From: MSN NicknameEagle_wng  (Original Message)    Sent: 7/9/2005 5:09 AM
Jule, 09, 2005

Putin is a casual person in world politics

Putin is a casual person in world politics. He is not only an authoritative politician, but also a gambler, who has turned out to be in a wrong place, approve reporters of the newspaper “Washington Post”, spouses Peter Baker and Suzan Glasser in the book "The Eminence of the Kremlin".

Putin provoked a splash of discontent, when at the meeting with the British Prime-Minister Blair he remembered, that Africans had propensity to cannibalism. After he had been called to account for infringements of human rights in the Chechen Republic , he attacked the past of the African continent, the newspaper “Sun” writes, the translation of which is cited by the site Inopressa.ru.

Having given in to a fit of anger, Putin once again showed his unbalanced character and declared, "We know, that in some African countries not so long ago there was a practice "to have a snack" with your political opponents. We do not have such a practice, and in comparison with such countries I consider it to be incorrect".

The visitor from Britain was about to fall down from his chair with confusion, having heard this application from the lips of the former KGBist, the newspaper writes. Putin's behavior already for a long time does not need an expert estimation of high professionals, at the same time his allegorical attacks, in the form of, having become habitual for many formulations - "to wet in a toilet", need a use of special linguistic means.

A thin layer of the competent people, trained not only to listen attentively, but also to understand the told, for the sixth year marks the raised sensitivity of the Russian president to the slightest criticism in his address.

Journalists of the radio "Echo of Moscow" gave a more complete picture about Putin's private world; in their opinion intellectuality in dialogue with press is absolutely not peculiar to Putin and, probably, those are right, who say, that the first leader Putin's role in the childhood was the role of a hooligan and a rabble.

The late maturing of Putin is specified with his avoidance from the direct answer, by the method "I have not noticed". Usually children hide under a blanket or close eyes with fear like this. He has almost childish vivid imagination.

Therefore he is a “boy”, who can not know things known well enough. His own imaginations frighten him and lead him to sharp decisions, and excitation leads to psychological return to the past (including the language) - to the "boyish" ways of decision of conflicts, "And we…, and they…, and we…, and they…"

The arrogance and immodesty of the Russian president irritate the interlocutor, when he structures a picture of the reality, changing in vain the manner of the story. Putin is emotional, but at the same time he vividly reacts to emotional displays of other people, both positive, and negative ones, and usually uses the writing language, as means of concealment of emotions, the language of irony.

Putin passes to it, when he does not wish to speak, when it is unpleasant for him to speak. Or he begins to shirk the direct answer, answering polysyllabically. Putin is strongly subordinated to external circumstances - he does not model them himself, and depends on them.

They either please him, or drive him into a depression. Therefore Putin happens to be suppressed and unbalanced more often, he does not control himself well, especially, when the conversation is about the Chechen Republic .

It always attracts attention that he involuntarily stands up from the chair - maybe, not even noticing it. If he is sitting, it means, that it does not disturb him at all. He gets up a little, it means, everything is serious.

The complication of the events in the Caucasus (the Achilles heel of the security officer) causes in Putin fear, rage and desire to be fenced off. Putin always prefers simple decision to the complex one, and it always seems to him, that his desire should be realized despite of everything.

Putin constantly hopes that there will be a wonderful transformation independently of him, and the frog will turn into a princess. A young successor of the Russian throne of the last or before the last century, probably, could have thought like this.

Putin has guarding and superstitious love for plans and rules – his hope for a miracle is stronger than sober calculation. The hope for a miracle forces him to give irreplaceable promises. For example, has anything changed because of that Putin in irritation shouted out, "We shall wet gangsters in a toilet!"?

The prepotent feature in Putin's character is curiosity (property substantially childish one), overcoming, for example, moral imperatives. They usually serve at Putin as means of objection to the interlocutor, when he does not have other arguments of his good relation to this or that ambiguously estimated event.

His transforming of a question to the comic sphere is typical, but frequently enough these jokes are so flat, that they get venomous rudeness of an ordinary schoolboy. The penultimate masterpiece of Putin's rhetoric is the words about "ears of a dead donkey", which he promised to Latvia in exchange to the primordially belonging to it Pytalovskiy region (the Abrensky area).

Now this repetition of Bender was moved to the background - the memoirs about cannibalism in the countries of Africa eclipsed it. But Putin's roughness in the case with Latvia, probably, the reason of it is Putin's "difficult" childhood, when an over-age juvenile, who did not have friends among contemporaries, had nothing else to do, but to show his muscles to kids and to develop a pedagogical technique in their company.

Probably, therefore Putin likes to teach lessons very much, and in the manner of a strict teacher to pull up in ordering tone, "Listen to me!"

Alhazur Dzhalilov, IA DAYMOHK, 09.07.05
http://chechenpress.co.uk/english/news/2005/07/09/04.shtml