It is real truth that appears as a terrible articles in news papers, and we read them horrify and feel sorry for Russian women dating that choose the first who meet with a foreign passport, hoping for a better life. Exactly! girls get married with a passport, keeping in their kind hearts pink dream to be a citizen of other country for to improve their life quality. They sacrifice their youth and just ignore a poor foreign fiancé do not count his feelings, but he only wants to have a family. There are a big crowds to the Russian consulate in Milan. Main part of the visitors are Russian women dating that need different documents for marriage ceremony.
All of that are different cases from our compatriot’s lives abroad that together create paradoxical image of “Russian women”. After all that seeing start to understand why Russian passport in immigration service cause just a squeamish smirk and comments through a teeth”..one more Russian women comes”.

In his address to the Yaroslavl Global Policy Forum earlier this month, President Medvedev emphasized that Russia’s multinational and multiethnic makeup is a creative asset. My research into London’s creative industries leads me to fully agree, and this goal to unlock the potential of Russia’s diversity is a move that deserves a warm welcome.

Indeed, Deputy Mayor of London Richard Barnes told the Global Policy Forum that the UK capital’s status as a ‘world in one city’ is the secret ingredient of its commercial success and global role. Similarly, the writings of creative industry researcher Richard Florida point to the importance of diversity in the modern megacity as the force which drives creativity.

The facts show that diversity is critical to economic success in the modern world. These same hard facts show that many human requirements, that governments are treating as costs or luxuries, are fast becoming economic necessities – such as education, the built environment and social care.

These same hard facts show that many human needs, which governments are ignorantly treating as costs or luxuries, are becoming economic necessities – such as education, the built environment and social care.

Creativity, the most fundamentally human capacity, has become the principal productive resource of our age. It is the foundation of a new paradigm of production. In the next phase of economic history, the winners will be the countries, cities and peoples that grasp this.

This is why China, for example, is laying the groundwork to become the world’s leading creative economy, leapfrogging the West, and not just to supply it with ‘cheap products,’ but with high-value-added products. Employment in manufacturing there has in fact fallen for the past 20 years, whilst employment in services will soon surpass agriculture.

The assets of the top six design media and entertainment conglomerates now amount to more than those of Exxon, one of the biggest companies in the world. These companies do not make or sell things, but rather entertainment, news and style: customized and tailored services.

This is the foundation of a creative economy.

Many speakers at the Global Policy Forum noted that economic success needs industries with increasing returns, high value added and high productivity growth. And it is service sector productivity that holds the key to future success. But for this we must invest in people and the environment they work in – that is, cities.

Old thinking leads us to think of production as being mechanical, but for the services industry the emphasis is on people – scientists, technicians, software geeks, designers, artists. So diversity, human welfare urban infrastructure, well-being and education provide the resources of the future.

Old thinking is wrong on this too: regarding environmental spending as a cost, a luxury, something we have to do without when times are hard. This is economically senseless. People, and cities, are a productive resource.

The last word on this has to go, appropriately, to an architect – Buckminster Fuller: the best way to predict the future is to design it. Russia, the most multinational country in the world, has become a sleeping giant. Moscow has an ethnic and cultural diversity that very few cities have achieved – perhaps only London, Toronto, New York and Singapore. Great gateway cities like Berlin and Vienna aspire to it, and China positively thirsts for it. I agree with President Medvedev – it is time to unleash it.

Working with local partners has been a winning strategy for many MNCs interested in the Russian market. However, with increased concerns about FCPA and UK Bribery Act enforcement, MNCs are more than ever seeking to ensure their Russian partners are not engaging in any corrupt practices.

In theory, MNCs can protect themselves by conducting extensive due diligence on any potential partners, including compliance clauses in their contracts with their partners, and carefully monitoring for any suspicious activity.

In practice, however, “Some companies are so eager to enter the market, they rush into partnerships believing everything their Russian counterparts tell them. They allow themselves to be seduced by local partners,” says Tim Stanley, formerly with Control Risks and KPMG and now Frontier Strategy Group expert advisor and independent consultant with extensive experience in conducting integrity and operational due diligence for companies investing in Russia and throughout the CIS.

“There is often a huge gap between how foreign companies expect their local partners to work, and how their Russian counterparts actually operate on the ground. The gap may not become obvious for a while, especially if foreign company representatives only occasionally meet with their Russian partners,” points out Tim Stanley.

He adds that Russian firms may sometimes not share the details of how they get things done with their foreign partners, because they believe all that matters to the foreign company is good financial results. “Communicating to your partners the importance of ensuring compliance in all their actions is key,” says Mr. Stanley. “And doing so not just once, but on a continuous basis.”

Mr. Stanley offers a few other tips for foreign companies working with local partners in Russia:

When evaluating potential partners: know who runs the company, and who actually owns it

Who legally owns the company and who runs it can differ greatly in Russia, and MNCs should see any inconsistencies in the ownership and management structures of potential partners as a red flag. Some Russian companies have immensely complicated ownership structures, sometimes for legitimate reasons but often created with the purpose of tax evasion and other illegal practices. The real owners may present operational, reputational and political risks significantly different from those which an unwitting investor or business partner may be aware of when negotiating with local management.

Reputational due diligence is extremely effective in Russia

Often in Russia, word of mouth can give you a better perspective on a potential partner than a review of their financials. Get a second or third opinion on a potential partner, learn about their reputation and the experiences other companies – especially Western ones – have had working with them. If the company has a local track record of legal disputes, or a reputation for using aggressive business tactics or for cutting corners, then chances are, you will hear about it.

Due diligence does not end with a signed contract

Over time a company’s profile will change as business activities adapt and develop.  A company’s compliance profile – and thus potential vulnerability – will change in step with the changing nature of the company, with some risks becoming more prevalent and others diminishing.  A clean bill of health during the pre-transaction due diligence is a necessary, but not sufficient condition for compliance purposes, and foreign investors need to invest in promoting a culture of integrity and compliance in their dealings with local companies. This can be achieved by embedding compliance throughout the company’s operational activities, and through regular communication and training.

About the Orchestra

The Russian National Orchestra has been in demand throughout the music world ever since its 1990 Moscow premiere. Of the orchestra’s 1996 debut at the BBC Proms in London, the Evening Standard wrote, “They played with such captivating beauty that the audience gave an involuntary sigh of pleasure.” More recently, they were described as “a living symbol of the best in Russian art” (Miami Herald) and “as close to perfect as one could hope for” (Trinity Mirror).

The first Russian orchestra to perform at the Vatican and in Israel, the RNO maintains an active international tour schedule, appearing in Europe, Asia and the Americas. Guest artists performing with the RNO on tour include conductors Vladimir Jurowski, Nicola Luisotti, Antonio Pappano, Alan Gilbert, Carlo Ponti and Patrick Summers, and soloists Martha Argerich, Yefim Bronfman, Lang Lang, Pinchas Zukerman, Sir James Galway, Joshua Bell, Itzhak Perlman, Steven Isserlis, Dmitri Hvorostovsky, Simone Kermes and Renée Fleming, among many others. Popular with radio audiences worldwide, RNO concerts are regularly aired by National Public Radio in the United States and by the European Broadcasting Union.

Gramophone magazine called the first RNO CD (1991) “an awe-inspiring experience; should human beings be able to play like this?” and listed it as the best recording of Tchaikovsky’s Pathétique in history. Since then, the orchestra has made more than 70 recordings for Deutsche Grammophon and PentaTone Classics, distinguishing the RNO as the only Russian ensemble with long-standing relationships with these prestigious labels, as well as additional discs with many other record companies. Conductors represented in the RNO discography include Founder and Music Director Mikhail Pletnev, Vladimir Jurowski, Kent Nagano, Alexander Vedernikov and Paavo Berglund.

The RNO’s recording of Prokofiev’s Peter and the Wolf and Beintus’s Wolf Tracks, conducted by Kent Nagano and narrated by Sophia Loren, Bill Clinton and Mikhail Gorbachev, received a 2004 Grammy Award, making the RNO the first Russian orchestra to win the recording industry’s highest honor. A Spanish language version narrated by Antonio Banderas was released in 2007, following a Russian version narrated by actors Oleg Tabakov and Sergei Bezrukov, with Mandarin and other editions to follow.

The orchestra’s Shostakovich cycle on PentaTone Classics is widely acclaimed as “the most exciting cycle of the Shostakovich symphonies to be put down on disc, and easily the best recorded.”

A regular visitor to the Schleswig-Holstein, Gstaad and Rheingau festivals, the RNO is also the founding orchestra of Napa Valley Festival del Sole, Festival of the Arts BOCA in Florida, and the Singapore Sun Festival, and resident orchestra for multiple seasons of the Tuscan Sun Festival in Cortona, Italy. The RNO launched its own annual festival in 2009, held each September in Moscow.

The RNO is unique among the principal Russian ensembles as a private institution funded with the support of individuals, corporations and foundations in Russia and throughout the world. In recognition of both its artistry and path-breaking structure, the Russian Federation recently awarded the RNO the first ever grant to a non-government orchestra.

President Dmitry Medvedev offered Vice Prime Minister and Finance Minister of the Russian Federation Aleksei Kudrin to step down if he had discrepancies with the head of state. As a result, Medvedev accepted Kudrin’s resignation as was advised by Prime Minister Vladimir Putin. Medvedev also said that he would put an end to the “irresponsible chatter” of Russian officials.

Medvedev’s remarks followed Kudrin’s statements, which the finance minister released in Washington. Kudrin particularly stated that he did not see himself in the new government, which would be established in Russia after the presidential election of 2012. As it was reported, the new government would be chaired by Dmitry Medvedev. Kudrin stated that he disagreed with Medvedev on a number of important economic issues, including the questions related to Russia’s defense spending.

On Monday, Medvedev conducted a session of the commission for modernization and technological development of the Russian economy. Aleksei Kudrin took part in the meeting too.

During the meeting, which was held in Russia’s Ulyanovsk region, Medvedev offered Kudrin to think about his resignation. Immediately.

“I am addressing you (Kudrin) right here with the following suggestion. If you believe that your views of the economic agenda differ from those of the president – from my views that is to say – then you can write an adequate letter of resignation. I ask you to answer right here and right now. Are you going to write the letter?” the president asked the finance minister.

Aleksei Kurin responded saying that he indeed had some discrepancies with Medvedev. However, the minister added that he would be able to make up his mind only after he consulted the prime minister (Putin).

“You can consult anyone, including the prime minister. But as long as I am the president I make such decisions myself. You will have to decide for yourself very quickly and give me the answer today. If you say that the discrepancies that you say you have don’t exist, then you will make to comment that. If they exist, I do not see any other way out, although it is an unpleasant situation for me, of course,” the president replied.

“Mr. Kudrin, as far as I can understand, had an opportunity to announce his position in advance to determine his political future. He could even join the rightist forces. He was asked, but refused. He probably had some reasons for that,” Medvedev stated.

Kudrin released the above-mentioned statements about his future work in the government as soon as it became known that Vladimir Putin would run for president in 2012 and Medvedev would chair the government after the election.

One may find many reasons to explain why Mr. Kudrin said the things that he said. In any case, it looks strange. The head of the Finance Ministry has an extensive experience of working in the government. Despite his experience, he turned out to be the only vice prime minister and minister who said something about the imminent changes in the government. It happened after the president and the prime minister demonstrated their readiness to continue their work together.

Vitaly Ivanov, the director of the Institute of Politics and State Law, believes that the head of the Finance Ministry is not supposed to arrange a public fight with the head of state.

“It appears to me that Kudrin was serious about his political prospects, that’s why he behaves as a politician, rather than an official. He works for his image,” the expert told Pravda.Ru.

“It’s hard to say where he is going to find himself eventually. This is just not good, of course. The minister indulged in a public fight with the president. One should be punished for that,” Vitaly Ivanov said.

“The president’s position is tough and correct. Kudrin does not work only in Putin’s team – he also works in the team of the president. It is the head of state who represents the government. It is the head of state who sets the course for the development of the country, including the economic development. The government realizes this course, but it is up for the president to set it,” Mikhail Remizov, the head of the Institute of the National Strategy said.

“From the point of view of political and bureaucratic ethics, Kudrin must undoubtedly step down if he stated that he disagreed with the president’s course. This is absolutely natural,” Remizov said.

In accordance with the law about the government, vice prime ministers and ministers can be dismissed by the president, at prime minister’s suggestion. Prime ministers and ministers are allowed to send in their resignations.

It became known on Monday night that the president had accepted Kudrin’s resignation at Vladimir Putin’s suggestion.

Russia will continue cooperation with Iran in the nuclear field. Sergei Ryabkov, Deputy Foreign Minister of the Russian Federation, said that Russia may participate in the construction of another nuclear power plant in the country.

“The construction of the Bushehr nuclear power plant in Iran showed that Russia was a responsible partner, which was capable of removing the concerns of our partners,” the official said.

“The questions of cooperation with Iran in the nuclear field have been regulated with the resolution of the UN Security Council. The resolutions of the UN Security Council do not prohibit the development of peaceful nuclear power. In addition, the essence of the Non-Proliferation Treaty, in which Russia and Iran participate as members, is to guarantee progress in three directions. They include nuclear disarmament, non-proliferation and peaceful usage of nuclear power,” the official said.

“We can and should cooperate in this field within the framework of UN Security Council resolutions. I exclude the variants, in which anyone, except for the UN Security Council, could either restrict or affect the adequate work,” he added.

“We have proved with the help of the Bushehr nuclear project that we are a fully responsible partner in this field. Russia is capable of finding the mechanisms which weaken and remove the concerns of other members of the international community regarding Russia’s cooperation with Iran in the nuclear field,” Ryabkov said.

“Bushehr is the example of solution of the nuclear power development problem with 100-percent guarantee of non-proliferation,” the official added.

Ryabkov acknowledged that there was no breakthrough in the solution of the Iranian problem. However, the dialogue of the six continues, and Iran shows interest in that.

“There is no final solution to the problem, of course. We have been conducting the dialogue on certain issues, and Iran evinces interest in discussing the Russian plan,” Ryabkov said.

The world’s largest ballistic missile submarines of Project 941 Akula (Shark), known as Typhoon, will be decommissioned before 2014 and used for scrap metal, a source at Russia’s Defense Ministry told the Izvestia newspaper.

All three operating submarines of the project – Arkhangelsk, Severstal and Dmitry Donskoi – will thus be destroyed. The Dmitry Donskoi cruiser was previously used as the base for launching Russia’s new Bulava ballistic missile. The decommissioning of the missiles will cost the Russian budget hundreds of millions of rubles, experts said.

Defense officials said that it became impossible to use the above-mentioned submarines for intended purposes because of the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START-3), which Russia had signed with the United States.  Specialists of Sevmash Enterprise (the maker of the subs) said that it could be possible to redesign the submarines to use them as undersea gas tankers or all-season marine freight vessels. However, defense ministry officials said that the cost for this work would be unreasonably high.

It was Borei class submarines that ruined the career of the Typhoons, defense officials said. Borei is a new class of submarines, which Sevmash Enterprise currently builds. The new subs will be armed with Bulava missiles.

The tests of Borei submarines ended successfully, which made the maintenance of bulky and more expensive typhoon submarines pointless. The crew of the Borei sub is 1.5 times smaller than that of the Typhoon. Maintenance costs also differ in Borei’s favor. To crown it all, it is much more difficult to detect Borei submarines in the water, officials said.

Officials representing the Defense Ministry also said that any work to redesign the submarines would cost tens of billions of rubles. Therefore, it would be more reasonable to spend this money on building new vessels, they said.

Specialists of Sevmash Enterprise said, though, that the Typhoon subs could be transformed into undersea tankers and freighters to transport liquefied gas, oil and cargoes for polar ports. “This reconstruction may not cost that much,” representatives of the enterprise said.

Alexander Konovalov, the President of the Institute of Strategic Estimations, shares a different point of view. According to him, the era of Typhoons is gone for good.

“This is a gigantic thing. It is the largest sub in the world, and it is very expensive in its exploitation. Moreover, there are no missiles for these subs,” he said.

The fate of gigantic submarines was determined by the START-3 Treaty, which was signed by Russian and US presidents in the spring of 2010. The treaty restricted the strategic arsenals of the two countries to 1,550 nuclear warheads.

Russia’s Project 955 Borei and 667BDRM Dolphin submarines may carry over 1,100 nuclear blocks. The remaining part can be used by long-distance aviation and Special Purpose Missile Troops.

One Typhoon class submarine is capable of carrying of only 120-200 nuclear warheads.

Russia’s Defense Ministry has already decommissioned three of the six Akula submarines before in accordance with the START-2 Treaty. Russia decided that it was too expensive to maintain the battle capacity of those submarines. Each cruiser required nearly 300 million rubles a year.

The decommissioning process took place as follows. Spent nuclear fuel was unloaded from the reactors. The equipment was dismantled afterwards. The subs were then transferred to the dry dock. In the dock, specialists cut out the reactor compartments from the subs. The compartments were subsequently transferred to long-storage facilities in the Murmansk region.

The utilization of one cruiser cost $10 million. Two million dollars of the amount were assigned from the Russian budget. The remaining funds were provided by the United States and Canada.

The Project 941 or Akula, (“Shark”) class submarine (NATO reporting name: Typhoon) is a type of nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarine deployed by the Soviet Navy in the 1980s. With a submerged displacement of 48,000 tons,the Typhoons are the largest class of submarine ever built,large enough to accommodate decent living facilities for the crew when submerged for months on end.The source of the NATO reporting name remains unclear, although it is often claimed to be related to the use of the word “Typhoon” by Leonid Brezhnev in a 1974 speech while describing a new type of nuclear ballistic missile submarine. Soviet doctrine for these vessels was to have them launch SLBMs while submerged under the arctic ice, avoiding the traversal of the GIUK gap to remain safe from the enemy attack submarines and anti-submarine forces. Technically Typhoons were also able to successfully deploy their long-range nuclear missiles while moored at their dock.

The Borei class is a class of nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarine produced and operated by the Russian Navy. The class is intended to replace the Delta III, Delta IV and Typhoon classes now in Russian Navy service. The class is named after Boreas, the North wind. The sub is 160 meters long; its maximum displacement measures 24,000 tons. The submergence depth – up to 400 meters. The crew – 107 people.

Sevmash currently builds three Borei class submarines: Alexander Nevsky, Vladimir Monomakh and Saint Nikolai. The construction of the first submarine – Yuri Dolgoruky – began on November 2, 1996. The sub was launched on February 12, 2008.

Alexander Nevsky was launched on December 6, 2010. The sub is to be passed into service in 2012.

This year has seen the end of the longstanding tradition of the Soviet times. Russia’s Defense Ministry has decided to completely refuse from purchasing the legendary AK-74 rifles for the army. There are two reasons for that: the country has too many Kalashnikovs and they are outdated.

Nikolai Makarov, the Chief of the General Staff of the Russian Armed Forces said: “Yes, we have refused. The reserves that we have in the country exceed the needs considerably.”

Afterwards, the official destroyed the AK-74 completely having said that the Kalashnikovs were not good for the army.

The Chief of the General Staff is an important person, of course. He obviously knows all about the reserves and the needs. However, it is not clear which logic the official had in mind. Was it peace-time or war-time logic? However, the point here is not the quantity. It is about the quality of Kalashnikov assault rifles. If they do not conform with today’s standards of small arms, it just so happens that Russian military depots are piled with garbage that no one needs. What will the soldiers get in return?

The Kalashnikov AK-47 (7.62 mm caliber) was developed by Mikhail Kalashnikov in 1947. The rifle was passed into service in 1949. The basic model of the rifle was then used as the basis to create a whole family of combat and civil weapons of various calibers. They include AKM and AK-74 rifles, RPK guns, carabines, smooth-bore Saiga guns, etc.