In the process of its formation, the Ukrainian republic has become polarised. A complex geographical and political split separates the East and South from the West, following the interests of different clans. This rift causes weakness at the state level, which in turn makes the Ukraine more susceptible to outside influence. Today, the most worrying destabilising factor in the republic is the growth of radical Islam in the Crimea. The recent presidential elections in the Ukraine showed that in the near future, American foreign policy may undergo radical change, leading to the formation of an American-Islamic-European union designed to weaken or even destroy Russia. The main international consequence of recent events in the Ukraine is the threat of a ‘belt' emerging which would isolate Russia from Europe, as well as the threat of radical Islam permeating Russia through the Caucasus. An Islamic explosion in the Caucasus would cause detonations in Adygea, the North Caucasus and the Volga region. Central Asia and the Middle East would follow suit. What we see happening in the Ukraine today could be called a particularly shameful triumph of American policy. The USA have blatantly disregarded all civilised electoral norms. Far from instating Western democratic order in the Ukraine, America is steadily pushing the world into the flames of radical Islam. Unlike the West, Russia today has no clear-cut project for civilisation. In the absence of such a project, it will most likely prove unable to maintain the Ukraine within its sphere of influence. Furthermore, the Ukrainian scenario will then be repeated in other CIS republics and, finally, in Moscow itself. Objectively speaking, the success which American policy is currently enjoying in the Ukraine is doing nothing to stabilise the political situation in the republic. On the contrary, the entire range of ideological, political and clan-driven economic rifts dividing the republic has become deeper and more pronounced. Were the Kremlin to recognise and use this situation to its own advantage, Moscow’s ignominious defeat in the Ukraine could eventually be turned into something of a victory.

How do European Muslim communities live today? Why is it that their number continues to grow, and what are the social, cultural and political consequences of this trend? These are the issues examined by Chetverikova in her article. The author conducts a thorough study of the different aspects of the Tarikat in Europe, focussing mainly on the painful process of restructuring Western society in the attempt to integrate the new and alien Muslim culture. The multicultural approach adopted in order to overcome social segregation and promote the mutual enrichment of different cultures had an adverse effect. Inconsistent and contradictory, it created a situation in which Islam in Europe began to identify itself as an independent cultural and religious community. Following a certain outside strategy, this community was firmly bent on defending its own interests.

Russian culture has always tended to focus on literature. In Russia, classical literature promoted the growth and development of thought. Even in philosophy, the best results were obtained where research was connected with the arts. Thus, if Russia wishes to be a worthy participant in the international philosophical process, she should use her strengths by focussing primarily on study in the humanities.

The article deals with the process of civic self-organization which takes place in Moscow at the beginning of the 20-th century. It examines the formation and activity of tens of societies with different aims, including scientific and technical, literary and educating, health service and philanthropic, etc. It gives the scientific classification of Moscow societies, characterizes the main directions of their activities, relations with the authorities, their influence on social-cultural atmosphere of the city and self consciousness of the citizens, formation of the public (obschestvennost`). The article is based on a wide variety of sources (archive documents, periodics, memoirs of state and public persons, intellectuals).

In the second part of the article the author affirms that a woman «makes» a man and then takes the responsibility for him in the society. A child is her exclusive field of creation. It is necessary to settle back in people minds the idea that children are not the burden but happiness and blessing itself, that bringing them up is a very important work. A woman cannot abandon her duties for a long time because the comfort of a man and children depend on her. If this comfort gets misbalanced a family and the activity of men and children come to the deep crisis. The «masculinisation» of women strengthens the processes that let the world upside down, provoke the transference of the sexual poles and finally lead mankind to death. The author reckons that the target of any revolution is to break a woman. The suffragettes' leaders, pursuing interests of their families, achieved the enslaving of other women with the help of the labor market. The happenings of 1991 in Russia brought back in our life the basic female values. It is important for a woman now to realize anew her responsibility and to use the modern opportunities of her creative activity.

When he was arrested in September 1923 A. M. Krasnoshchekov was founder and chair of the directorate of the highly successful Bank of Industry and Trade (Prombank). A Communist, Krasnoshchekov was well known in Russia and abroad, not least because he was former President of the Far East Republic. When arrested he was charged with corruption, abuse of authority, isolation from the proletariat, and other violations of «Communist ethics». The following March he became the first prominent Communist to be put through a show trial. This article examines the arrest and trial of Krasnoshchekov from a number of perspectives in order both to shed light on the case itself and on the broader political environment of the early NEP period. The first part of the article, published in this issue, first discusses the historiography of Soviet show trials. Krasnoshchekov’s case has been overlooked, despite widespread publicity at the time, but it deserves attention as the first show trial of an important Communist official, one whose career had been advanced by Lenin himself. Then the question of the regime’s economic policy is addressed. In this regard, the turn toward stronger party control over the economy in 1923 may have been a factor in the downfall of the highly independent head of Prombank. The last section in this part peers into the «trenches» at Prombank, illuminating how the «class struggle» between Communist agents and Prombank’s leadership unfolded.

The author, Russia’s noted expert on interpretation narrates the dramatic story of interpretation and diplomatic interpreters in the 20th century in the USSR from V. Lenin to V. Putin when history was made and often interpreters were the only (and silent) witnesses or even contributed to it. The English voices of Soviet leaders – V.Berezhkov (Stalin), V.Sukhodrev (Khrushchev), P.Palazhchenko (Gorbachev) reverberated across the world in an assertive and skillful way. Many historical vignettes are provided for the first time.