An objective assessment of Boris Yeltsin's role will be made when Russia feels like a full-fledged, established power, and not a fragment of a disintegrated empire. Then, in the historical pantheon, he will take the place of the creator of the new Russian state, and not the destroyer of the old one.

Over time, it will become clear that the first two Russian presidencies are not antitheses, but one period, an era of the country's difficult transition to a different quality. Yeltsin had the most dangerous period, when the spring of history straightened out and released powerful political forces. The fact that Russia withstood their onslaught is the merit of Boris Yeltsin, no matter how many mistakes he made in the process.

It is believed that under him, Russia lost its status as a great power, pursued a dependent policy, and humiliated itself before the West. However, the Kremlin's behavior at that time should be assessed not in absolute terms, but in relative terms, correlating successes with investments and available reserves. With this approach, perception changes.

Moscow in the 1990s remained the undisputed center of the post-Soviet space. The influence that our country still enjoys in neighboring countries is largely a legacy of that time, when Russian diplomats achieved the signing of the most important intergovernmental documents under the most difficult conditions.

Russia approached the solution of the problems that flared up in the post-Soviet territory responsibly. Thanks to its intervention, bloody wars in a number of neighboring states ceased, and one of them, Tajikistan, was essentially created anew. In the conditions of total collapse, Yeltsin's Russia ensured the safety of nuclear arsenals and prevented the appearance of three more nuclear powers on the world map - Ukraine, Belarus and Kazakhstan. This was not appreciated not only in Russia, but also beyond its borders.

Finally, despite the chaos inside the country, Moscow maintained a presence on the international stage. The view that Yeltsin was always weak-willed, following in the wake of the West, is biased. If we assess Russia's entire post-Soviet foreign policy impartially, we will find the same cycle, characteristic of both presidents - oscillations from hopes to disappointments and back again. This is inevitable in an era of groping for a new national identity. And perhaps the cautious search for itself that Russia undertook under Yeltsin is, from the point of view of the end result, more productive than the well-fed self-affirmation observed today.

Yeltsin passionately desired Russia's return to the ranks of great powers, doing what the situation allowed. Contrary to today's belief, Putin came not to ruins, but to an already laid foundation, which was, incidentally, covered with layers of political garbage. However, it was still easier to clear away the garbage than to lay the foundation on which it was later possible to begin to erect the building of a new Russian statehood and its place in the world. Someday, the role of the first builder will be appreciated.

PERSONALITY IN HISTORY: The Foundation Builder