This encounter between the two mentalities represents Russia’s conflict with itself and Europe, as

After WW1, There was a power struggle for the leader of Russia. High level government workers Joseph Stalin and Leon Trotsky fought for the throne after the untimely death of Vladimir Lenin.

The United States and Russia both emerged from WW2 as superpowers. Both of these nations had vastly different ideologies regarding government and the economy. As these two nations struggled to gain increased power and influence globally it seemed almost inevitable that yet another war would ensew. Yet matters were complicated by what had originally been an American super weapon- the atomic bomb which first tests were conducted in 1945. This atomic bomb technology had been stolen by the soviets and each side now possessed enough of these deadly weapons to end the world. As such neither side could choose to directly confront one another as such as action would almost certainly bring about M.A.D. Simalutanly the waning influence of the French and British empires led to numerous liberation movements globally in which various groups fought for control of the former colonies. Such an environment fostered much concern and brought about the American policy of Containment. Containment was a policy originally devised by U.S. diplomat George F. Kennan. Kennan had long observed the soviet union and was aware of the desire of the Soviet Union to expand and become a global empire through the use of Marxist satellite states and allies. Kennan theodore established the basis of containment which involved effectively stopping the formation of new communist nations (with military force if necessary) in order to subvert soviet influence whilst simultaneously avoiding a potential nuclear war.

by the East Slavs who had pagan beliefs, but in the 10 th century adopted the

On May 8th, 1945, Field Marshal Wilhelm Keitel surrendered the German armed forces to the allies in Berlin, thus ending the war for Germany. The German people were then confronted by a situation never before experienced. All of Germany was occupied by foreign armies, their cities and infrastructure lay in ruins, and millions were homeless and starving. Following the unilateral surrender by Germany, the country was divided into four zones, governed by each of the allied powers: Britain, France, the U.S. and the Soviet Union. As diplomacy between the West and the Soviet Union began to deteriorate, each zone became more self-sufficient and independent of the others. Tensions between the West and the Soviet Union also began to rise as it became apparent that the two super powers, the U.S. and the U.S.S.R. would vie for dominance throughout the world, each seeking to spread its ideology and stop the spread of the other’s. The first real exacerbation of this conflict came when the Soviet Union blockaded the divided city of Berlin, which lay in is zone of control. The U.S.S.R. wanted to test the Western resolve to hold Berlin and maintain control. The response the U.S. chose was to keep Berlin supplied by air, through constant resupply by aircraft, a feat never before accomplished. The airlift lasted for nearly eleven months and kept the Western controlled sectors of Berlin adequately supplied, and showed the Soviet Union the U.S.’s resolve to hold out against the spread of

Dmitri Dmitritch Gustov, as characterized by Anton Chekhov in his short story, “The Lady with the Dog”, has had his share of bad relationship experiences. Married at a young age, this man has formed a very negative opinion of women, or as he refers to them, “the lower race”. He has an unconscious realization throughout the story that alters his view of women, or at least one woman in particular. By remaining unfaithful to his wife and rejecting his life in Moscow, Dmitri Gustov is able to find what may be true love.

The dominance of Soviet Russia’s government and societal norms are key factors that control the fate of those who live in the area. Soviet Russia, well known for their communistic society, is deemed by Americans as a place with “horrors” and can be seen by outsiders as amusing (70). Katya’s lover, an oblivious American, inquires about these horrors as a way of seeking “some entertainment—for an easy amusing, and preferably sexy story about the exotic world to which his lover belonged” (70). Unfamiliar with the Russian communist lifestyle, Katya’s lover is merely a spectator to the customs and culture of Katya’s homeland, which seem oppressive in nature to him. On the other spectrum, Katya is startled and unaccustomed to the perception others might have of the society she comes from. She reminisces on miniscule happenings such as the lack of freedom of

Chechnya has been a war-torn hearth of terrorism on Russia’s southern periphery for a few decades. Couple weeks before the 2014 Winter Olympics in Sochi a number of suicide bombings were carried on Russian soil, which brought an extensive international attention to the dangerous North Caucasus region. Such brutality and bloodshed illuminated poor governance and counterterrorism threats in geographically close but ethnically different area of Russian Federation, which is embedded with separatist and nationalistic campaigns. The North Caucasus was highlighted as a critical region that will remain a source of endemic tension and conflict. [National Intelligence Council (2004), p. 54] Among the territories with the lack of governance, the North Caucasus, especially Chechnya, is definitely worth attention because this extremely diverse region is located in pivotal/critical frontier between Asian and European civilizations, carries the most dangerous transit path for the smuggling of illegal weapons and goods and is highly corrupted. According to J.Brown “lagging economies, ethnic affiliations, intense religious convictions, and youth bulges will align to create a ‘perfect storm’ for internal conflict.” [Janet P. Brown Globalization in 2020] Moreover, location and intensity level of the conflict are determined by the competence of the country’s government. Those countries, such as Russia, that are unable to both satisfy the expectations of their people and resolve

There were many golden age Slavic writers that dealt with the issue of adultery in their writings and Anton Chekhov is one such author. In his short story “Lady with a Dog”, Chekhov presented adultery not as a moral issue, but as a human relationship that may or may not result in happiness for those who engaged in it. Anna Sergeevna and Dmitri Gurov were more concerned about each other than the moral implications of their adulterous acts. Moreover, Chekhov leaves the fate of the adulterous couple undecided and provides a hope of happiness for the two protagonists. The way Chekhov’s story focused on the human relationship dynamic of adultery over the moral dilemmas it presented was a refreshing take on a trope that was all too common during

Marriage is a major part of Crime and Punishment and knowing the cultural context of marriage explains Svidrigailov’s unrest. Svidrigailov was placed into a controversial marriage scenario. Russian culture in the 1860’s was extremely patriarchal, the males playing dominant roles in society. One such role was financial dominance and bringing the wife back home. However, the opposite is true for Svidrigailov. After being bought by Marfa Petrovna, Svidrigailov was bore “off into a the country like a treasure” (283). Opposite to tradition, Svidrigailov plays the submissive half of the marriage and is treated merely as a “treasure”. Moreover, Marfa, not Svidrigailov, dominates the economic dynamic of the relationship. This contrast

Marriage for money – It was really interesting to read in the account about how and why Ivan married Praskovya. In my late British Literature class that I took in high school we talked about a theme that occurred in many of the novels we read in class; this theme was the fact that many people married for money rather than love. In our modern western society there is a notion that every person marries their true love or soul mate and they live happily ever after that sometimes we forget about the people who are in arranged marriages or others whose social ro economic situations are so bad that their only choice is to marry for love. Then there are the people like Ivan who got married to someone who fit the social class that he was trying to fit into. Ivan also portrays the marriage characteristic of getting married solely because it the most socially acceptable thing to do. Being a single man in his positon would have set him at a disadvantage in the social class he was trying to fit into. This then starts to beg the question about the feelings that Praskovya had after Ivan had died. The story tells us that they fought a lot and that neither of them really loved one another, but does that mean that she wasn’t as deeply affected by his death as a loving wife would be. She shows a large interest in the fact that she needs to get as much money out of the government due to her husband’s death as possible, but is that all she is really worried about from his

Throughout Russian literature authors are often found to portray both Russian men and women in an idealised manner, as heroes. The line between heroism and self-sacrifice is often blurred. This often leads to having strong and beautiful female characters with characteristics of power and presence. These characteristics are used to contradict the traditional view of ‘damsel in distress’. Alternatively the men are traditionally depicted as classical heroes. They are powerful men whom are ready to sacrifice themselves in order to defend their family, country and their personal beliefs, no matter the cost. These two portrayals of Russian people throughout 19th Century literature show that both genders tend to be heroic. Self-sacrifice is very often

The conflict between the Ukraine and Russia is the Ukraine's most long-standing and deadly crisis; since its post-Soviet independence began as a protest against the government dropping plans to forge closer trade ties with the European Union. The conflict between Russia and the Ukraine stems from more than twenty years of weak governance, the government’s inability to promote a coherent executive branch policy, an economy dominated by oligarchs and rife with corruption, heavy reliance on Russia, and distinct differences between Ukraine's population from both Eastern and Western regions in terms of linguistics, religion and ethnicity (Lucas 2009).

The more and more time they spent together, the more enchanted Dmitry became towards Anna. At first he describes her as naïve and plain looking. Even thought she was pretending to be sad as her eyes filled with tears when she accused him of not respecting her. However, slowly his feeling for grew to the point that he could not be away from her. Also, he would kiss her passionately in broad daylight when no one was watching. He would tell her “how beautiful she was, how seductive…” (160). Yet she still persisted that Dmitry “… did not respect her, did not love her in the least, and saw nothing but a common woman” (160). Even with these reservations, they continued to spend time together and take trips to view the beautiful scenery outside of town. When it came time for them to part Anna was described as unhappy. “She was not crying but was so sad that she seemed ill and her face was quivering” (161). Dmitry was also sad that another one of his conquests had ended and how Anna would soon just be a memory. Since all his affairs in the past started out great then “…inevitably grows into a whole problem of extreme complexity, and in the end a painful situation is created” (157). Unbeknownst to him, he had developed feelings towards her and felt remorse because in his mind Anna wasn’t happy the last time they were

The present day Russian Federation involves a democratic system, given the presence of elections, an independent judiciary, and the supremacy of law. Yet, in democracy, the crux of it involves an inevitable paradox: law limits state power, but the state must have the power to enforce the law. However, finding the balance of the ability to enforce laws, and therefore maintaining order, while not infringing on civil liberties, requires a mutual understanding, a social contract, between the rulers and the ruled. This requirement has not found its place in the Russian political arena, especially since “creating a rule-of-law-based sate out of dictatorship is not easy” (Bressler 2009). In addition, the Russian psyche views authority as a source of force and violence (Yakovlev 1996), an etymological result of a continuity beginning from imperial Russia. Although the Russian Federation, the Union Soviet Socialist Republics, the Russian Empire, and the Tsardom of Russia differ significantly, a strong state remains prevalent in the core of Russian history and politics. In short, the nature of political rule in Russia involves a never ending tug of war between the seemingly undying authoritative soulless entity known as the state and the equally undying Russian people’s hunger for liberty.

Russia, known by most as the Russian Federation, is a federal state in Eurasia. Russia is the largest country in the world at 17,075,200 square kilometres by surface area, covering more than one eighth of Earth 's inhabited land, and the ninth most populous, with over 146.6 million people as of end of March 2016. The European western part of the country is much more populated and urbanised than the East, with almost eight-tenths of the population living within the European region of Russia. Russia 's capital, Moscow is one of the largest cities in Europe and the world. Its ohter major urban cities include Saint Petersburg, Novosibirsk, Yekaterinburg, Nizhny Novgorod and Samara.