?

I think that the way Russia has been effectively giving diplomatic cover to the Syrian regime is a disgrace: even if there are some tactical arguments for caution over what might replace the Assad regime, the overall sense of Russia’s diplomacy on this issue is negative and disappointing (and insulting to the mass of Syrians who by now are entitled to some sort of decent chance to elect their own leaders).

Moscow’s policy is doomed to fail sooner or later (just as in 2000 Russia’s close relations with the Milosevic tendency in Serbia failed to Russia’s surprise and dismay), and will deservedly do so. ‘Western’ policy too may fail, of course.

And so on.