Select period

“The level of security remains the same in the United States. Americans conducted a thorough analysis of the threats the country faces today. A better understanding of existing threats has appeared; the political establishment has become more aware of the nature of the threats’ operations and structure. In this sense, the security level actually increased, despite the fact that the level and severity of threat remained the same”, – President of the Center on Global Interests, Nikolai Zlobin.


“Bashar Assad was reelected as the President of Syria. Foreign intervention after the election remains an option, but it definitely would be a costly one. The task of organizing such intervention stands before Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Turkey. The position of the West will depend on the final cost-benefit analysis. Iran will continue providing Assad with military and political supports, Russia and China will stand by Syria at the UN”, – President of the Institute of Middle East Studies Evgeny Satanovsky. 


“In my opinion, we will witness a decade of bad relations between Russia and the United States and Russia and the West in general. In the short term there are no factors that could have a positive impact on this relationship. In fact, the deterioration is just beginning, but the depth, sharpness and the scope of the process is not yet known to us. The current US administration is unlikely to work on improving the US-Russian relations, because it is completely unnecessary for them. The next administration in Washington will grandfather the damaged relationships and I think it will have a good chance to continue to worsen them. The same, however, is true for the Russian side”, – President of the Center on global interests, Nikolai Zlobin.


“As a result of the current Ukrainian crisis Budapest Memorandum of 1994 – Memorandum of non-nuclear status of Ukraine and security guarantees in connection with the accession of the country to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, signed between Ukraine and the USA, Russia and Britain – remained nothing more than a piece of paper with no value. Proliferation risks are increasing, especially for the so-called threshold countries”, - Member, Royal Institute of International Relations, journalist Konstantin von Eggert.


“There is no clarity, what are the views of Narendra Modi on the foreign policy. But obviously, a large set of domestic issues was accumulated, which must be solved by new leadership in the next two to three years. Those include problems of economy, the social sphere, and politics. Internal agenda of the new prime minister promises to be very intense”, – Vice President, Observer Research Foundation Nandan Unnikrishnan. 


“The diplomatic containment in Geneva of a potentially dangerous situation between the West and Russia over Ukraine; the continued commitment to a diplomatic resolution of the Iranian nuclear issue and the non-abandonment of the search for a diplomatic and political solution to the crisis in Syria, have had a positive impact on the region. All these positives have involved the rational approach and realistic diplomacy of Russia's Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov”, - former Ambassador, Permanent Representative to the UN in Geneva, Senior Lecturer in Politics at the University of Colombo, Dayan Jayatilleka.


“It is widely believed that the government has failed because of mounting pressure from the Islamist-Jihadist alliance operating behind the scenes. The jihadists have become an important political player. It is well known that former Al-Qaeda members and Libya’s Islamic Fighting Group are now members of the General National Council. They effectively control some cities in Easter Libya, particularly Derna, and parts of Benghazi”, – independent Libyan academic, journalist, Mustafa Fetouri.


“The crisis has also demonstrated that legitimacy may slide away during the office period of high officials without waiting for the next elections to depose leaders. The second factor of the crisis – it can be taken for granted that Ukraine will reproduce these phenomena with some regularity”, – Head of the International Security Program of the Geneva Center for Security Policy Pál Dunay.


“Ukrainian crisis leads to increasing tensions and internal distrust between Russia and its CIS partners. Obviously, relations between Russia and current Ukrainian leadership or any of it successors, will be broken. Diplomatic relations, as well as some trade and economic cooperation between the two countries will continue. But let us make it clear, no Ukrainian politician, same as it was previously in Georgia,  will be able to pursue directions alternative to integration into Euro-Atlantic structures”, – Member of the Royal Institute of International Relations Konstantin von Eggert.


“Contradictory, cautious and vague statements that Central Asian states made on the events in Ukraine and the Crimea indicate serious concern of the regional leaders over possible implication of these developments for their countries. CIS institutions, including the CSTO, to significant degree lost their relevance by abstaining from the Ukrainian question. This put Central Asian countries at one-on-one position with Russia, without the possibility of appealing to multilateral structures in problem situations. This can adversely affect the security climate in our region”, – Director of the private research and educational center "Bilim Karvon" ("Caravan of knowledge") Farhad Tolipov.