BOAC: From my experience in CIS, it is very common that approaches are monitored by ATC. Even during ILS, you will be given information on distance, crosstrack and your glidepath error. DME equipment is few and far between, I clearly remember a NDB procedure to one of our destinations where for 2NDB approach the FAF was noted as "final descent point provided by approach controller". Here's one similar:
It seems that the ill fated (and executed) APCH to Smolensk was not a PAR approach; hence the resposibility for profile flown rests solely with the crew and you are indeed correct to re-itarate so.
Given the fact that in CIS final approaches are routinely monitored, controllers are trained for the task and most probably also required to issue instructions during final if the profile is incorrect (this authority does not extend over our EU registered, civilian operations still it happens so frequently) an additional safety layer exists. This is one more barrier breached during the accident. I believe that's why people with more understanding/exposure to CIS/Military ATC-to-Crew procedures keep digging at the ATC aspect so vigorously.
Yours sincerely,
FD (the un-real)