All and sundry stigmatize "dark" Lavrov. Let me start with where Mr. Lavrov is not right. Ways to express and choice of words matters too. "Brevity is the soul of wit." Not everyone has the ability to say in one phrase what requires 2 pages of explanations. But purely humanly, I understand what kind of emotional load Sergey Lavrov is now carrying and will allow myself to develop his thought. Thus coming to his defense. Took me the whole year to pick up words.

Let me start from a little afar. 30 years ago, after the end of Cold War and collapse of Soviet Union, the world has entered a new era. Relatively cheap natural resources. Significant advance in technology, if not to say a computer revolution. Peace and calm. Issues arise, like the Iraqi occupation of Kuwait, but all is resolved quickly. Paying tribute to President Reagan – his merit in stopping the Soviet and other totalitarian expansion is invaluable! As well as in making America great. Take for example raise of Silicon Valley. After all, it was his team that crushed inflation and state bureaucracy, that previously strangled business and technology. But he also left 2 small problems that turned into big ones over last 30 years. One problem is a Public (US Gov) Debt, without which the Reagan team really could not have won the Cold War. The other problem is promotion of the idea that everything American is the best (and therefore right). US Dollar is the most reliable currency. Hollywood makes the best movies. The system of government is the most just in the world. And so on. Perhaps this idea (possibly "overpromoted") was also necessary in order to win the Cold War. Why is it a problem? Because it made many (if not most) Americans not aware of the 2nd opinion (2nd side). Remember, we are the best and therefore never wrong.

President Reagan's team held the middle class as the core of America, and followed their heart. The healthy, responsible part of the society, those who sustain America (while "poor" and elite practically pay no taxes). Those who don't aim for global hegemony. And so let's trust James Baker, the Secretary of State of then, that he honestly meant what he was promising to Mikhail Gorbachev, the Soviet leader of then, not to expand NATO "even one inch" eastwards. [ Reagan and Baker were begging Gorbachev to move Soviet troops out of East Germany, while the Soviets were concerned about NATO entering East Germany once Soviet troops leave. ] Of course, you can smile at the naivety of Gorbachev, who did not ask for any written guarantees (the US Gov does change periodically). Yes this was the euphoria of friendship and peace after the end of the Cold War! [ Just like the carelessness of the drunkard Yeltsin, who did not specify the status of Crimea in 1991.