First, Kyrgyzstan, as small country, cannot afford - and detrimental - to rely on one country on everything. Instead, Kyrgyzstan should maintain healthy relations with all the powers (Russia, US, China, EU, Japan, India, Turkey, etc.).

Second, the fact that 500 000 (10% of population) Kyrgyz people are working in Russia as immigrant workers is not a good reason for Kyrgyzstan to join Russia just as why Mexico should not/cannot join the U.S. because it has more than 8 million Mexicans (8% of population) working in the US. In addition, this is a global tendency as some parts of the world (US, Europe, Japan, etc) are in need for working hands because of aging population - or dying population in case of Russia – and some parts of the world are having too many unemployed young people.

Third, Yulia is not considering the fact that $130 millions is only a small portion of the huge over $2 billion of Kyrgyzstan’s external debt. By her logic, we should instead join the IMF creditors (U.S. EU, etc).

Fourth, many people in Kyrgyzstan still look at Russia as, in Akaev’s words “given to Kyrgyzstan by God.” This is the underlying logic in many of Kyrgyzstan’s foreign policy prejudices. Russia cannot/won’t solve Kyrgyzstan’s problem; it has to many of its own. In fact, Central Asia countries are helping to solve Russia’s problems with underpopulation.

Fifth, who in the hell is Murat Juraev? Consider the source!

I can not see that yet as part of the Russian forgein policy, neither I can see the willingness of Russia to take over the financial responsebiltiy for this region. Giving direct investments loans and grants combined, Russia is lacking behind all major donors that support the Kyrgyz Government so far. Even its military contributions are lacking behind those of other nations if it comes to the value and supply of military technic & training.

What I can see is the economic importance of Russia to Kyrgyzstan. I can also see a strategic interest of Russia in the Region (including Kyrgyzstan) for resources as well as to control extremism, crime & anarchia which would have a negative effect on Russia itself. But I can not see that this should include the willingness of Russia to include Kyrgyzstan into its territory.

Concering Putin: I can not see a positive effect for any country if it is ruled by an open or icognito authocraty on the long run in the 21 century. Saying this I believe that Kyrgyz MP’s should rather look to participate society in descission making processes and work for a democratic culture that rejects coruption, and abides more to the rule of law than the rule of men.

But in any case if Russia takes over or Kyrgyzstan will get more stable - the road is rocky and it will take a major! effort of society & culture to make a change for the better happen.