[thriftwy]

That doesn't change at all. In the same pace it was ignored how pro-US Russia in 90s was, largely for intertia from Cold War times which was irrelevant but also the only mode that was remembered.

This lead to Russia only getting humiliation for its forward steps, and fast forward 20 years, new "cool war" with Putin.

The problem here is also short memory. It's Orwelesque "Oceania always had war with Eurasia", ignoring that "always" is just 40 years, but also it's all two generations can remember. In XX century, suddently human memory became too short for politics.

[dragonwriter]

> it was ignored how pro-US Russia in 90s was, largely for intertia from Cold War times

Russia wasn't “pro-US” in the 1990s; after the fall of the USSR, Russia, after a brief moment of inward-focussed stabilization, returned to active geopolitical competition based (in Europe, at least) largely on fanning the flames of pan-Slavism.

At best, under Yeltsin, Russia could be “pro integration into the neoliberal regime of international trade”, but that's a far cry from being pro-US.

[thriftwy]

That's as much affection as you can ever see from a country this size.

Russian pan-Slavism faces an obvious obstacle of Poland. It's a no go. If you're talking about Serbia, then let's face it, 90s Europe saw a fire lit in their midst that they couldn't contain for a decade. It's a thorough failure of pan-European security. On yet another attempt to extinguish flame with gasoline, even Yeltsin's Russia had to do something. Which was totally not much.

[coldtea]

>If you're talking about Serbia, then let's face it, 90s Europe saw a fire lit in their midst that they couldn't contain for a decade.

Couldn't extinguish? They help lit the fire.