Russia: Other Points of View

THE WASHINGTON POST CONTINUES TO DISTORT THE NORTH CAUCASUS

COMMENTARY

 by Gordon Hahn

The Washington Post once again distorts reality in Russia’s North Caucasus. The Post’s (and U.S. mainstream media’s) malpractice of covering the North Caucasus only within the context of Russian human rights violations continues (see “Russia's political murders - When was the last time that killings of human rights activists were so blatant, and so common?,” Washington Post, 29 August 2009).  At first glance Philip Pan’s October 30^th article “In Russia, an intensifying insurgency” seemed a turn for the better.  However, a close reading reveals conformity with the biased approach.

MEDVEDEV'S GRADUAL THAW CONTINUES

COMMENTARY

 by Gordon Hahn

Even before the inauguration of Dmitrii Medvedev as Russias president I broached the idea of a likely thaw under the somewhat new administration, basing that view on both historical precedents and contemporary imperatives (Gordon M. Hahn, “Is A Russian Thaw Coming?,” Russia: Other Points of View, April 18, 2008).  Six weeks later, I reported some of the recent new signs of a coming and indeed already real if crawling thaw (Gordon M. Hahn, “More Signs of a Possible Thaw Under Medvedev,” Russia: Other Points of View, June 2, 2008).  A month later, I wrote that there would be a political thaw under Medvedev barring any unexpected upheavals: “Medvedev is on a leash.  If he learns to stay on the sidewalk and not wander into the traffic, Putin will gradually lengthen and very gradually remove that leash, fade into the premiership and perhaps leave it in a second Medvedev term.  In lieu of a major jihadist attack, an assassination, or an overly aggressive Western Russia policy, an economic and political thaw will likely develop at the pace with which Medvedev takes control.  Such a thaw will be very gradual – like watching an iceberg melt – but it will melt.” (Gordon M. Hahn, “The Politics of Unleashing,” Russia Profile, July 1, 2008).

PRESIDENT MEDVEDEV EXPRESSES SUPPORT FOR NONPROFITS

REPRINTS

by Clifford J. Levy

New York Times, November 23, 2009 

MOSCOW — President Dmitri A. Medvedev called Monday for tax incentives and other measures to assist Russia’s beleaguered nonprofit groups, which have come under government pressure in recent years.

Mr. Medvedev, promoting policies that he hopes will modernize the country, said in a meeting with human rights advocates that new laws would not alleviate all the problems the groups faced, but that they would certainly help.

“Our main goal is the support of the authority of nonprofit groups in society, and the attraction to this sector of more talented people and philanthropic resources,” Mr. Medvedev said. “We need to stimulate philanthropy and create a stimulus or a motivation for volunteers who toil for such organizations.”

The government has sought in recent years to establish more control over nonprofit groups, especially those that receive foreign assistance. Mr. Medvedev’s mentor, Prime Minister Vladimir V. Putin, the former president, has at times portrayed the groups as little more than tools that the West uses to meddle in Russia’s affairs.

IS RUSSIA READY FOR DEMOCRACY?

IN MY HUMBLE OPINION

SERIES #2  IS RUSSIA READY FOR DEMOCRACY?

By Sharon Tennison

A quote from the New York Times:  November 14, 2009

"It's time to stop treating Russia as a 'handicapped person," former Czech President Vaclav Havel said recently, responding to suggestions that Russia cannot be expected to reach democracy anytime soon. He urged that Russia be treated as a "partner country like any other," applying the same standards to Russia as are applied "to Burma, Brazil, the Czech Republic or any other country."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Let's use this quote as a springboard for pondering.

HOW DO WE, IN OUR EVERYDAY LIVES, WORK WITH THE GRAVE DISPARITIES AMONG PERSONS WITH WHOM WE ASSOCIATE?

We are not all equally endowed or capable or favored in life. We can't apply the same standard to everyone.  Whether we are teachers, lawyers, business owners, or elected Congressmen and women, we run up against situations where national histories, family situations, ethnic backgrounds, traumas, and other variables complicate outcomes.

RUSSIAN MODERNIZATION, CORRUPTION, AND THE MEDIA

REPRINTS

The Moscow Times

by William Dunkerley

President Dmitry Medvedev should start his modernization program by taking a hard look at the sorrowful state of the media in the country. Russia’s media are awash in a corrupt culture of paid-for news stories — propaganda masquerading as news. Few news outlets are free to tell the whole truth. Instead, they are subjugated by those who put money into the loss-making media companies in return for an opportunity to color the news in their own favor. They constitute a pluralistic but conscripted press, hardly a free press.

Articles are paid for not only by businesspeople, but by mayors, governors and natural resource monopolies controlled by the state. The government is clearly a big part of the problem.

With little free press, it is difficult for the electorate to make informed choices during elections, and the people are deprived of the aid of a Fourth Estate in exercising vigilance over their government.

RUSSIAN FEDERATION WEEKLY SITREP

by Patrick Armstrong

Medvedev Speech. Last week Medvedev gave the annual Presidential address to Parliament. (Russ) (Eng). The principle theme was “modernisation”: “Today we are talking about modernisation – this is the essential aspect of my Address today – about our desire to be modern.” His definition: “A truly modern society is the one that seeks constant renewal, continuous evolutionary transformation of social practices, democratic institutions, visions of the future, assessments of the present, the one engaged in gradual but irreversible changes in technological, economic and cultural spheres, the steady improvement of the quality of life.” He understands that this involves a major psychic change: “Instead of an archaic society in which the leaders think and decide for everyone we will become a society of clever, free and responsible people” and “we ourselves will change too”. These speeches are made annually (the Constitution requires them, Art 84.f) and I am interested that, for practically the first time, the Kommentariat appears to have actually read the speech rather than skimmed it looking for some phrase it can twist into a threat. But old blinders are still on as many commentators spun it as a criticism of Putin, because they never bothered to read Putin’s speeches. Here from Putin’s speech in 2004 (the first I looked at): “We want high living standards and a safe, free and comfortable life. We want a mature democracy and a developed civil society… We are interested in further integration of the Russian economy into the international economy.” What many people cannot imagine is that this is a long-term project carried out by a team. Putin stabilised things; Medvedev is to modernise things. But it’s the same project. The doing of it, is, of course, the problem. It will be neither easy nor short. Nor entirely successful.

RUSSIA'S SOCIALLY RESPONSIBLE BUSINESS

IN MY HUMBLE OPINION

by Sharon Tennison

A bear of a man covered with a leather coat and French hat walked into my St.Petersburg apartment yesterday. This 40-year-old was intent on serious discussion. The request for the meeting had come from one of Russia's largest companies in timber and pulp.  They wanted to discuss how to encourage charitable services and volunteerism among their workers in far away cities and towns - the "one company" cities, which one occasionally hears about.

I had asked for an agenda and had sent my questions for discussion.  It was a pleasant surprise that I didn't need to pull information from Denis. He began talking specifically to the points I had requested in my agenda and flooded me with facts regarding their business, their work in far out Russian regions, their 50/50 joint venture with a large American company (2007), the charity the company did during the Soviet years, and their relatively new Fund (2005), which was created solely to promote charity work among their workers.

PRESIDENTIAL ADDRESS TO THE FEDERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION

  IMPORTANT SPEECHES

http://eng.kremlin.ru

PRESIDENT OF RUSSIA DMITRY MEDVEDEV:

Citizens of Russia,

Deputies and members of the Federation Council,

Two months ago, in my article Go, Russia! I announced the principles for a new political strategy. In today’s Address to the Federal Assembly I want to outline the first specific steps for implementing this strategy. I will tell you about the immediate tasks ahead.

The foundation of my vision for the future is the firm conviction that Russia can and must become a global power on a completely new basis. Our country’s prestige and national prosperity cannot rest forever on past achievements. After all, the oil and gas production facilities that generate most of our budget revenue, the nuclear weapons that guarantee our security, and our industrial and utilities infrastructure – most of this was built by Soviet specialists. In other words, it was not we who built it. It is still keeping our country afloat today, but it is rapidly depreciating both morally and physically. The time has come for today’s generation of Russians to make their mark and take our country to a new, higher level of civilisation.

Last century, at tremendous cost and effort, an essentially illiterate country was transformed into what was at that time one of the world’s most influential industrial powers, a leader in creating advanced technology in the space, rocket and nuclear fields. But the closed society and totalitarian political regime made it impossible to hold onto this lead. The Soviet Union, sadly, remained an industrial and raw materials giant and proved unable to compete against post-industrial societies.

To access the full address, please click here

Russia's Economic Crisis and U.S.-Russia Relations: Troubled Times Ahead

ARTICLE CRITIQUE

Response to Heritage Foundation Executive Summary "Russia's Economic Crisis and U.S.-Russia Relations: Troubled Times Ahead" by Ariel Cohen and Richard Ericson

by Gordon Hahn

The article reviewed below is an executive summary of a set of proposals put forward by the Heritage Foundation’s Ariel Cohen and Richard E. Ericson. Although there are some commendable points made by the authors, it suffers from the usual Washington consensus bias that sees Russia’s role in international affairs as one that should serve primarily American and Western interests, regardless of Russia’s national and security interests.  No substantial concessions are made to Moscow.  Belated and therefore insubstantial concessions are made only to have their effect negated by putting new roadblocks in Moscow’s efforts to integrate into the global and Western economy.  The paper ignores NATO expansion – the pivotal issue impacting the relationship – and proposes to continue policies that dismantle and deny Russia a small sphere of influence in countries directly on its borders – while the U.S. reserves the right to add those same countries to its global sphere of ‘vital interests.’ 

To access the full analysis, please click here Download Heritage_Foundation_Cohen_Ericso_Nov_09

THE TALE OF TWO PRESIDENTS

ROPV CONTRIBUTORS

The tale of two presidents: a man for the country or a country for the man?

By Eugene Ivanov

A few weeks ago, the good old science of Kremlinology got a delightful gift.   At a meeting with members of the Valdai Club, Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin told the audience that in 2012, he and President Dmitri Medvedev will sit together and decide which of the two will run for presidency.  The interpretation of Putin’s words by Western pundits and the media was swift and unambiguous, if somewhat expandable.  They concluded that Putin is going to return to his old Kremlin office and possibly stay there until 2024.  

Before trying to infer what Putin actually meant to say, it’s worth pointing out that forecasting his future has always been a dubious job.  For example, a prominent Russia expert predicted, in January 2005, that “Putin will be out of office in the near future.”  Yet in the fall of 2007, the same expert opined that Putin will remain in power indefinitely by "possibly following declaration of a national military emergency."  Needless to say, neither forecast has come even close to getting materialized. 

It turns out that the much better predictor of what Putin will or will not do has been his own words.  Whatever one might think about the Russian strongman, lying for the sake of political expediency is not in his character (a feature pointed to by many world leaders, including President George W. Bush).  During his presidency, Putin has always maintained that he was not going to change the Constitution in order to run for a third term.  At the same time, he repeatedly indicated his desire to endorse, sometime in 2007, a “successor.”  This is exactly what happened in reality: in December 2007, Putin threw his weight behind Dmitri Medvedev who was nominated shortly before that by United Russia and other political parties.