Russian President Vladimir Putin has left his mark in the international community over the past few months, but his motives remain unclear.

There is ongoing debate over whether Putin's moves are part of a larger master plan, or whether he is just acting impulsively day by day.

One former aid who was known as "Kremlin's Banker" firmly believes that the world's "most powerful" person is just winging it.

"Putin is not someone who sets strategic plans; he lives today," Sergei Pugachev said in an interview with Time.

Pugachev was a big player in Moscow until recent years. He founded Mozhprombank (International Industrial Bank) in Moscow in 1992, and within four years was a "Kremlin powerbroker," helping politicians win elections. Things went sour in 2010, and then the Kremlin started aggressively buying up his business.

Pugachev fled to London in 2011.

While Pugachev was a Kremlin favorite, he spent plenty of time with Putin. In fact, he "spoke to him almost every day probably" when Putin was St. Petersburg's mayor and Pugachev served as an adviser.

The former aide believes that Putin didn't have any master plan for his career. He just sort of ended up as president because "there weren't any other options," and his former boss was a democratic ex-mayor of St. Petersburg, according to the report by Oliver Bullough.

"He had no plans; he didn't aim to become president. He hadn't thought of that. He didn't plan to remain in the government at all," he added. 

Pugachev suggests that the Russian leader might not be making economic decisions strategically.

"Vladimir Putin does not understand economics. He does not like it. It is dry. It's boring to hear these reports, to read them," Pugachev says. "He likes clear things: Russia's moving ahead, how great everything is. He does not have a deep understanding of what is happening."

Right now, Russia is facing serious economic problems. Not to mention the rouble keeps plunging. Pugachev says Putin doesn't care.

"Putin's close circle understands that he likes good news, so they always bring him good news. Whatever is happening, it's good. For him, it's enough to be in a good mood," Pugachev told Time.

Check out the interview at Time >>

NOW WATCH: 11 Facts That Show How Different Russia Is From The Rest Of The World

Join the conversation about this story »

In some coffee shops in Crimea, you can no longer order a "Caffé Americano." It's now called "Caffé Crimea."

Tanya Lokot tweeted photos of the new trend. One coffee shop alerted customers to the change with a notice that reads: "Attention! Given the current geopolitical situation, we no longer have 'the Americano.' Please ask for the 'Crimea coffee.'"

Another coffee machine was advertising the "Russiano."

Check it out:

Oh Russia: Coffee places in Crimea now selling "Russiano" instead of "Americano."pic.twitter.com/ysBHQq8uvx

— Tanya Lokot (@tanyalokot) November 6, 2014

An Americano is espresso mixed with hot water.

American soldiers in Italy reportedly created the drink during World War II to make European espresso taste more like the coffee they were used to back home.

This ploy from Crimea is reminiscent of some restaurants in America referring to French fries as "freedom fries"as a reaction to France's opposition of the US invading Iraq.

Russia invaded Crimea, a peninsula that was formerly part of Ukraine, earlier this year. The US opposed the move.

Join the conversation about this story »

The Russian missile cruiser Moscow, also known as Moskva, will hold drills on air defense and the use of “rocket, artillery and torpedo weapons” in a rare visit to the South China Sea, the Russian defense ministry announced Wednesday in a statement.

The training exercises will also include practicing damage control tasks, according to the statement.

Moscow, an 11,500-ton cruiser, left Singapore after a short port call to conduct the drills in an unspecified area of the South China Sea. The Russian missile cruiser, which was launched in 1979 and commissioned in 1983, left a Russian naval base in Sevastapol, Crimea, on Sept. 6, and made port calls in the Greek ports of Corfu, Lefkada, Zakynthos and Argostalion. In mid-October, the Moscow crossed the Suez Canal into the Red Sea on its way to the port of Colombo in Sri Lanka, where it docked on Sept. 23.

Moscow’s rare fire drills in the South China Sea will be followed by a visit from Russian President Vladimir Putin to Beijing this month. During his visit, Putin, who was named the world’s most powerful person by Forbes in a report Wednesday, is expected to sign a bilateral cybersecurity agreement with China, the United States Naval Institute, or USNI, said in a report, adding that it is unclear if the deployment of the Moscow to the South China Sea and Putin’s Beijing trip are connected.

“That area of the South China Sea hasn’t been a core Russian operating area but it’s part of this expanded push from Russia that we’re seeing,” USNI quoted Eric Wertheim, an American naval expert, as saying. Wertheim believes that the Moscow’s deployment is a rare show of surface presence in the region by Russia.

Over the past year, Russia's military operations have had an increased focus on its aviation and submarine fleets rather than its surface fleets, the USNI report said, citing U.S. Chief of Naval Operations Admiral Jonathan Greenert.

On Wednesday, Russia successfully test-fired an intercontinental missile from a submerged Northern Fleet nuclear submarine from the Barents Sea to the Kura Range on the Kamchatka Peninsula in the country's far east. This is the second such test of a missile by Russia in a week after it successfully tested a new intercontinental ballistic missile on Oct. 29.

Join the conversation about this story »

Russia is sending additional military forces toward the border with eastern Ukraine, including units equipped with ballistic missiles, as part of Moscow’s ongoing destabilization effort in support of pro-Russian rebels.

US officials with access to intelligence reports said one Russian military unit equipped with short-range ballistic missiles was detected this week near eastern Ukraine, where Russia has launched a destabilization program following its military annexation of Ukraine’s Crimea in March.

The military movements coincided with the an unusual number of flights last week by Russian strategic nuclear bombers and aircraft along Europe’s northern coasts in a what NATO’s military commander called strategic “messaging” toward the West.

“My opinion is that they’re messaging us,” Gen. Phillip Breedlove, the commander, told reporters at the Pentagon this week. “They’re messaging us that they are a great power and that they have the ability to exert these kinds of influences in our thinking.”

The bomber flights included three days of paired Tu-95 bomber flights that were to have circumnavigated Europe from the north but instead were halted near Portugal.

US officials said Russia deployed several Il-78 refueling tankers in Egypt that were to resupply the bombers during flights over the Mediterranean, but those flights were scrapped for unknown reasons.

NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg expressed concerns about Russian military moves in Ukraine during remarks to reporters Tuesday in Brussels.

“Recently we are also seeing Russian troops moving closer to the border with Ukraine, and Russia continues to support the separatists by training them, by providing equipment, and supporting them also by having special forces, Russian special forces, inside the eastern parts of Ukraine,” Stoltenberg said.

Other officials said both intelligence and social media reports in recent days revealed an increase in Russian deployments.

The missile systems being deployed were described as conventionally armed, short-range ballistic missiles, multiple launch rocket systems, and BM-21 Grad multiple rocker launchers.

Additionally, Russian military forces are moving towed artillery pieces closer to the border.

One official said the display of military power is part of Moscow’s effort to reinforce “separatists” seeking to carve out a pro-Russian enclave in Eastern Ukraine.

The Russian “Spetsnaz” or special forces commandos are already inside the country, but the ground forces as of Wednesday appeared to be staging at the border.

Russian military forces in Ukraine number around 300 commandos. “These are not fighting formations. These are formations and specialists that are in there doing training and equipping of the separatist forces,” Breedlove said.

The buildup is either part of a plan for military escalation, or a coordinated pressure tactic by Moscow to force Ukraine to make concessions to the rebels, officials said.

Rebel groups in the region have made repeated threats to take control of the key southeastern Ukrainian port of Mariupol and other territory unless the Ukrainian government agrees to make changes in the current separation line.

“The build up may just be a pressure tactic to force such concessions, or it may presage further escalation,” one official said.

Rebels in eastern Ukraine recently held elections that Ukraine and NATO dismissed as illegal. New charges were raised in Kiev Wednesday about violations of a peace agreement reached in Belarus in September.

Breedlove said Monday there was no “huge change” in Russian deployments. Currently about seven battalion task groups are stationed near the border with Ukraine.

“Some of those formations have moved closer to the border,” he said. “We believe that was probably to bring some pressure on and make sure that the elections went according to the separatist plans; we’ll look now to see if they pull back from the border into their previous border locations.”

“We have now realistically entered the phase of a ‘frozen conflict,’” Yury Yakimenko, a political analyst at Ukraine’s Razumkov political research center told Reuters. The term frozen conflict has been applied to other former Soviet Republics where separatists are being backed by Russian forces.

Russia’s aggression against Ukraine is part of a program by Russian President Vladimir Putin to gain control or hegemony over former Soviet bloc states described as the “near abroad.”

Putin is seeking to restore Russian power with territorial seizures, along with a large-scale nuclear and conventional forces buildup.

Pentagon spokeswoman Eileen M. Lainez said Russian forces and equipment remain on Ukraine’s border and on Ukrainian territory in violation of international law. “We again call on Russian authorities and the separatists they back to abide by their commitments under the Sept. 5 ceasefire agreement and the Sept. 19 implementing agreement,” she said.

Breedlove said the Russians in the past have conducted small-scale bomber flights.

“And what you saw this past week was a larger, more complex formation of aircraft carrying out a little deeper and, I would say, a little bit more provocative flight path,” he said. “And so it is a concern.”

The flights are destabilizing and “problematic,” Breedlove said.

Stoltenberg, the NATO secretary general, also voiced concerns about the Russian bomber flights.

“When it comes to the increased Russian military activity, both in the air but also along the borders of Ukraine, I think that what we see is, especially when it comes to increased air activity of Russian planes, is that they are showing strength, and what we are doing is what we are supposed to do: we are intercepting the Russian planes, whether it is in the Atlantic Sea or the Baltic Sea or in the Black Sea,” he said.

Breedlove said he has discussed with US military chiefs the idea of moving additional troops and supplies closer to Russia as a result of “increased pressure that we feel in Eastern Europe now and because of the assurance measures that we are taking in the Baltics, in Poland, in Romania.”

“I believe there is a requirement for rotational forces in the future until we see the current situation begin to normalize,” he said.

Breedlove said the halt in the conflict in Ukraine has been “pretty much a cease-fire in name only.”

“There continue to be sporadic engagements in and around the cease-fire zone,” he said. “And the second thing that I would say that has changed is we have seen a general trend towards a hardening of this line of demarcation and much more softening of the actual Ukraine-Russia border.”

Russia’s border with Ukraine in the east is open and completely porous. As a result, Russian military equipment is flowing back and forth the border

“Russia continues to resupply the Russian-backed separatists in eastern Ukraine,” Breedlove said.

SEE ALSO: Putin may just be winging it

Join the conversation about this story »

The Kremlin accused the United States on Thursday of firing a broadside against President Vladimir Putin by opening a money-laundering investigation into a member of his inner circle.

The probe into Gennady Timchenko, a co-founder of the Gunvor trading house who is also under sanctions over the crisis in Ukraine, is likely to increase tension between Moscow and the West in their worst standoff since the Cold War.

Dmitry Peskov, Putin's press secretary, told reporters the Kremlin knew no details of the case "and we cannot express anything but bewilderment."

"What is happening in the various 'sanction actions' is hard to explain and very often is aimed directly against Putin," he said. "This is yet another example of this - though I don't know how reliable the information is - this theme when the attacks on Russia focus on the leader of the country, Putin himself."

Putin did not comment on what documents and people familiar with the matter say is an investigation by the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Eastern District of New York into Timchenko and Gunvor involving alleged oil trading and money-laundering.

Timchenko< was among the first Russians to face sanctions imposed following Russia's annexation of Crimea from Ukraine in March and later over Moscow's wider role in the crisis in the crisis in Ukraine.

Volga Group, a holding company for Timchenko assets, said in a statement the billionaire was not aware of any investigation against him.

"Mr Timchenko has not received any notification from the U.S. law enforcement bodies (including the U.S. Attorney’s office for the Eastern district of New York or the U.S. Department of Justice) on any investigation into his activities, Volga Group said in a written statement.

"Mr Timchenko has always conducted his business activities in strict compliance with the law and the highest standards of business ethics.

Bitter Conflict

U.S. authorities are investigating transactions in which Gunvor Group, which was co-founded by Timchenko, allegedly bought oil from Russia's Rosneft and sold it to third parties, sources said.

According to a Gunvor bond offering from 2013, the U.S. Attorney's office in Brooklyn served a subpoena on its Castor Americas unit for documents related to its oil trading activities. Prosecutors also sent subpoenas to three Castor employees and one employee of Gunvor, the offering circular said.

Gunvor told Reuters it had never been an intermediary between a buyer and a seller, "and certainly not for Rosneft. That is factually incorrect. We have never worked this way, and will never work this way."

Gunvor also said it had not been notified of any investigation involving the company, saying it was caught in "political crossfire."

Relations between Moscow and Washington have deteriorated sharply since a Russia-backed president was ousted in Kiev in February after street protests over his decision to spurn a trade and political pact with the European Union.

Russia accuses the West of being behind what it calls an anti-constitutional coup in Kiev and denies sending weapons and soldiers to support rebels who rose up in eastern Ukraine against Kiev's rule in mid-April.

Tensions remain high, with a ceasefire agreement in Ukraine in tatters following elections of separatist leaders in the east which Moscow has refused to condemn.

Hours after Washington imposed sanctions on Putin associates in March, Swiss-based Gunvor announced that Timchenko had sold his stake in the firm to Chief Executive Officer Torbjorn Tornqvist earlier that week.

"Nevertheless Mr Timchenko is confident that Gunvor has always been fully compliant with applicable legal requirements, as is confirmed, in particular, by the long-standing relationships between Gunvor and many of the world’s major financial institutions that abide to the strictest compliance and anti-money laundering standards," Volga Group said.

The report said the transactions predated U.S. sanctions against Russia introduced in March on Timchenko and others over the Ukraine crisis. Timchenko is also co-owner of Russia's No. 2 gas producer Novatek.

Transfers of funds related to the transactions could constitute illegal money laundering if the funds were found to have originated from illicit activity such as, for example, irregular sales of state assets such as oil, the newspaper said.

The newspaper cited one source as saying the probe was also examining whether any of Putin's personal wealth was connected to allegedly illicit funds.

The U.S. Treasury has said Putin has investments in Gunvor and may have access to Gunvor's funds. Both the company and the Kremlin have strenuously denied those allegations.

"When it comes to President Putin, he does not and never has had any ownership, beneficial or otherwise in Gunvor. He is not a beneficiary of Gunvor or its activities, directly or indirectly," Gunvor said on Thursday.

(Additional reporting by Vladimir Soldatkin, Katya Golubkova and Timothy Heritage in Moscow, Aruna Viswanatha in Washington and Emily Flitter in New York; Writing by Timothy Heritage; Editing by Sophie Walker)

Join the conversation about this story »

Russian President Vladimir Putin took a quick break from politics to describe the 'the meaning of life' at the 15th Congress of the Russian Geographical Society.

"In general, love is the whole meaning of life, of being. Love of family, of children, and of the Motherland. It is such a multifaceted phenomenon that is the basis of all our actions," he said in the conclusion of a speech at the event, reports RIA Novosti.

Additionally, he expressed his hope that the Russian Geographical Society might be able to "strengthen the love for the Fatherland," according to RIA Novosti. (The words for 'Fatherland' and 'Motherland' are interchangeable synonyms in Russian.)

Love for the Fatherland "is exactly that most important task to which we must all strive towards, and I am absolutely convinced that success awaits us," he told the RGS.

Putin is the chairman of the board of trustees of the Russian Geographical Society.

(h/t Alec Luhn)

SEE ALSO: Russian Tanks Are Rolling Into Ukraine Again ...

Join the conversation about this story »

The rouble was caught in a tug-of-war Friday, falling 3% in early trading before recovering its losses later in the day. At the time of writing it was struggling to hold onto its gains against the dollar.

Over the past few months Russia's currency has been grinding downward against both the dollar and the euro as oil prices fell and the country's economy weakened on the back of international sanctions over the crisis in Ukraine. This week, however, the rouble moved from worrying to critical, falling 11%, its biggest weekly loss since the aftermath of the country's 1998 default.

Dr. Nicholas Spiro, managing director of Spiro Sovereign Strategy, writes in a note:

Russia has a full-blown currency crisis on its hands. This is an all too familiar test of wills between a central bank that's perceived to have lost credibility and increasingly bearish investors who have been scenting blood for some time now. Everything that Russia's central bank has done up until now — stepping up the pace of its interventions and hiking interest rates aggressively — has patently failed to stabilise the rouble.

The Russian central bank appeared to effectively throw in the towel by announcing the "abandonment of unlimited foreign exchange interventions" on Wednesday. This took away a key support for the currency and appeared to send it into free fall.

However, the central bank's attempt to allow the rouble to free float is understandable considering the country's international reserves fell by $26 billion through October. Most of this was spent buying up roubles in an unsuccessful effort to halt the currency's slide.

Rumours were swirling Friday that the bank had reentered the fray to prevent a deeper rouble collapse that could have threatened financial stability in the country. This could explain the apparent lack of direction in the USDRUB market, if the central bank is attempting to wrest control back from currency traders.

Below is the latest statement from the central bank:

In recent months, the dynamics of the ruble exchange rate and its impact on the financial and real sectors of the economy is causing concern. The observed weakening of the ruble caused by a number of fundamental factors, primarily, lower oil prices and limited access to external capital markets. In order to limit the rate of depreciation of the ruble during October the Bank of Russia intervened in the amount of $30 billion ... Accordingly, taking into account the package of measures and the recent depreciation further weakening of the ruble is not required to achieve a balance of payments. In recent days, there are signs of excessive pressure, which creates conditions for the formation of financial stability risks. In these circumstances, the Bank of Russia is ready to increase foreign exchange intervention at any moment, and to use other financial market instruments at its disposal.

If the central bank fails, however, the risks are large. Next month Russian corporates will have to pay back $35 billion of foreign-currency-denominated debt, a large chunk of the $140 billion due for repayment over the next 12 months. In January, the December payment would have cost them 1.15 trillion roubles to settle. At current levels the same bill would be 1.63 trillion — or almost 500 billion roubles more.

According to Bank of America Merrill Lynch, of the 17 largest foreign-currency bond issuers in its Russian corporate bond index, only nine had enough cash to cover at least 80% of the outstanding debt. Of them, only seven had enough cash to cover the full amount.

We already know that Rosneft requested 2 trillion roubles from the state National Wealth Fund to help it weather current market turmoil. The request was refused, with Russia's Finance Minister Anton Siluanov saying the scale of the request was impossible to meet without putting a huge strain on the country's reserves.

Whether more companies will now come out of the woodwork to request support is an open question. 

Join the conversation about this story »

As the director of this country’s oldest museum of political repression, Vasiliy Khanevich spends his days inside a musty Siberian basement some 2,000 miles east of Moscow, surrounded by photographs of the dead.

His salary is modest and the state-owned museum he runs, located in the cramped detention center of a former state security building, makes no money.

But none of that bothers him.

What upsets stocky, mustachioed Khanevich is that the rest of Russia is caught in a patriotic frenzy glorifying the Soviet Union’s heroic achievements.

“People forget a lot of details about the ‘bright Soviet past,’” Khanevich says, “about the shortages, the poverty and many, many other things.”

With Russia locked in a geopolitical standoff with the West over Ukraine, the Kremlin is selectively deploying historical memory in a bid to bolster support for President Vladimir Putin and his policies.

That often means glossing over its most painful moments, such as the terror that flourished under Soviet dictator Josef Stalin.

Instead it’s resurrecting a Soviet-style narrative with the help of state-run media, casting Russia as a righteous bulwark against Western influence. The overarching theme is always “victory.”

Officials and other government supporters here have drawn increasingly absurd parallels between the seizure of eastern Ukraine by Russian-backed gunmen and the Soviet Union’s defeat of Nazi Germany — by far the most pivotal moment in that country’s history.

Critical examination of the Soviet past is rarely an option, and Putin himself typically sets the tone.

In a meeting with historians on Wednesday, he dismissed Western criticism of the 1939 non-aggression agreement between the Soviets and Nazi Germany, the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact that paved the way for Soviet Union’s forcible occupation of the Baltic states and half of Poland.

“They say: ‘Oh, how bad,’” Putin told the audience. “But what’s so wrong here if the Soviet Union did not want to fight?”

Arseny Roginsky, chairman of the venerated rights group Memorial, says such official messages justifying Soviet policy have left Russians confused about the past, especially because de-communization never occurred here.

He points to Stalin’s Great Terror of 1937-38, when more than a million were killed or imprisoned, saying many are reluctant to pin blame on the Soviet system at large.

“On one hand, they understand the Terror happened, and that it was bad,” Roginsky says. “But on the other, they say, ‘Our government was always decent.’”

“So who is to blame?” he adds. “A crime took place, but there’s no perpetrator.”

The absence explains why Stalin remains one of the most popular historical figures for Russians, credited for defeating the Nazis and industrializing the Soviet Union.

A recent poll by the official Public Opinion Foundation found that 89 percent of Russians discuss their country’s history of repression only rarely or not at all. Meanwhile, a third of the population believes the media discuss the topic “too much.”

Even more ominously, the same poll also found that 48 percent expect a return of Soviet-style repression.

And it’s not just public opinion: Veteran dissidents see signs of what they say are familiar Soviet tactics making a comeback.

Critics have accused the authorities of staging politically charged show trials against protesters and even ordering alleged perpetrators to mental hospitals.

Sergei Grigoryants, an activist who spent nearly a decade in Soviet prisons, says the Kremlin’s current critics are met with a wave of “total intimidation” that may only worsen.

“Unfortunately, I’m afraid that the forms [of intimidation] used today will be deemed insufficient by the authorities pretty soon,” he told Radio Liberty late last month.

Some of that pressure is being exerted on those encouraging Russians to dig deeper into their history.

The most prominent example is an official campaign against Roginsky’s Memorial, the country’s oldest civil rights group and the lone symbol of Russia’s flagging effort to deal with its past.

Founded during the Soviet Union’s twilight years to shed light on the regime’s crimes, it’s also played a crucial role in uncovering human rights abuses in post-Soviet Russia.

The group is has gotten used to official harassment.

In recent years, it’s been hit with allegations of treachery and collusion with foreign powers seeking to foment unrest here — familiar accusations for Putin’s critics.

But now Memorial faces a Supreme Court hearing next week that could strip the organization of its legal status. It comes after Russia’s Justice Ministry asked the court last month to “liquidate” Memorial.

Roginsky says the move would unleash a bureaucratic nightmare on his organization, which maintains a vast network of regional groups, but that it would not stop their activity.

“The [regional] organizations will reregister, and we’ll keep thinking about how to reunite again,” he says.

The campaign is especially painful for veteran activists like Khanevich, who runs the Tomsk chapter of Memorial and has spent more than two decades uncovering Soviet crimes.

For him and other locals here in Siberia, the issue of historical memory hits home particularly hard: virtually everyone was affected in one way or another by the regime’s penchant for mass executions, arbitrary detentions, and forced exile.

In the Tomsk region alone, at least half a million people fell victim to Soviet repression. That number includes only those who were officially rehabilitated, Khanevich says.

From the four-chamber prison that now houses his museum, around 11,000 people were sent to their deaths in front of firing squads on Stalin’s orders.

That’s partly why he believes politics shouldn’t be involved in addressing historical memory.

“The time has come to drop the political insinuations regarding this question and simply think about the millions of people who were lost,” he says.

“No matter what you think of this part of history,” he adds, “it’s impossible to hush it up.”

Join the conversation about this story »

On Monday, I posted my nominees for ten Cold War histories worth reading.

But many people don’t have the time or patience to plow through comprehensive histories.

So for The Water's Edge readers looking to save time, here is a short course on the history of the Cold War using forty of the most memorable quotations from that era.

“I can deal with Stalin. He is honest, but smart as hell.” — President Harry Truman, diary entry, July 17, 1945.

“In summary, we have here [in the Soviet Union] a political force committed fanatically to the belief that with US there can be no permanent modus vivendi that it is desirable and necessary that the internal harmony of our society be disrupted, our traditional way of life be destroyed, the international authority of our state be broken, if Soviet power is to be secure. This political force has complete power of disposition over energies of one of world’s greatest peoples and resources of world’s richest national territory, and is borne along by deep and powerful currents of Russian nationalism.” — George Kennan, chargé d’affaires at the US embassy in Moscow in an official cable to the US State Department (“The Long Telegram”), February 22, 1946.

“From Stettin in the Baltic to Trieste in the Adriatic an iron curtain has descended across the Continent.”— Winston Churchill, address at Westminster College, Fulton, Missouri, March 5, 1946.

“I believe that it must be the policy of the United States to support free peoples who are resisting attempted subjugation by armed minorities or by outside pressures. I believe that we must assist free peoples to work out their own destinies in their own way. I believe that our help should be primarily through economic and financial aid which is essential to economic stability and orderly political processes. ”— President Harry Truman, speech to a joint session of Congress, announcing what becomes known as the Truman Doctrine, March 12, 1947.

“The United States should do whatever it is able to do to assist in the return of normal economic health in the world, without which there can be no political stability and no assured peace.” — Secretary of State George C. Marshall, commencement address at Harvard University that unveils the Marshall Plan, June 5, 1947.

“The main element of any United States policy toward the Soviet Union must be that of a long-term, patient but firm and vigilant containment of Russian expansive tendencies.” — “X” (George Kennan), Foreign Affairs, July 1, 1947.

“The defensive perimeter [of the United States in East Asia] runs along the Aleutians to Japan and then goes to the Ryukyus.” — Dean Acheson, speech to the National Press Club that leaves South Korea outside the U.S. defense perimeter, January 12, 1950.

“While I cannot take the time to name all the men in the State Department who have been named as members of the Communist Party and members of a spy ring, I have here in my hand a list of 205.” — Sen. Joseph McCarthy, speech at the Women’s Republican Club of Wheeling, West Virginia, February 9, 1950.

“The whole success of the proposed program hangs ultimately on recognition by this Government, the American people, and all free peoples, that the cold war is in fact a real war in which the survival of the free world is at stake.” — NSC-68, April 7 (or 14), 1950.

“If we let Korea down, the Soviet[s] will keep right on going and swallow up one [place] after another.” — President Harry Truman, remarks at his first meeting with his advisors after learning that North Korea had invaded South Korea, June 25, 1950.

“Mr. Stevenson has a degree alright – a PhD from the Acheson College of Cowardly Communist Containment.” — Vice President Richard Nixon, attacking the Democratic presidential nominee, Adlai Stevenson, during the 1952 election.

“It will begin with its President taking a simple, firm resolution. The resolution will be: To forego the diversions of politics and to concentrate on the job of ending the Korean war – until that job is honorably done. That job requires a personal trip to Korea. I shall make that trip. Only in that way could I learn how best to serve the American people in the cause of peace. I shall go to Korea.” — Republican presidential nominee Dwight D. Eisenhower laying out his plan for ending the Korean War, October 25, 1952.

“Until this moment, Senator, I think I never really gauged your cruelty or your recklessness …. Let us not assassinate this lad further, senator. You have done enough. Have you no sense of decency?” — Lawyer Joseph Welch defending one of his colleagues against an attack from Sen. Joseph McCarthy at the Army-McCarthy hearings, June 9, 1954.

“Finally, you have broader considerations that might follow what you would call the ‘falling domino’ principle. You have a row of dominoes set up, you knock over the first one, and what will happen to the last one is the certainty that it will go over very quickly.” — President Dwight D. Eisenhower, press conference, April 7, 1954.

“If you don’t like us, don’t accept our invitations and don’t invite us to come to see you. Whether you like it or not, history is on our side. We will bury you.” — Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev, November 18, 1956.

“In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists, and will persist.” —President Dwight D. Eisenhower, farewell address, January 17, 1961.

“Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe to assure the survival and the success of liberty.” — President John F. Kennedy, inaugural address, January 20, 1961.

“Nobody intends to put up a wall!” — East German Premier Walter Ubricht, June 15, 1961, less than two months before construction of the Berlin Wall begins.

“This Government, as promised, has maintained the closest surveillance of the Soviet Military buildup on the island of Cuba. Within the past week, unmistakable evidence has established the fact that a series of offensive missile sites is now in preparation on that imprisoned island. The purpose of these bases can be none other than to provide a nuclear strike capability against the Western Hemisphere.” — President John F. Kennedy, address to the nation on the Cuban Missile Crisis, October 22, 1962.

“We’re eyeball to eyeball … and I think the other fellow just blinked.” — Secretary of State Dean Rusk to National Security Advisor McGeorge Bundy upon learning that Soviet ships headed toward Cuba had stopped dead in the water, October 24, 1962.

“All free men, wherever they may live, are citizens of Berlin, and therefore, as a free man, I take pride in the words, Ich bin ein Berliner.” — President John F. Kennedy, speech to the people of West Berlin, June 26, 1963.

“I believe this resolution to be a historic mistake. I believe that within the next century, future generations will look with dismay and great disappointment upon a Congress which is now about to mistake such a historic mistake.” — Sen. Wayne Morse (D-OR) on the Senate’s impending vote to adopt the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution, August 7, 1964.

“We are not about to send American boys 9 or 10,000 miles away from home to do what Asian boys ought to be doing for themselves.” — President Lyndon Johnson, speech at Akron University, October 21, 1964.

“We do this in order to slow down aggression. We do this to increase the confidence of the brave people of South Vietnam who have bravely born this brutal battle for so many years with so many casualties. And we do this to convince the leaders of North Vietnam — and all who seek to share their conquest — of a simple fact: We will not be defeated. We will not grow tired. We will not withdraw either openly or under the cloak of a meaningless agreement.” — President Lyndon Johnson, address to the nation on US war aims in Vietnam, April 7, 1965.

“Declare the United States the winner and begin de-escalation.” — Sen. George Aiken (R-VT) offering advice to President Lyndon Johnson on how to handle the politics of reducing the US commitment in Vietnam, October 19, 1966.

“But it is increasingly clear to this reporter that the only rational way out then will be to negotiate, not as victors, but as an honorable people who lived up to their pledge to defend democracy, and did the best they could.” — Walter Cronkite, CBS Evening News, February 27, 1968.

“Accordingly, I shall not seek, and I will not accept, the nomination of my party for another term as your President.” — President Lyndon Johnson, address to the nation, March 31, 1968.

“And so tonight — to you, the great silent majority of my fellow Americans — I ask for your support.” — President Richard Nixon, address to the nation asking for support for his Vietnam policy, November 3, 1969.

“It is in that spirit, the spirit of ’76, that I ask you to rise and join me in a toast to Chairman Mao, to Premier Chou, to the people of our two countries, and to the hope of our children that peace and harmony can be the legacy of our generation to theirs.” — President Richard Nixon, toast on his visit to China, February 25, 1972.

“From secrecy and deception in high places; come home, America. From military spending so wasteful that it weakens our nation; come home, America. From the entrenchment of special privileges in tax favoritism; from the waste of idle lands to the joy of useful labor; from the prejudice based on race and sex; from the loneliness of the aging poor and the despair of the neglected sick — come home, America.” — Sen. George McGovern (D-SD), speech accepting the Democratic nomination for president, July 14, 1972.

“During the day on Monday, Washington time, the airport at Saigon came under persistent rocket as well as artillery fire and was effectively closed. The military situation in the area deteriorated rapidly. I therefore ordered the evacuation of all American personnel remaining in South Vietnam.” — President Gerald Ford’s statement following evacuation of United States personnel from the Republic of Vietnam announcing the Fall of Saigon, April 29, 1975.

“Under Lenin, the Soviet Union was like a religious revival, under Stalin like a prison, under Khrushchev like a circus, and under Brezhnev like the US Post Office.” — National Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski at a cabinet meeting, as recorded in President Jimmy Carter’s diary, November 7, 1977.

“My opinion of the Russians has changed most drastically in the last week than even (sic) the two-and-a-half years before that. It’s only now dawning upon the world the magnitude of the action that the Soviets undertook in invading Afghanistan.” — President Jimmy Carter, interview with ABC News, December 31, 1979.

“Well, the task I’ve set forth will long outlive our own generation. But together, we too have come through the worst. Let us now begin a major effort to secure the best — a crusade for freedom that will engage the faith and fortitude of the next generation. For the sake of peace and justice, let us move toward a world in which all people are at last free to determine their own destiny.” — President Ronald Reagan, speech to the British Parliament at Westminster Hall, June 8, 1982.

“What if free people could live secure in the knowledge that their security did not rest upon the threat of instant US retaliation to deter a Soviet attack, that we could intercept and destroy strategic ballistic missiles before they reached our own soil or that of our allies?” — President Ronald Reagan, address to the nation on defense and national security that launches the Strategic Defense Initiative, March 23, 1983.

“My fellow Americans, I am pleased to tell you today that I’ve signed legislation that will outlaw Russia forever. We begin bombing in five minutes.” — President Ronald Reagan during a microphone test before a radio address, August 11, 1984.

“I like Mr. Gorbachev. We can do business together.”— British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, BBC interview, December 17, 1984.

“Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!” — President Ronald Reagan, speech at the Brandenburg Gate in West Berlin, June 12, 1987.

“The threat of world war is no more.” — Soviet Premier Mikhail Gorbachev on the ending of the Cold War December, 1991.

“But the biggest thing that has happened in the world in my life, in our lives, is this: By the grace of God, America won the Cold War.” — President George H.W. Bush, State of the Union address, January 28, 1992.

SEE ALSO: The biggest human-made explosion in history happened 53 years ago

Join the conversation about this story »

The 2014 World Chess Championship begins on Saturday in Sochi, Russia (yes, that Sochi). It's a rematch, and an unexpected one, between the current World Champion, Norway's Magnus Carlsen, and the former titleholder, Viswanathan Anand of India.

Last year, on Anand's home turf in Chennai, Carlsen — then just 22 years old — took the crown away from the 5-time champ. The match was scheduled for 12 games, but Carlsen needed only 10 to become the first World Champion from the West since Bobby Fischer in 1972.

Carlsen, who has since set the chess world on fire and become the global face of the game, defeated Anand in crushing fashion, losing no games and scoring 3 decisive wins.  

The chess cognoscenti figured that Anand would retire at 44, but he staged an impressive comeback at this year's Candidates Tournament and won the right to reclaim the title. It wasn't clear until just about a month ago that he would even be facing Carlsen across the board: the now 23-year-old became embroiled in a dispute with the World Championship's governing body, the World Chess Federation (FIDE). Carlsen was unhappy about the prize money (less than what he was playing for in Chennai) and the venue (a symbol of corrupt FIDE's connection with corrupt Vladimir Putin).

The dispute was resolved and the two Super Grandmasters will now play another 12-game match, plus tiebreakers if it comes to that. Carlsen is the highest-rated player in the world at 2863. Anand is substantially lower, at 2792. This means that, statistically, Carlsen should win. But of of course, Anand cut a swath through younger and higher-rated players at the Candidates Tournament, and some observers expect his form to be better than last year.

Wins will count for 1 point, losses 0, and draws half a point. At FiveThirtyEight, Oliver Roeder has broken down the odds. The first game is Nov. 8, and the match could run nearly through the end of the month, a game per day with a number of break days.

So what should you look for, if you watch the games live online or review them later?

1. Does Carlsen seem as dominant coming in this year as he did last year?

Carlsen was the undisputed King of Chess in 2013. He had surpassed Garry Kasparov's highest-ever rating, had beaten everyone at the upper-reaches of the chess hierarchy, was modeling for G-Star Raw and being profiled by U.S. TV shows and magazines, and — most importantly — was intimidating. It looked like it was his time. And as it turns out, it was.

A year later, Carlsen is as dominant as ever but there have been some wobbles. The U.S. number one (and world number nine), Hiraku Nakamura, nearly defeated him by pursuing an attacking line similar to one that Anand attempted, unsuccessfully, in Chennai. The Italian number one (world number two), Fabiano Caruana, defeated Carlsen in a tournament in St. Louis en route  to a decimation of the chess elite, a performance that had many comparing the 22-year-old Caruana to Fischer (Seth Stevenson chronicled the performance for Slate). There's a lot of people who think that Carlsen-Caruana, a showdown between the world number one and world number two, should be the World Chess Championship matchup.

In any case, Carlsen's form of late hasn't been quite as daunting as in 2013, so if Anand can make a few more games into tactical battles, avoiding draws (tough to do at the Super GM level) and grueling endgames (a Carlsen specialty), then he might have a shot.

2. Will Anand play aggressively from the first game?

Last year's match began with four draws, then two wins by Carlsen, which spelled the end of Anand. Anand is a powerful player who can play "universal" chess, attacking and defending. At his age, however, he probably won't want to make the mistake his did in 2013, accepting early draws to test Carlsen's ability to handle the pressure of the event.

Anand literally has nothing to lose at this point in his career, so he might as well rip into Carlsen from the get-go and see if he can pursue some sharp lines and dynamic positions, playing free-flowing chess. Anything to prevent long battles and the type of grinding endgames where Carlsen can use his computer-like positional understanding to play so precisely that Anand will crack.

3. Will openings matter?

Prior to Carlsen, Grandmaster-level play was all about preparation and the first 10-15 moves of the game, so-called "opening theory." The book on Carlsen in 2013, however, was that he didn't want to get bogged down in openings and would rather just get a more-or-less even position and then "play chess," challenging his opponents to avoid errors over the course of hours and hours at the board. If it goes this way again in Sochi, Anand will likely lose as Carlsen is still the best endgame player around and very good at turning lost positions into draws and even wins. 

But if Anand can entice Carlsen to allow the openings to yield sharp positions, he may be able to create some middle-game opportunities and force Carlsen defend creatively and counterattack, playing serve-and-volley rather than grinding everything out from the baseline.

It could be fantastic contest. Or it could fizzle. But I have a feeling we're going to know in the first game or two what to expect from the match.

I'll be following the games and writing short summaries the day after, so check back for results and a bit of analysis.

SEE ALSO: 22-YEAR-OLD MAGNUS CARLSEN WINS WORLD CHESS CHAMPIONSHIP — And Chess Enters A Whole New Era

Join the conversation about this story »

US lawmakers have urged NATO to acquire French-built warships after France indicated that it may not hand over the controversial Mistral helicopter carriers to Russia.

The US and Western powers have hit Russia with several sanctions since the latter annexed the Crimean peninsula, and have criticized President Vladimir Putin's policies involving Ukraine.

In a letter to NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg, US lawmakers argued that purchasing the Mistral-Class warships would keep them from augmenting Russia's military resources.

The deal would also prevent a financial loss for France, which has temporarily suspended the sale of the warships to Russia, in response to international indignation over Moscow’s involvement in the Ukrainian conflict, The Hill reported.

“Sensitive to the financial burden that France may incur should it rightly refuse to transfer these warships to Russia, we renew our call that NATO purchase or lease the warships as a common naval asset,” the lawmakers wrote in the letter, as quoted by The Hill. “Such a decisive move by NATO is not without precedent and would show President Putin that our rhetorical resolve is matched by our actual resolve and that this Alliance will not tolerate or abet his dangerous actions in Europe.”

The letter was signed by eight lawmakers, including House Foreign Affairs Committee ranking member Eliot Engel (D-NY), Reps. Mike Turner (R-Ohio), Bill Keating (D-Mass.), Mike Rogers (R-Ala.), Gerry Connolly (D-Va.), Steve Chabot (R-Ohio), Steve Cohen (D-Tenn.) and Jim Gerlach (R-Pa.), according to The Hill.

French Prime Minister Manuel Valls announced Thursday that the conditions for the delivery of the Mistral helicopter carrier ships to Russia have not been met, while a source in the Russian defense ministry said that the Russian government would wait until the end of 2014 for the final decision over the transfer of the first Mistral ship, RIA Novosti reported on Friday.

According to the terms of a $1.5 billion deal struck between Russia and France in June 2011, the first vessel, known as the “Vladivostok,” is scheduled to be delivered to Russia by the end of 2014, while the second ship, known as the “Sevastopol,” is to be handed over in 2015.

The Hill’s report comes at a time when Canada too has been reported as a potential destination for the French vessels. French President François Hollande's visit to Canada last week helped fuel this theory.

“Canada or NATO should buy these ships from France, leaving the Russians to await a further slot on the list, which good behavior would assure,” Canadian Senator Hugh Segal had said publicly in May. 

SEE ALSO: Russia is fighting an information war over the history of the Soviet Union

Join the conversation about this story »

Forbes came out with its list of the most powerful people in the world earlier this week. 

US President Barack Obama came in second. 

Russian President Vladimir Putin came in first. 

While Forbes obviously doesn't have the final say on world power, it is compelling to investigate why Putin, the ruler of a faltering quasi-republic, is considered the most powerful person alive. 

For one, he has a remarkable grip on power. He became prime minister in 1999. That gig lasted until 2000, when he switched to president, which lasted until 2008. Then he became prime minister again — until 2012. He then went back to being the president of Russia, an office he's held since May 2012. 

He's effectively run the world's largest country by landmass for 15 years. In roughly the same period, the US has cycled through Clinton, Bush, and Obama administrations.

While American presidents struggle with a foot-dragging Congress, Putin seems to do whatever he wants.

You could argue that, this year, Putin has executed the most flagrant displays of power yet. 

Forbes editor Caroline Howard lists a few of his 2014 highlights: 

• Putin annexed Crimea.

• Putin started a proxy war in Ukraine.

• Putin landed a $70 billion gas pipeline deal with China.

But wait, there's more: Putin continues to keep European energy in a chokehold, and he hosted a (mostly) successful winter Olympics. Putin has even figured out the meaning of life, as expressed during the 15th Congress of the Russian Geographical Society.

"In general, love is the whole meaning of life, of being," Putin said. "[Love for Russia] is exactly that most important task to which we must all strive towards, and I am absolutely convinced that success awaits us."

In short, Putin went for it in 2014.

And he isn't backing down from his ambitions, no matter what Obama, David Cameron, and the rest of the gang have to say. 

"The bear isn't asking anyone for permission,"Putin said of Russia in another recent speech."The bear is considered a strong and a very traditional animal ... (and) will not surrender."  

SEE ALSO: The 25 Most Powerful People In The World, According To Forbes

Join the conversation about this story »

The lead spokeswoman for newly installed EU foreign policy chief Frederica Mogherini is married to a partner in a Brussels public relations firm that lobbies for Russian state-owned natural-gas monopoly Gazprom.

Spokesperson Catherine Ray married Thomas Barros-Tastetsin France on October 19, 2013. Barros-Tastets is a partner in the Brussels branch of the G+ lobbying firm. His online biography states that he "helps to coordinate the European part of a worldwide consortium which advises a major international energy company on communications and public affairs."

Although the "major international energy company" is not named, Barros-Tastets is frequently referenced in the media as "a consultant in European public affairs for Gazprom." An August 2013 announcement that he was appointed a partner at G+ states that he "is an adviser to Gazprom in its dealings with the EU competition authorities."

The EU's Transparency Register lists "Diversified Energy Communications (for Gazprom Export)" as one of G+'s major clients, generating annual turnover of between 300,000 and 350,000 euros. Barros-Tastets is listed there as one of the firm's employees "accredited for access to European Parliament premises."

Barros-Tastets was seen in the company of Russian Energy Minister Aleksandr Novak in Brussels on October 29, when Novak was in town for gas negotiations with EU and Ukrainian officials.

Margaritis Schinas, the chief spokesman of the European Commission, who participated in the process of vetting Ray for her position, told RFE/RL in written comments that Ray informed the EU about her husband's professional activities, including his work for Gazprom.

"Ray followed the ethics procedure as requested by the European Commission," he wrote. He added that Mogherini "was involved" in the process of selecting Ray, but did not nominate Ray.

Schinas noted that Ray is charged with "speaking on Africa, Latin America, and Gulf countries." Fellow foreign affairs spokeswoman Maja Kocijancic speaks for Mogherini on European affairs, including Russia.

"We therefore do not believe there is a potential conflict of interest with…Ray's duties at the commission," Schinas wrote.

Ray declined requests to comment for this article.

Former Italian Foreign Minister Frederica Mogherini was a controversial choice to replace Catherine Ashton as the European Union's foreign policy chief. Critics viewed her as politically inexperienced and, possibly, too willing to make accommodations to Russia's Vladimir Putin.

"I was particularly worried by what seemed to be her blind spot toward Putin," says Edward Lucas, senior editor for energy, commodities, and natural resources at The Economist, who argued against Mogherini's candidacy on social media during the summer. "She seemed to like Putin, to get on with him, and to not really see the world from the perspective of the European Union countries neighboring Russia."

Lucas and other EU watchers argued that the foreign policy post should go to someone from Central Europe such as Radek Sikorski, the current speaker of Poland's parliament who was then the country's foreign minister.

Mogherini, 41, is a relatively inexperienced politician who was picked by Italian Prime Minister Matteo Renzi as foreign minister in February. Just a few months later, Renzi lobbied strenuously and successfully in the EU to have her replace Ashton.

Renzi was the only EU head of government who argued against further sanctions on Russia for its actions in Ukraine at the EU summit in Brussels in October. Renzi has also lobbied in support of the Gazprom-backed South Stream gas-pipeline project that would supply Russian gas to Italy and other EU countries via Greece, Bulgaria, Serbia, and Romania.

The European Commission ruled in December 2013 that the intergovernmental agreements with Russia on the construction of the pipeline were all in violation of EU regulations on competition and nondiscriminatory access of third parties.

The European Union has set itself the goal of reducing its dependence on Gazprom. The EU receives approximately one-third of its gas from Russia.

Catherine Ray has been working in communications for the EU since 2000, as well as a brief stint at the United Nations Development Program in 2007-08. She has served as spokeswoman for EU commissioners Pascal Lamy, Janez Potocnik, and Andris Piebalgs.

RFE/RL's Katarina Solikova contributed to this report

SEE ALSO: The entire history of the Cold War — in 40 quotes

Join the conversation about this story »

SNIZHNE, Ukraine (AP) — Associated Press reporters saw more than 80 unmarked military vehicles on the move Saturday in rebel-controlled areas of eastern Ukraine, indicating that intensified hostilities may lie ahead.

Three separate columns were seen — one near the main separatist stronghold of Donetsk and two outside the town of Snizhne, 80 kilometers (50 miles) further east. The vehicles were mainly transportation trucks, some of them carrying small- and large-caliber artillery systems, and at least one armored personnel carrier. Several of the trucks were seen to be carrying troops.

Ukrainian officials said this week that they believe rebel forces have received substantial consignments of weaponry and manpower from Russia. Moscow denies such claims.

It was not immediately possible to establish the provenance of the vehicles seen Saturday. Separatists have always insisted they are armed with equipment captured from Ukrainian forces, but the sheer scale and quality of their armaments have strained the credibility of that claim.

Ukrainian National Security and Defense Council spokesman Volodymyr Polevoy said rebel reinforcements have also been observed moving toward front-line locations around 150 kilometers (95 miles) northeast of Donetsk, in the Luhansk region.

Polevoy said rebel authorities are boosting their ranks by forcibly mobilizing residents in a number of occupied towns.

Despite a cease-fire being reached in September, Ukrainian and rebel troops engage on a regular basis, with some of the heaviest fighting focused on Donetsk airport.

One government paratrooper was killed Friday by a sniper at the airport, military authorities said in a statement. Polevoy said two other Ukrainian troops were killed on the same day, but gave no details.

The statement added that Ukrainian positions came under artillery fire in several towns and villages east of Donetsk, including Debaltseve, which has begun to be increasingly encircled by rebel forces.

Earlier this week, Ukraine's president Petro Poroshenko said that additional troops were being deployed to the east to defend cities still under government control against possible incursions. That followed rebel statements of intent to expand the amount of territory under their control.

The truce signed in the Belarusian capital, Minsk, by Russia, Ukraine and the separatists stipulates the pullback of heavy weaponry.

In Beijing, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry and Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov met Saturday on the sidelines of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation conference for what was expected to be a discussion about the unrest in eastern Ukraine.

Asked if Russia still respects the legitimacy of the cease-fire agreement, Lavrov said it is for the "rebels and the government" of Ukraine to finalize a disengagement line — a process that he said is continuing.

Tensions between Ukraine and Russia rose further after the rebels held an election last Sunday that Ukraine and the West denounced as a violation of the truce. Russia, however, quickly lent its support to the vote.

___Peter Leonard in Kiev, Ukraine, and Lara Jakes in Beijing contributed to this report.

Join the conversation about this story »

Mikhail Gorbachev, the former Soviet leader, has warned that the world is edging closer to a new Cold War, in comments made on the eve of celebrations to mark the fall of the Berlin Wall.

"The world is on the brink of a new Cold War," said Mr Gorbachev, speaking at an event, near the Brandenburg Gate in Berlin, to mark the 25th anniversary. "Some are even saying that it's already begun."

The 83-year-old, who ordered his Soviet troops stationed in East Germany to remain in their barracks on the night of November 9 1989, has been scathing in his view of what he termed Western "triumphalism".

"Taking advantage of Russia 's weakening and a lack of a counterweight, they claimed monopoly leadership and domination in the world. And they refused to heed the word of caution from many of those present here," he said.

"The events of the past months are consequences of short-sighted policies of seeking to impose one's will and fait accompli while ignoring the interests of one's partners."

President Barack Obama appeared to share some of Mr Gorbachev's concerns for Europe – although he blamed Moscow for the current tensions.

Paying tribute to the East Berliners who pushed past border guards to flood through the Wall, Mr Obama said on Friday that "as Russia's actions against Ukraine remind us, we have more work to do to fully realise our shared vision of a Europe that is whole, free and at peace."

But Mr Gorbachev pointed the finger of blame for current tensions firmly back at the West. Making reference to Nato expansion, military intervention in Syria and Iraq, and simmering troubles in Kosovo, he said that Europe was becoming "an arena of political upheaval, of competition for the spheres of influence, and finally of military conflict."

And he described the Ukraine crisis as a "blister turning into a bleeding, festering wound."

His comments came as five more coffins carrying victims of the MH17 plane crash – which was downed by a rebel-fired missile on July 17 – were flown out of Ukraine and back to the Netherlands, which is leading the investigation into the accident.

Bert Koenders, the Dutch foreign minister, warned on Saturday that the remains of the last nine victims on MH17 might never be fully recovered.

On Monday the Netherlands – which lost more of its citizens in the crash than any other country – will hold a national commemoration service in Amsterdam for the victims. Hundreds of grieving relatives are expected to attend, along with politicians and the Dutch king and queen.

Join the conversation about this story »

Game 1 of the 2014 World Chess Championship was played on Saturday and ended in a draw (you can watch it here).

I know that sounds boring, but it was a fascinating draw and should set the tone for the rest of the match.

Current World Chess Champion Magnus Carlsen of Norway and challenger Vishy Anand of India both left the board with half a point. 

The match consists of 12 regular games (with tiebreaks as needed) and runs through the end of the month. It's being played in Sochi, Russia.

You never know what to expect at events like this. Carlsen is the world number one and Anand is number six, Carlsen is 23 and Anand in 44, and Carlsen is rated at 2863, while Anand is at 2792. Carlsen took the title from Anand convincingly in 2013. He should win.

Unlike last year, when the players started with a fairly quick and rather boring draw, this year's Game 1 was an engrossing example of elite Super-Grandmaster chess (although for the rematch, Anand got to start with the white pieces). It consumed 48 moves, numerous hours, and was a great display of attacking and defending at the highest level.

A QUICK BIT ABOUT OPENINGS

First, a quick bit about the most popular first moves in chess, even for top players. If you already know all about this stuff, just skip down to the recap.

The first moves set up what's called the "opening"— the critical initial 10-15 moves of the game. Most amateurs and even many professionals open by moving the pawn in front of their king two squares forward. In algebraic chess notation, this is called "e4" and that's how a player will write it on his or her scoresheet. It's also known as a "King's Pawn" game. Anand, a smooth player who can bring powerful, attacking chess to the board seemingly at will, has often played e4 — aggressive players love to play e4 because it achieves a chess fundamental, staking a claim to the center, and supports another fundamental, creating a line for the light-squared bishop to be developed while preparing the white king for castling.

But it also sets up some excellent attacking chances for white.

Unfortunately, e4 can lead to an opening called the "Berlin Defense," now often called the "Berlin Wall" because at the Grandmaster level, it gives black a great chance to secure a draw. This was a problem for Anand last year; he couldn't break through the Berlin Wall in the three games in which it arose, even losing one game as white. The premier GM opening these days that evolves from e4 is the famous Ruy Lopez, or "Spanish Game" (named for the Spanish priest who devised it). It's been around for centuries — and sadly in 2013 the Berlin Defense took the teeth out of it.

THE GRUNFELD!

So Anand opened with d4 instead. This is the other popular pawn opening: the pawn in front of the white queen is moved forward two squares, and unsurprisingly when not called "d4" the opening is referred as a "Queen's Pawn" game. Unlike e4, which claims a piece of the center with an undefended pawn, d4 aims for center control with a pawn that's defended by its queen from the get-go.

Carlsen responded by moving his knight to the f6 square. The following sequence of moves led to an opening called the "Grunfeld Defense," named after the early 20th century Grandmaster Ernst Grunfeld of Austria, who popularized it. The Grunfeld has become one of the top replies to d4 in modern GM play. It was supercool to see it rolled out by Carlsen, who isn't known for playing it all that much — his idea seemed to be to confuse Anand, but as we'll see, Anand had a trick up his sleeve.

It was also cool to see the Grunfeld because the Russian GM Peter Svidler (world #18) is providing commentary for the official WCC webcast (Game 1 is archived here), and he's a total Grunfeld geek — an expert in the opening. Plus, while I'm very, very far from a master chess player, I play the Grunfeld as black (if I can) pretty much exclusively against d4, so I felt that I could follow along pretty easily for the first 10-15 moves or so.

The main idea with the Grunfeld is for black to let white have a lot (but not total) center control but to work later to undermine it. As such, it's what's know as a "hypermodern" opening, but as you can see from the diagram above, it doesn't allow white to build up an utterly imposing center because the pawn comes to d5 (preventing white from playing e4 unopposed) to complete the characteristic opening sequence. 

GAME 1 RECAP

Enough with the technical analysis and opening theory: What went down in the game after we established that it would be the Grunfeld?

Anand briefly confused Carlsen — or at least made him spend 15 minutes thinking about an obvious move — by countering Carlsen's Grunfeld with a single offbeat move that proved he knew what Magnus was up to. Susan Polgar, one of the strongest female GMs in the world, in her commentary suggested that Anand, who is comfortable in the Grunfeld, threw Carlsen a curveball to test his preparation.

Carlsen got himself back together and later attempted to trade queens on move 19, taking Anand's most powerful piece out of the game. Anand, playing at this point to maintain the initiative, declined. (As an aside, you can see from the diagram below that Anand had a funky arrangement of pawns on the right side of the board, something he had to accept to get the game he wanted.)

The players had castled on opposite sides of the board, a setup that can lead to some ferocious chess. But it didn't materialize, as Anand was never able to get his pawn on the critical attacking h-file going, although Carlsen did make things interesting when he launched his pawn on the a-file down the board and coordinated his queen and remaining rook. 

Anand had to find a very resourceful move after making what he later admitted were some sloppy decisions when his got short of time (the players had two hours for the first 40 moves, then another hour for the next 20, almost all of which they used up). He put his queen on the h1 square:

With Carlsen unable to mount a threat against Anand's king, the challenger slipped out of an uncomfortable endgame by putting Carlsen into an endless or "perpetual" check — the same position would have been repeated three times, so the players called it a draw. 

Anand couldn't get the attack he wanted on the kingside — his h pawn was more often a target than a threat — and Carlsen was aiming for a grueling endgame, his specialty. Magnus has to feel great because he grabbed a draw as black, was never truly losing and at times looked like he was winning, and made Anand play a long game. Anand didn't really uncork anything dazzling, only perplexed Carlsen in two or three positions, and looked weak toward the end the first time control. Interestingly, the game ended in a draw by repetition just as Game 1 in 2013 did, but this draw took far, far longer. Anand can't be happy about that — but he has to be stoked that he played great chess when he needed to.

WHAT NOW?

My theory about this rematch is that Anand can't afford to let it go the distance — he crumbled last year after four draws to start the match. He needs to go for wins as white and black. Carlsen has already seen enough after Game 1 to know that he can get a pressure-packed draw with the Grunfeld and always fall back on the Berlin Defense if Anand tries to open with e4 rather than d4. What's tough about Carlsen is that he's able, when playing black, to negate white's first-move advantage and sometimes turn draws into wins after white runs out of gas on what might look like a winning attack and has to craft a draw — which if your goal was to win is the same as admitting defeat!

In Sunday's game, I'll bet that Carlsen opens with e4 Anand plays c5, which sets up another famous opening called the "Sicilian Defense." Anand played it once last year, when he had to win or lose his crown (the game was a draw and Carlson took the title). As it turns out, I've been looking closely at the Sicilian lately — even though I never play it as black — because my 9-year-old son, who plays scholastic chess, loves it. It can create a very strong winning position for black and stymie white's efforts to contain some of the wildness and generate his own attack.

Why would Carlsen invite this? Because he knows that by refuting an Anand attack, as he did in the Sicilian last year, he can frustrate him that much faster. The "winning" draw in Game 10 last year took 61 moves.

In 2013, the big complaint about the WCC was that, initially, it showed everything that's supposed to be wrong with Grandmaster chess: now that the players can use computers to analyze positions into the ground, many of the games are boring draws, sometimes even agreed to very early on when it's clear where play is headed.

The vibe is already completely different this year. First, fans got to see Carlsen and Anand play a game that was defined by one of the systems that's right at the center of GM competition — d4 leading to the Grunfeld is going to produce chess of the highest order, even if there isn't a ton of fireworks.

Second, even though Carlsen looks fine, Anand looks a lot sharper this year than last year — losing the title and then unexpectedly returning for the rematch has focused his mind. 

You can review the game at ChessBase, with superb comments by GM Alejandro Ramirez. 

SEE ALSO: Here's What To Watch For In The World Chess Championship

Join the conversation about this story »

Perhaps Vladimir Putin should be worried when he arrives at the Asia Pacific Economic Conference in Beijing on November 9.

Besides a scheduled meeting with Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott — who said he would use a "shirtfront" rugby tackle on Putin over the deaths of Australians in the downing of MH17 in eastern Ukraine — Putin is also set to discuss yet another mega gas contract with China. 

The projected Altai pipeline, also known as the "western route," could bring up to 30 billion cubic meters (bcm) of gas a year to China from Russia, potentially allowing Moscow to play Europe against China for a better gas price. 

Before his upcoming trip, Putin told the media that Moscow and Beijing had already "reached an understanding in principle concerning the opening of the western route," and had "agreed on many technical and commercial aspects of this project."

But despite Putin's rosy outlook, all is not well in Russia-China gas relations, comments from industry insiders and analysts have revealed. Not only is the "western route" project likely to prove elusive for Putin to nail down in Beijing, but a key detail of the "eastern route" gas pipeline deal that China and Russia signed in May has yet to be worked out. And given the Chinese side's stinginess and the daunting and expensive task of building pipelines through thousands of miles of Siberian wilderness, both projects could prove to be minimally profitable for Russia, which receives half of its budget revenues from oil and gas sales.

"It looks like first contract isn't done, so it could be premature to move on to the second one," Ildar Davletshin, head of oil and gas research at Renaissance Capital, told VICE News.

Related: Who'll win the fight between Russia and Ukraine? Maybe China.

In May, Russia signed a $400 billion deal to deliver up to 38 bcm of gas annually to China. Called the "Strength of Siberia," or "eastern route," the project will require the development of the Kovykta and Chayanda fields in the remote Yakutia region in eastern Siberia, as well as the construction of a gas pipeline over 2,500 miles of swamps, mountains, and seismically active areas to China's industrial heartland.

The contract didn't come easy, however, and now it appears the two sides may still have a disagreement over a proposed down payment. The Russian side was in talks with the Chinese, who are notoriously tough negotiators, starting the first day of a visit by Putin to Beijing in May, and continuing through the night. Finally, on the second day, Putin reportedly stepped in and told his negotiators to sign a deal at all costs. Although the amount of gas to be delivered each year and the price China would pay for each thousand cubic meters were not announced, Davletshin said Putin's intervention suggested a "last-minute discount."

The project is on the 'edge of unprofitability' given the likely high costs of developing the gas fields and building the pipeline.

After the initial fanfare, it also came to light that the two sides hadn't agreed on how China would pay Russia the $25 billion stipulated in the contract. In a remark that was little reported in the English-language media, Gazprom deputy CEO Alexander Medvedev said in September that the issue of the advance was "up in the air," although he added that "Gazprom has begun building the pipeline without waiting for a final resolution of this issue."

Moscow has portrayed the $25 billion as a prepayment for the gas to be delivered, while it appears the Chinese thought it should be paid as a loan with interest. Whether it is a prepayment or loan will influence the eventual price Russia gets per thousand cubic meters, which Davletshin predicted would be no higher than $350 per thousand cubic meters with the discount figured in.

Related: Russian Roulette: Watch the VICE News dispatches

"If it's an advance, China will demand a discount on price, which Gazprom doesn't want to give, but if it's a loan, China will demand the purchase of Chinese products and services, which Gazprom also doesn't want to do," said Vladimir Milov, former deputy energy minister of Russia who is now an opposition-minded energy analyst. He told VICE News that the project is on the "edge of unprofitability" given the likely high costs of developing the gas fields and building the pipeline.

Davletshin said the total return on investment for both the eastern route and the western route could reach the "okay but not great" level of 10 percent — before taking into account likely cost overruns.

According to Putin, Russia will invest $55 billion developing the project. But previous gas pipeline projects have skyrocketed in price once construction actually commenced. Russia's Eastern Siberia-Pacific Ocean oil pipeline, initially estimated to cost $6 billion, ended up costing more than $20 billion.

And, according to a scandalous comment by a Gazprom official, the eventual payoff for the Strength of Siberia project will come later than previously indicated by Russian officials, who stated that the pipeline would deliver up to 38 bcm a year. After Viktor Selin, deputy director of the new Chayanda gas field, told a Russia news agency in September that Gazprom had delayed the start of gas deliveries from this field to the pipeline until 2020, two years later than announced, the company promptly fired him for allegedly giving up business secrets. With the delayed schedule, the volume of gas in the pipeline won't reach the announced 38 bcm until at least 15 years from now, Milov said.

Related: The synthetic drug called Spice is ravaging Russia

Despite the many potential problems with the eastern route, it will likely be even harder for Putin to iron out an agreement on the western route. Negotiations between Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev and Chinese State Council Premier Li Keqiang in Moscow in October ended with a variety of trade deals, but for the western route it produced only a joint working group between Gazprom and Chinese state gas company CNPC, indicating the two sides were still far from agreement. "Another attempt of Moscow to talk the Chinese into accepting the idea of the Altai gas pipeline has failed," the Carnegie Moscow Center wrote at the time.

The Chinese will demand a lower price than with the eastern route, as low as $300 per thousand square meters, since the pipeline would go into sparsely populated northwestern China and would still have to be transported east on Beijing's dime, Davletshin said.

In 2013, China signed an agreement to increase gas deliveries to its northwestern region from the Central Asian country of Turkmenistan to 65 bcm by 2020, greatly reducing Beijing's interest in more expensive Russian gas along a similar route, Milov said. He called Putin's visit to Beijing over the western route a "PR move" to emphasize Moscow's much-publicized turn away from Europe, its current main gas market, which has hit Russia with economic sanctions over its role in aggravating the conflict in eastern Ukraine.

"For Putin, it's important to do this PR move to show that we've come to agreement with China, that we're going to deliver gas by the western route, but I don't think China is that interested because they're already covering these needs with gas from Turkmenistan," Milov said.

But despite the hurdles Putin is likely to encounter in Beijing this week, Russia will likely keep moving toward smoothing out the misunderstandings in the eastern route project and eventually locking down the western route, Davletshin said.

"Russia is more than ever looking at Asia for all types of deals, including financial deals," Davletshin said. "The reason they're looking for this (western route) deal is not just to sell hydrocarbons, but also to get more money out of China now when the western markets are practically shut to Russia, almost impossible to access."

Join the conversation about this story »

Tensions between Russia and the West have been steadily growing over the past few months, as there has been a sharp uptick in Russian bombers and fighters flying missions over Europe. This increase in activity has  taken place against the backdrop of a frozen conflict in Ukraine, which has already pitted Russia and the West against each other. 

This rise in tensions, summarized succinctly in a recent brazenly anti-Western Putin speech, has led to Russian aerial incursions being viewed with increased hesitance. 

"What is significant is that across history, most of these incursions have been very small groups of airplanes, sometimes singletons or at most two aircraft,"the Supreme Allied Commander in Europe, U.S. Air Force General Philip Breedlove, said at a Pentagon briefing.

"What you saw this past week was a larger, more complex formation of aircraft carrying out a little deeper, and I would say a little bit more provocative, flight path."

We have listed below some of the most notable instances of provocative Russian aircraft exercises over the US and US allied territory since March 2013. 

March 29, 2013 — Sweden

Russian military aircraft simulated a large scale bombing run over Stockholm, Sweden. Two Tu-22M3 Backfire heavy bombers, which can carry cruise missiles and nuclear weapons, and four Su-27 Flanker fighter jets flew within 30 to 40 kilometers of Swedish territorial waters before returning to Russia. 

February 24, 2014 — Estonia

On February 24, Estonia's independence day, US F-15Cs intercepted a Russian spy plane. The F-15Cs were in Estonia as part of the NATO rotational force that helps to police the Baltic states' airspace. 

May 2014 — California and Guam 

In a seeming return to Cold War tensions, Russia increased its aerial activity throughout the Pacific. US fighter jets intercepted Russian Tu-95 strategic bombers over Guam and over the Pacific west of the California coast. 

June 2014 — Alaska and California

In the beginning of June, four Russian Tu-95 strategic bombers triggered US air defense systems in Alaska and California. Two of the bombers returned to Russia after being intercepted over the Aleutian islands, while the other two continued to within 50 miles off of the north Californian coast. 

June 2014 — Denmark 

Russia carried out a simulated attack of the Danish island of Bornholm while the island hosted 90,000 guests in a political festival that drew attendees from ranging from politicians to journalists and activists. The Russian planes were equipped with live missiles, and was the most overtly offensive Russian simulated strike against Denmark since the Cold War. 

August 2014 — US 

During a ten day period from the end of July into the beginning of August, Russian strategic nuclear bombers carried out at least 16 incursions into US air defense zones in the northwest of the country. The Russian planes included Tu-95 heavy bombers and intelligence aircraft. 

September 2014 — US 

Two Russian strategic bombers carried out simulated cruise missile strikes against the US during a NATO summit in Wales. The Tu-95s flew to an optimum site for launching the missiles in Canada's north east. US fighters were not scrambled to respond to the threat, as the Russian aircraft stayed out of the North American Air Defense Identification Zone. 

October 2014 — Japan

From May 2014 to October 2014, Japan more than doubled the number of times it scrambled aircraft against Russian aircraft. The Japanese aircraft intercepted a mixture of Russian spy planes and bombers, and focused around a ring of contested islands to the north of Japan. 

October 21, 2014 — Estonia

A Russian spy plane violated Estonia's airspace. The Russian Ilyushin-20 flew for about a minute in Estonian airspace before being intercepted by fighters from Denmark, Portugal, and Sweden. 

October 28, 2014 — Baltic Sea

Seven Russian combat aircraft flew over international airspace in the Baltic Sea. German Typhoon fighters intercepted the Russians over the Gulf of Finland. The Russian aircraft did not change course, and were also intercepted by Danish, Swedish, and Finnish forces before they landed in the Russian province of Kaliningrad on the Baltic Sea. 

October 29, 2014 — Baltic Sea, Black Sea, North Sea, and Atlantic Ocean

Portuguese fighter jets intercepted seven Russian jets over the Baltic Sea. Simultaneously, Turkish fighters were scrambled to intercept two Russian bombers and two fighters over the Black Sea. 

The English RAF also intercepted eight Russian aircraft over the North Sea. After the interception, the formation split, with the fighters and a tanker returning to Russia while two bombers continued towards the Atlantic. The bombers were later intercepted again by the Portuguese over the Atlantic. 

SEE ALSO: NATO intercepted 26 Russian aircraft in two days

Join the conversation about this story »

DONETSK Ukraine (Reuters) - Heavy shelling around the eastern Ukrainian city of Donetsk increased strains on a two-month-old ceasefire between Ukrainian government forces and pro-Russian separatists on Sunday.

Reuters reporters in rebel-held Donetsk said shelling by heavy artillery continued throughout the night and into the early hours, and then picked up again later on Sunday morning.

The shelling appeared to come from areas held by the separatists as well as from positions controlled by the government forces, and could be heard in the center of the city, which had a pre-conflict population of more than 1 million.

The truce, agreed on Sept. 5, has looked particularly fragile over the past week, with each side accusing the other of violations after separatist elections on Nov. 2 that were condemned as illegitimate by the West.

Residents said there appeared to be fighting near Donetsk airport, around which battles have repeatedly violated the ceasefire in a conflict in which more than 4,000 people have been killed since mid-April.

There were no immediate reports of new casualties. Donetsk's City Council said in a statement on its website that the shelling had damaged residential buildings and that fire fighters were at the scene of one of the damaged buildings.

The rebels have accused Ukrainian forces of launching a new offensive and Ukraine's military accused Russia on Friday of sending a column of 32 tanks and truckloads of troops into the country's east on Thursday. Russia has denied arming the rebels.

(Reporting by Anton Zverev and Kazbek Basaev in Donetsk, Writing by Alexander Winning, Editing by Timothy Heritage)

SEE ALSO: The Crisis In Ukraine Just Officially Became Worse

Join the conversation about this story »

Russia and China just agreed to a second major gas deal, worth slightly less than the $400 billion agreement reached earlier this year, according to Bloomberg.

The details of the deal mean Russia will supply China with another 30 billion cubic metres of gas every year for the next three decades through the Altai pipeline, a proposed pipe transporting the gas from western Siberia to China. 

Earlier in the fall, Keun-Wook Paik at the Oxford Institute for Energy Studies said this kind of deal would be “Putin’s revenge,” according to the Financial Times.

Many analysts see the move as evidence that Moscow is pivoting away from a reliance on European customers and toward east Asia, where relatively rapid economic growth should prop up demand.

It's also a political move, as relations with the rest of Europe have become increasingly cold after Russia's invasion of Ukraine, and the tit-for-tat sanctions between the European Union, United States, and Russia. 

Join the conversation about this story »