Information blockade over the Nagorno Karabakh problem has been created in Russia. In general the Russian political elite is badly informed of the Nagorno Karabakh conflict. "Publications are few in number, not to mention TV programs. The situation with websites has improved a bit lately, but they do not change the whole picture. The Russian state media trying not to arouse Azerbaijan's discontent do not call things by their proper names and thus prefer to write nothing about the conflict. "Over this reason the major part of our political elite and the society have poor knowledge not only of Karabakh's present problems but also of the true causes of the conflict. A new generation of Russians grew up during the recent 15 years. It means a new generation of politicians who are unaware of the conflict. I have many times heard people say that Karabakh is inhabited by Azerbaijanis and that Armenians are Muslims. People are unaware of the age-old friendship between the Armenian and Russian people, of the significant role the Armenians of Karabakh played 200 years ago in the liberation of Armenia from the Persian and Ottoman yoke and self-willed joining Russia. I would like to believe that Russia deals with the Karabakh settlement not only as the OSCE Minsk Group Co-chair. Russia as no other party is first of all interested inn maintenance of peace in the Caucasus. Being the assignee of the Soviet Union Russia is responsible for the alienation of Nagorno Karabakh from Armenia in 1992 that took place through the fault of Bolshevik Russia and consequently for the fair resolution of the Karabakh problem. I also regret over the exchange of welcome telegrams between the Foreign Ministries of Russia and Turkey on the anniversary of Moscow Treaty signed on March 16, 1921. "To put it mildly, it was odd to mark the date when the Western Armenian territories as well as the Kars region and Surmalu district belonging to Russia were conveyed to Turkey Everyone, who knows the history a bit understand that it was a hazardous agreement concluded without participation of representative of Armenia of that time in order to involve young Turks in the promotion of world socialist revolution in the Near East. As result Turks behaved with traditional eastern delicacy. They not only saved Sultan Empire from division but also received from Soviet Russia new territories and succeeded in smashing Eastern Armenia to three pieces. And now it would be appropriate to renounce the historical venture of Bolshevik predecessors and keep silent. By the way I won't be surprised if October 13 our MFA will celebrate the 85th anniversary of the Kars agreement that confirmed the outcomes of the shameful Moscow agreement. The conflict settlement model should necessarily provide for reasonable and bloodless approach proceeding from the true but not distorted history of the region with the complete maintenance of human right including the right to self-determination. As a man well aware of the history of Karabakh and as the author of "Rebellious Karabakh" book I want to believe in a fair settlement model, the fairest model that will bring people back to peaceful and friendly co-existence. But such model seems to be doomed to failure in the near future. The history will severely punish the politicians, who in response to fair aspiration of the Armenian population of Nagorno Karabakh, provoked and allowed bloody national collision between two peoples in Azerbaijan since 1988. Judging from the development of the Russian-Armenian relations the Armenian lobby in Russia is probably absent. Even if it exists its role is unnoticeable. Despite the successful development of relationships between the two states the potential of friendship is not fully used, Armenians within the Russian public and political elite are not to blame for it. First of all because the notion of lobbying in Russia is still too young. Lobbying implies open contribution to the power bodies in taking favorable decisions excluding bribery. Unfortunately, today pushing of interests at any level in Russia has acquired the form of shadow lobbying. At that Russia lacks the law on lobbying and the attempts to introduce the bill to the Russian State Duma in 1992, 1995 and 2000 were a failure. Thus, with the transparent and public form of lobbying it's improperly to speak of the availability of Armenian lobby in Russia, the Russian politician considers. Armenians independently of citizenship are always potential lobbyists of Russia's interests both within the society and at the international level.