Marcfrans, you just may be right, it's hard to tell, but I want more evidence before I'm truely convinced. Chechnya is something I viewed more as a 'protect the integrity' thing than a battle against Islamists - initially. It changed over time, and that made it more important for the Russians to gain the victory they did.

Meeting with Ahmadinejad wasn't pleasent to see. That did not look like an understanding of the importance of not lending him undue legitimacy. At the moment, I don't think Putin has a crystal clear agenda of confronting the Islamists. For the record, nor do I think Bush has...

BollekeBoy, not an easy task here, absolutely not. Ancient Kremlnologists can apply again.

Putin's tough. He's a real KGB guy, has a black belt (in Judo, right?), and is simply not easily scared.

But I do believe he cares much more about Russia than about his own position. Russia's running high on oil, and the latest price hikes makes it go even higher. Russia paid off her national debts well in advance of scheduled. Yes, they paid back every penny borrowed by the Soviet Union - and a healthy compensation for doing so too early, to boot.

That was then. Now they're getting richer. Some say that Russian influence on Europe is bypassing the American. I don't quite agree - yet - but we're heading in that direction. We see Russia supporting Serbia over Kosovo, which in turn makes Serbia trust Russia more than Europe. Does the US government listen, take heed, seek out a compromise? Nope... It tries to find other ways to pave way for an independent Kosovo, regardless of the Wahhabi danger there. Resisting the US on the matter doesn't provoke dialogue, it provokes pressure from the US.

Oh, there's a small matter of the .. Russian mafia there, too. Better watch out...

@ HenrikRClausen
 
Indeed, it is "good old (presumed) moral equivalence at work."

If by "he" (in your last sentence) you mean Putin, then we disagree on your last point.  I think that Putin understands very well the challenge of islamism.  How could he not, with his long experience in the KGB and with Chechnya, etc...?  No, I think rather that he thinks that Bush and others care MORE, and will take care of the 'problem' in time.  Meanwhile, he reckons, it pays Russia to appease the islamists 'abroad' (not the local ones).   If history is any guide, his cynical calculation is probably 'right' (but not in a moral sense, only in a predictive sense).    
 

Thanks, marcfrans, for the explanation. Good old 'Moral equivalence' at work again... Unfortunately, with the current situation in Europe, it has every chance of succeeding:

Suppose now the Putin office on human rights complains "Freedom of assembly in Belgium is compromised. Mayor Thielemans is involved in major constitution violations.", what would one do?

Take cover, I presume :)

But then, I believe I understand Putin's overall goal. He's reestablishing the greatness of Russia. And he does a damn good job at that, human rights violations at all. 70 % public support - who in the west can claim that? Heck, Bush is struggling to get back to 30!

I don't think he understands the challenge of Islamism. Nor do I think he cares...

This is another example of the strange world of Putin. I've watched this man for years and still can't figure out what makes him tick, at least not completely. I really believed after the fall of the Berlin Wall and the collapse of the Soviet Union that there would be a new age of friendship and cooperation between Russia and the West. It seemed to be going that way under Yeltsin, but Putin seems determined to return Russia to a cold war mentality. Is it all just about promoting Russian nationalism in order to extend his own power?
The most mind boggling thing about Putin is trying to figure out where he stands on the war against radical Islam. How can you be fighting the global jihad in Chechnya on one hand and midwifing the Iranian nuclear program on the other? Can't he see where that could lead?

This is similar to UN human rights forums taken by some of the world's least savory regimes.   The to trump some forum is to either take it over, to create a countervailing and more amenable counter forum. 

@ HenrikRClausen

This has nothing to do with human rights, in Europe or elsewhere.  This is all part of Putin's succesfull ways of convincing Russians that he is standing up for Russia, that he will not take criticisms from foreigners, and that Russia can 'talk back'.  His proposed institute in Brussel is not for talking to Europeans, nor to promote human rights in Europe. It is all intended to be shown on Russian televison and elsewhere that others can just as much be criticised as they criticise Russia.  

Nationalism is the new ideology in both Moskou and China, to keep autocratic regimes in power.  And both regimes are succeeding in convincing their public that 'western-style democracy' is tantamount to chaos and decadence.   Obviously, part of this new ideology involves moral-relativism, in the sense that the goal is to convince their own people that "human rights' are not universal, but country-specific: democracy-with-Russian-traits or the Chinese way of 'democratic socialism'.   The whole point of the exercise is to justify to the Russian people, or to help convince them, that the absence of actual human rights in their country is not to be deplored.  See, others have their 'human rights' problems too, Putin is saying.  The Russians will prefer to believe that, rather than having to face the fact/shame that they do not have the same human rights (individual protections) as westerners do. 

Come to think of it, naive-left westerners justify their own transgressions, for instance against freedom-of-speech, on the basis of a similar rationale of moral relativism. 

I didn't realise till now what a lively sense of humour Mr Putin has. I suppose he picked it up on active service in Chechnya.

for the left these days goes along the lines of:
US/Europe: Country x has human rights violations
The left: But what about Guatanamo, Abu Ghraib, etc. You have no moral authority.
The outcome: Country x continues its human rights violations, now with the sanction of the left, which it knows will stand up for it because the US criticized it.

Who cares if this is an illegitimate form of argument and a prescription for continued human rights abuses?

Surely, Putin has noticed this. Now, every time the US or the EU criticizes Russia on human rights, free press, elections, etc., he has a ready propaganda outfit that can use the above form of argument to insulate him from criticism and get the left squarely on his side.

Perhaps he's saying,you stop criticising us and we'll stop criticising you.But if we stop criticising eachother,doesn't that make you as hypocritical as your friends the Americans if you continue to criticise my friends the Iranians?

While there is an obvious need for some truely independent monitoring of human rights, freedom of expression, assembly etc., it's double weird that the Russians do it. Their record on Journalists Without Borders, Freedom House etc. read like a schooltext example of how NOT to do human rights. That's clear enough.
 
But the real puzzle is: What does Putin want from this? He never does anything without a clear purpose, he must believe that Russia stands to gain something from it.
 
I'm blank. Any ideas..?

"the institute will be monitoring the situation in Europe concerning rights of ethnic minorities,immigrants,media and such".
 
 
"Mu".

I thought  Vlad (the enabler) was closer to Tehran than Brussels.If so,wouldn't it be more appropriate for him to locate his human rights institute there?

Wolf.
Sheep.