him to put pressure on yeltsin. one time that chechnya comes up with that, is when he is speaking. what happens? in strobe talbott's book, on page 55, he says in the beginning of the of administration, people are concerned. people around clinton were concerned, you are becoming too personally committed to yeltsin. you should be more committed to principles and processes. clinton shows he is very indeed committed to yeltsin. he indeed sees this as black against white. game.s it is a zero-sum democracy cannot be a zero-sum game, it is a compromise. if you support democracy, you should encourage interaction between the president and the parliament. i am not saying it was the u.s'' fault, i am saying there is something the united states, with their leverage, could have done. russia has itself to lose, it did not need somebody to lose it. coming back to the priorities, this priority was support for democratic development in russia. there were many priorities, as always, in the u.s. russia relations. i think a very import

clinton worried about yeltsin all the time. in almost every conversation i ever heard from him, he had a combination of apprehension and admiration. and sometimes, though, the admiration played second fiddle to the admiration, as you can imagine. but never ever did he ever -- did he waiver on supporting yeltsin. especially when the alternatives were people like korniendo. and look at the skill, for example, the americans -- we haven't talked much about vietnam. the americans during this period are totally ham strung by their position on vietnam and their need in every negotiation to try to get the soviets to try to help them manage their vietnam problem. let me just say a little bit let me just say a little bit about a number of points that have come up, which i would call the bill of particulars of alleged sins of omission and commission on the part of the u.s. government during this period. they have come up over the last 20 years and they certainly have come up in the last 24 hours. first, why did the united states, why did

on yeltsin. and the one time that chechnya comes up in that is when he's speaking about fred kuni. so what happens? and actually in strobe talbott's book, on page 55 -- [ laughter ] he says that in the beginning of yeltsin's administration, they were concerned, people around clinton were concerned to say, you are becoming too personally committed to yeltsin. you should be more committed to -- you should be more serious about principles and processes, and clinton shows them very clearly, indeed, committed to yeltsin and he, indeed, sees this as black against white. he says it's a zero sum game. there. democracy cannot be a zero sum game, it's a compromise, so if you support democracy, you should encourage interaction between the president and the parliament. i'm not saying that was the u.s. thought -- fault, i'm saying that there was something that the united states with a lot of their leverage could have done. but russia -- russia has itself to lose. russia did not need somebody to lose it. now,

put pressure on yeltsin. time that chechnya comes up with that, is when he is speaking. happens? 's book, healbott spo says in the beginning of the of illustration they were concerned. people around clinton were concerned, you are becoming too personally committed to yeltsin. you should be more politically aboutted -- more serious this. clinton shows he is very indeed committed to yeltsin. this asd sees black-and-white. he says it is a zero-sum gain. democracy cannot be a zero-sum game, it is a compromise. democracy, you should encourage interaction between the president and the parliament. it was the u.s. 'fault, a lot of their leverage could have been done. russia has itself to lose, it did not need somebody to lose it. ,oming back to the priorities this priority was support for democratic development in russia. there were many priorities, as always in the u.s. russia relations. i think a very important priority was to make sure the nuclear mechanical, and biological weapons were safe and secure. very impor

to stabilize yeltsin's government. - [narrator] policymakers in washington welcomed the chance to find common ground with russia. a country they had countered strategically throughout the soviet-era with nato, an anti-communist military alliance of north american and european nations. - [polyakova] in the 1990s, there was this general view that russia should be and could be integrated into western institutions. so not just western economic institutions, liberal market economies, the globalized marketplace, but also western security institutions. - i was actually in the room when boris yeltsin asked manfred werner, then secretary general of nato to allow russia to join nato. and that was vetoed. i think that was a huge mistake. one of the greatest mistakes probably of the 20th century. and we now reap what we sow. (ominous music) - we will continue to support nato airstrikes until the serbs agree to the conditions laid out by the u.n. - [narrator] the aspirations of integrating russia into western institutions would be quickly tested in the balkans. the u.s. and its nato allies organize

there are these interesting parallels from which gorvachev and yeltsin are the exception. the search of the soviet union and russia under putin for a sphere of, we called it by different names, influence, dominance, first in eastern europe he talked about after the war and now in the near abroad. several papers talked about how the soviet union and russia have seen the united states as hypocritical, proclaiming its adherence to ideals and ignoring them in its foreign policy practice. we heard several times how the soviets and now putin, himself, want to be treated as an equal of the united states. we have heard about how the liberal international order is promoted and defended by the united states has been an obstacle to the soviets and the russians achieving what they wanted to achieve. we heard before lunch about the parallels as well as the differences between brezhnev and putin. so it strikes me even more as a result of this conference than it did in writing my book that gorbachev is and yeltsin is the great exception. truly exceptional. both at home and in his country

bush and bill clinton and russian president boris yeltsin d

bush and bill clinton and russian president boris yeltsin, how they influenced the new russia after dissolution of the ussr. the miller center convened scholars for a conference

but there are interesting parallels from which gorbachev and to some degree yeltsin is the exception to list a few of them i've heard mentioned here. the search of the soviet union and russia under putin for a sphere of -- well, we called it by different names, influence, dominan dominance, first in eastern europe as was talked about after the war and now in the near abroad. several papers talk about how the soviet union and russia over and over again have seen the united states as hypocritical, proclaiming its adherence, fealty, to ideals and then ignoring them in its foreign policy practice. we heard several times about how the soviets and putin himself wants to be treated as an equal of the united states. we've heard about how the liberal international order is promoted and defended by the united states, had been a kind of obstacle to the soviets and the russians achieving what they wanted to achieve. we heard just before lunch about the parallels as well as the differences between mika brzezinski they ha-- brezhnev a putin. so it strikes me even more that gorbachev is and yeltsin

about them all, but there are these interesting parallels from which gorbachev and to some degree yeltsin is the exception and just to list a few of them that i heard mentioned here and the search of the soviet union and russia in the sphere of -- we call it by different names. influence, dominancer is ral of the papers talk about how the soviet union and russia over and over again have seen the united states as hypocritical, proclaiming its adherence to ideals and then ignoring them in his foreign approximately see practice. we heard several times about how the soviets and now putin himself wants to be treated as an equal of the united states and we've heard about how the liberal international order is defended by the united states has been a kind of obstacle to the soviets and the rugs achieving what they wanted to achieve. we heard just before lunch about the parallels about the differences between breshnev and putin. so it strikes me as a result of writing the book that gorbachev is and yeltsin to some extent to be determined in the next half of this panel is the great exception. trul

it strikes me that gorbachev is boris yeltsin, are the exception. both at home, in his determination to try to democratize his country, and abroad, in his determination to try to end the cold war and try to build a new post-cold war order that would be based on the use of or nonuse of force. is such an exception, the question is, how did the united states react to him, in the person of presidents reagan and bush? to what extent did they understand the exception that he was, to the extent did they try to leave him and help him -- lead him and help him, as he pursued his goals? to what extent are they not do so in a way that may have efforts tos attain your goals? in my paper i talk first about reagan and then about george bush. i describe reagan as ironically an almost perfect partner to gorbachev, strange as that might team at the time. after all, he was in arch -conservative president. reagan talked about the evil empire, and the strategic defense initiative in the hope that it would scare the russians. when they met in geneva, when you read the tr

so it strikes me even more as a result of this conference that gorbachev, and yeltsin to some extent to be determined after this panel, is the great exception, truly exceptional, both at home and his determination to try to democratize his country, and abroad, in his determination to end the cold war and help to ,uild a new world order post-cold war order that would be based as much as possible on the nonuse of force. so if he is such an exception, the question is how did the inted states react to him the persons of presidents reagan and bush? to what extent did it understand ?he exception that he was to what extent did it try to meet him and help him as he pursued his goals? to what extent did it. -- did it not do so in a way that it might have hindered his efforts to obtain these exceptional goals? in my book and, to some extent in my paper, i talk first about reagan and then about george bush. as ironicallygan an almost perfect partner to gorbachev. strange as that seemed at the time. and in retrospect. after all, he was an archconservative president and gorbachev was a coming thi

frankly, from what i have read from your book, gorbachev or yeltsin doesn't grab economics. the technocrats in russia were far weaker than those in poland. it wasn't a question of money, although money helps. in the '90s, russia gets big sums of money from the imf, the world bank, the saudis and u.s. ag credits. you have two big issues, the macro economic issues of budget, inflation and credit. i think they have a good macroeconomic policy. the my kror economic issues, property rights, rule of law, contracts and competition, russia is still struggling with those issues 25 years later. i was deeply involved with poland's process of transition in 1989, '90 and '91. the politics almost fractured even with the strength of the solidarity coalition. i noticed at the end of your paper you note that the u.s. probably didn't miss a chance to save gorbachev and democracy but then you use this margaret thatcher quote setting up what might have been. from a practical policymaker's perspective, i would suggest that margaret thatcher might have spent time more effectively focusing on brit

putin was being groomed as yeltsin's successor.ave sway over the new leader. then, in february 2000, anatoly sobchak died suddenly at the age of 62. at the funeral, russia's new president was distraught. that was the first and last time everyone saw him crying in russia. this day i still remember it, and one of the shocks i had was his reaction, he was totally killed by this. but what killed sobchak? to this day, that remains a mystery. the original autopsy was inconclusive, and many were suspicious, including sobchak‘s widow, ksenia's mother. narusova had her own autopsy performed, but instead of making the results public, she keeps locked in a safe in a secret location. the kremlin today is still a place of rival factions, to threaten their power is to take a terrible risk. the girl with the silver spoon is not a girl any more. her family history may protect her, but only up to a point. meanwhile, back on the sobchak campaign trail... from public transport to pensions, to childcare, ksenia listens to people's everyday problems as

ambassador to russia and nato and the first russian foreign minister who served under boris yeltsin. this is just over an hour and a half. john: good morning. my name is john herbst. i run the eurasian center here at the atlantic council. thank you all for coming. we have a wonderful program for you this morning. and i should mention that this is part of our series on internal developments in russia. we began with a session in october on demography in russia. and this of course is on politics. next month, we are doing a session on the russian economy, followed by a session a session probably in april on energy sector in russia. we have a real treat for you this morning. we have a wonderful lineup of speakers. i will not describe them except to say yevgenia albats, a top-notch journalist from moscow, who has written a very provocative and a fascinating paper on russia politically. foreign minister kozyrev will comment on that, as will eugene rumer from carnegie. and ambassador and former deputy secretary nato, sandy vershbow will bat cleanup for us this morning. and with that i will t

well so it was a former deputy prime minister a political ally of president yeltsin in the ninety's were difficult time you know the economy went south and he was a reformer into was a reform and a fierce critic later on of mr putin he accused the president of launching an illegal war with ukraine today many russians came to pay tribute to the bravery of mr themself who was always fighting for the freedom of the press for a strong pall of and that is not always say yes to everything that comes from the kremlin today many russians came really to pay tribute to the bravery of this young politicians and he was someone who was really not afraid of anyone in the kremlin he always was a strong personality i've met him several times he had he was a cursed mattick figure and many people have not forgotten that. drugs are a shining us from moscow thank you. time now for some of the other stories making news around the world china's communist party has proposed removing a two term limit on how long the president can stay in power that would mean president xi jinping could remain in office after hi

the clinton and bush administration negotiated the post-cold war era with russian president boris yeltsin. >>> c-span's "washington journal" live every day with news and policy issues that impact you. coming up wednesday morning, we'll discuss u.s. foreign relations and the trump administration with former obama administration state department policy planning director jake sullivan. we'll talk about rebuilding the nation's infrastructure with president then ceo of associated builders and contractors. and we're live in oklahoma city, oklahoma, for the next stop on the c-span bus 50 capitals tour. oklahoma governor mary fallon will join to us talk about the key public policy issues in here state. be sure to watch "washington journal" live at 7:00 eastern wednesday morning. join the discussion. >>> the university of virginia's miller center convened scholars for a two-day conference looking at the complicated history between u.s. and russian leaders over the last century. the focus of this next session is the relationship between john f. kennedy and soviet premier nikita khrushchev in the ea

will close by saying i think there's a way of looking at these individuals, reagan, gorbachev, bush, yeltsin, through a lens of hero of factor. -- hero of factor. that is not to acknowledge the strengths of particular moments within the grades, the contributions of others at other moments. something that has fascinated me is the last interaction with shevardnadze and reagan in september of 1988, where reagan says i know i said turned on the wall, itear down the understand. it had been perhaps unrealistic to suggest the berlin wall be torn down in its entirety. he understood the division of germany and berlin was a product of world war ii. the feeling on part of the iniet union and many others germany should never be allowed to be the strongest and most dominant power in central europe. if you had said to reagan after yearseeting that in 2.5 we are going to unify germany and nato. i think he would've laughed and smiled and said that would be great. he also thought that would've been something that could maybe happen in 25 years. [applause] >> i would like to thank the organizers of this confe

starting from ninety one even under president yeltsin and the president putin and the president of egypt during all this time was actually to get back to the table where the most important international decision are being taken and russia by diffusing different means russia succeeded to get and that was of course a reaction to the tragic collapse of the state who in one thousand nine hundred. but you know the question is what next what to do with this position russia is accepted. accepted as a part of the group of most most mighty powers and now russia needs to understand. why did you need. these for for for someone to rule the world well you may disagree with me and but. my perception is that there is actually a nor controversy and full acceptance among their russian ruling elite that you have to build the country from within and that actually involves partially some. liberalization of the country economic liberalization the opening up of the system politically. laws on the eve of this presidential elections have been significantly east. i think the discourse in russia the media discour

the politburo her famous patients included soviet premier leonid brezhnev and later president boris yeltsin . nearly thirty years later countless healing services online represent a major enterprise. the patriarch of the russian orthodox church considers president vladimir putin's rise to power a miracle of god he also foresees an impending apocalypse. it's not uncommon for a police officer to ask a priest to bless the sites of numerous car accidents jesus has become an antidote for misfortune. sociologists point to depression anxiety and a disoriented society as an explanation for the rising belief in magical thinking. people have no idea what's going to happen in the near future from those they plan their lives from one paycheck to the next maybe a few months of most. of that are. back in the time manton's the spiritual guide yelena got mail and insists healers are more than a rural phenomena she says her clients from moscow couldn't get by without people like her. in a country where reality is a painful experience for many russians cope by hoping for miracles. russians aren't the only on

result, just to put it into comparison, some factors, in 1999, the last year that boris yeltsin was presidentf the russian federation, he pronounced his successor, prime minister pruden. -- from minister vladimir putin. the kgb in grew into an army at and as i said, 10 years later, the number went to 66.7%. -- then the people from the soviet union's kgb had in 1989, when mick calgary was the-- gorbachev leader of the country. obviously, when you have this overrepresentation of people in the topstitution, layer of the government, they bring with themselves or institutional culture. they bring with themselves, their understanding of what is wrong and right in internal and external politics. themselves, the usefulents that were back in the times when they were young and brave, strong and everything was pretty much good for them in terms of their career. besides the numbers, there is line in the-cut success of the kgb the, their intent to influence the politics by using oppression and repression. there was nothing special about russia and about respect once again, i argue that this printer to cal

debbie tash really the said to have helped soviet leader leonid brezhnev and later president boris yeltsin slightly nearly thirty years later countless healing services are now available online the patriarch of the russian orthodox church considers president vladimir putin's rise to power a miracle of god he also foresees an impending apocalypse. it's not unusual for a police officer to ask a priest to bless a location where numerous car accidents have occurred christ has become an antidote for misfortune. sociologists point to depression anxiety and a disoriented society as an explanation for the rising belief in the supernatural. a source for part of their living will have no idea what's going to happen in the near future that will they plan their lives for one paycheck to the next of the maybe a few months at most or from somewhere different commutes to put it back in the time mountains yelena go my own insists healers are more than a rural phenomenon she says her. clients from moscow couldn't get by without people like her. the way i think the fair thing my clients work with psychics e

course the famous how can we forget this picture time magazine russia the americans openly helped yeltsin in a rigged election keep our yanks to the rescue they were quite proud about their meddling back then they even made a movie spinning boris congratulating the ninety six million eighty six don't forget to vote face date you know. well i think it's just a case over double standards you know but you know that it's interesting you're right but they don't see it that way they can't see this far away from their face when it comes to issues like this well you know the problem is also with oh elite you know the response of rush and he is usually you are using oss in your internal struggle well for to tell you terry and i do it would you with global explorations which is no reason in the united states there is no difference between foreign and domestic policy and your foreign forty c. is spot of your domestic importance so you know they were trying to go in there just when you get to a short break and after that short break we'll continue what those thirteen russian state with our. hey every

few months to come up with a yeah take a listen to what the british foreign secretary what boris yeltsin what he said this morning after a morning run about what the e.u. is trying to do with the irish border so that what he'll move is that. the issue of the border is being used quite a lot politically to try to keep the u.k. in the customs union take you through the market so you can't really be that's what's going on. is that the case barbara is brussels trying to hold northern ireland hostage is our esteemed jogger planes. i think it isn't because even though the divorce the fight about this divorce may have reached the point where one party system or the other ok i'm going to rip out the kitchen sink sink and throw it sort of through the window if you won't see reason about how to divide up the cabinets but. michelle bunny the e.u. negotiator has several times said this is a stopgap this thing about northern ireland an island on the border being in the irish sea that we wrote down into this legal text you just have to and that really means it's a ploy in a sense it means to sort of w

itself in numerous countries around the world and in russia as well one thousand nine hundred six yeltsin was going up against the communists and looked like me to lose that election it was us political advisors there basically helped him win it what roy thank you very much for that for now that is roy hallums joining us live from moscow thank you. let's move on to other news now and a state of emergency has been declared in ethiopia a day after the unexpected resignation of prime minister. in the country seen a wave of protests filled at least in part by ethnic divisions of reports. the streets of ethiopia's capital addis ababa appear. but the country's political landscape is slipping deeper into crisis. of friday ethiopia's ruling coalition decided to oppose that. urgency rule to stem a recent wave of anti-government protests there's no indication of how long the measures will be in place the announcement comes a day after the sudden resignation of prime minister haile mariam to sell a new leader of ethiopia since two thousand and twelve he said he was stepping down in a bid to smooth r

the years and they in fact have done it in russia too in one thousand nine hundred six when for us yeltsin looked like he was going to be losing an election to the communists well it was us political advisors that what it for him. let's move on to other news now and at least eighteen people have been killed in three suicide blasts at a fish market in northeastern nigeria the suicide bomber struck in condor go near the border state capital my bill that more than fifty people have been wounded and islands claim responsibility but the vocal had and has carried out attacks in the area for many years. a suspected serial killer has been sentenced to death in pakistan for the rape and murder of a seven year old girl was a knob on sardi's body was found in a garbage dump in january a week she was kidnapped a killing sparked a nationwide protests and criticism that the government was not doing enough to protect children a court handed down for death sentences to iran has to be tried in seven other cases. the british prime minister has called for a new security treaty with the european union by the

washington had made his predecessor boris yeltsin it's vicarious agent but putin now still had to get what he was after from the newly elected us president first the lifting of sanctions against his country secondly this is spent nato enlargement in july twenty seventeen he finally met donald trump. to be. just. at i level with an american president at last this personal meeting which putin considered crucial had been carefully orchestrated with the american team. to keep the russian for the good for a longer time off that. president putin himself. relations who was voting to establish some kind of personal chemistry. you see trump if you meet with him one on one if you're able to give him the impression that you click with him that you understand him that you think he's you know. brilliant. flatter him. she'll give you what you want americans to see sits on schwartz at time most of the media thank you. that would give you the key of why. they're meeting in in was interrupted because nobody want to meet president putin you know to talk to that so that's that was their point there we g