Russia: Other Points of View

CAN RUSSIA FIX ITSELF BY 2012?

 by Nikolas Gvosdev

In 2010, Russia is picking up the pieces after the train wrecks that derailed its express return to great power status-the near-collapse of its stock market, the aftereffects of the Georgia war, and the global financial crisis. The good news-for the Kremlin-is that despite major falls in the prices for energy and raw materials from their 2008 highs, the system set up by Vladimir Putin survived. It did not come crashing down as some had predicted. Unrest was contained and companies teetering on the verge of bankruptcy got bailouts that prevented their Russian owners (or the state) from losing control to Western banks.

The bad news: the rainy-day stabilization fund is set to run out of money by the end of the year, and the fund supporting an ambitious array of national projects will see the till run dry by 2012. So Russia is running against the clock. It needs to rebuild its budget reserves to pay salaries and pensions so that much of the middle class which depends on the state for its employment stays supportive of the regime. It must get its new ambitious energy projects into place-especially the Nordstream and South Stream pipelines that promise a direct avenue to Russia's most important European customers-before alternatives that would erode Russia's advantages can be solidified (e.g. a Nabucco pipeline that takes in energy from Central Asia and Iraqi Kurdistan). It must work to solidify its growing sphere of influence in the Eurasian space before Europe recovers from its expansion fatigue and resumes the eastward march of the Euro-Atlantic world. Most importantly, it must keep maintain the "Putin bargain" in place: giving the Kremlin effective control over the political process in return for prosperity and opportunity. With a weak banking sector and major infrastructure challenges posing two key threats to that bargain, and without record-high energy prices bringing in "excess" income-this will be a hard challenge to meet.

KREMLIN TWO-STEP: MODERNIZE OR MARGINALIZE

REPRINTS

 Japan Times,  January 10, 2010

By DMITRI TRENIN

MOSCOW - Westerners often see Russian politics in terms of a high-level struggle between liberals and conservatives: Ligachev and Yakovlev under Mikhail Gorbachev; reformers and nationalists under Boris Yeltsin; siloviki and economic liberals under Vladimir Putin. Westerners also view Russia in terms of a tradition whereby every new czar partly repudiates the legacy of his predecessor, creating a political thaw at the beginning of a new reign. Nikita Khrushchev's de-Stalinization is Exhibit A.

Both methods were used to describe the Putin-Dmitri Medvedev relationship to understand its nature and dynamic, and what it portends for Russia. But observers remain puzzled.

To dismiss Medvedev as a mere Putin puppet, a constitutional bridge between Putin's second and third presidential terms, would be both unfair and wrong. Russia's third president has a broader role and a distinct function.

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. 

MEDVEDEV: POLITICAL DUNCE, DUPE, DECEPTIONIST, OR DEMOCRAT?

COMMENTARY

by Gordon Hahn 

For nearly a decade Russia has been living under a stealth-like soft authoritarianism, not a 'managed democracy', as many persist in calling the regime. Last week's local elections removed the cloaking device from the system's no longer stealth-like dagger.  'You Tube' and various Russian websites exposed efforts to control and falsify the vote, the bulk of which were undertaken by supporters of the authorities' party, United Russia, although not necessarily at the request of Medvedev or Putin.  

This is not to say that the election results were completely falsified.  In some regions, such as in the North Caucasus republics of Adygeya and Karachaevo-Cherkessia, opposition candidates managed to win mayoral elections in the second largest cities in both of those republics.  However, on the whole and especially in the important city council vote in Moscow, the elections were a real abomination.  Hence, even Russia's 'managed opposition' perceived the demise of Russia's hitherto virtual democracy. 

October 11's elections exposed President Dmitry Medvedev either negatively as a political dunce, dupe, or deceptionist - or more positively as a skillful reformer maneuvering in an authoritarian-friendly environment.  Which conclusion you come to depends on what your interpretation of the politics surrounding the elections is.  Which one is right will be borne out by Medvedev's (and Prime Minister Vladimir Putin's) future actions.  

RUSSIA'S TILT TOWARD CHIINA

ROPV CONTRIBUTORS

by Andrey Tsygankov

Russia is increasingly unable to resist the charm of China’s economic and political influence. As Russia’s relatively low productivity translates into declining competitiveness, China’s ways of influencing the north continue to expand.

Even routine domestic economic decisions in Russia are increasingly made with a consideration for China. For instance, Beijing sent a delegation to Moscow in July to negotiate conditions of a large group of ethnic Chinese affected by the Moscow government’s decision to close the large Cherkizovsky Market following multiple violations of labor and immigration law. Headed by Beijing’s deputy trade minister, the delegation negotiated restoration of the trading area on condition of a Chinese $1 billion investment.

But in recognition of the growing need for China’s investments and export markets, Russia was unwilling to press environmental claims against its neighbor when it polluted the Amur River.

China’s rising importance has translated into the growing prominence of the Sinophiles in Russia’s national discussions. Since the end of the Soviet Union, the China discourse has evolved from one dominated by the Westernizers to one largely controlled by the Sinophiles, who have supporters in the government, energy firms with ties to Asia and the military-industrial complex.

NEW YORK TIMES ON RUSSIA-GEORGIAN WAR

COMMENTARY

New York Times Softens the Blow of Forthcoming EU Report on Russia-Georgian Five-Day War.

by Gordon Hahn

On September 29th, the NYT published an article that purported to be a news story detailing leaked findings of European Union's report on the causes of, and violations of international law committed during the August 2008 Five Day Georgia-Russian War (Ellen Barry, "E.U. Report to Place Blame on Both Sides in Georgia War," New York Times, September 29, 2009).  The article gives the impression that this exhaustive report leveled but one charge against Georgia and then the author moved quickly to cast doubt on the veracity of that supposedly lone charge.

The charge against Georgia mentioned in the article is important enough - that Georgia invaded and started the war.  However, the NYT article conveniently omits other charges against Georgia directly connected with starting the war. 

RUSSIA, POLAND, and “HISTORY”

ROPV CONTRIBUTORS

by Rodric Braithwaite

(A revised version of the original "Russia, Poland and the History Wars", which appeared on www.opendemocracy.net and other sites)

A senior Russian official once asked me why Poland needed to join NATO: after all, Russia wasn’t about to invade the place. I agreed that he was probably right. But the Poles didn’t know that: three partitions in the eighteenth century; two risings in the nineteenth century and two in the twentieth; the carve-up in 1939; and more. “Why do you bring up all that old stuff?” my friend responded.

History is an essential part of a nation’s self-image. It is rewritten by every generation. Even the settled democracies can find it hard to come to terms with their past. The British have barely brought their relationship with Ireland into an objective historical focus. The Irish, with good reason, find it even harder.

History is politics in all countries. But in countries which have been through the traumas suffered by Russia and Eastern Europe in the past century, it is unrealistic to hope that they will soon be able to write what the rest of us would regard as “objective” history. 

BLACK SEA WARS

REPRINTS

By Patrick Buchanan

Sep 22, 2009

In August, the Georgian navy seized a Turkish tanker carrying fuel to Abkhazia, Georgia's former province whose declaration of independence a year ago is recognized by Russia but not the West. 

The Turkish captain was sentenced to 24 years. When Ankara protested, he was released. Abkhazia has now threatened to sink any Georgian ship interfering in its "territorial waters," but it has no navy. 

Russia, however, has a Black Sea Fleet and a treaty of friendship with Abkhazia, and has notified Tbilisi that the Russian coast guard will assure, peacefully, the sea commerce of Abkhazia. 

Not backing down, Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili -- who launched and lost a war for South Ossetia in 48 hours in August 2008 -- has declared the blockade of Abkhazia, which he claims as Georgian national territory, will remain in force. And he has just appointed as defense minister a 29-year-old ex-penitentiary boss with a questionable record on human rights who wants to tighten ties to NATO. 

BREAKING NEWS: KUCINICH, PRICE FORM BIPARTISAN CONGRESSIONAL RUSSIA CAUCUS

Washington D.C. 

September 22, 2009 

Congressmen Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) and Tom Price (R-GA) today announced the formation of a bipartisan caucus to address issues that are of mutual concern to Russia and the United States and to examine ways to improve friendship, dialogue and international exchange between the two nations. The announcement comes as Russian President Dmitry Medvedev  arrives in the United States tonight for the G-20 summit in Pittsburgh on September 24-25.

"The relationship between the United States and Russia has influenced the path of global development and the course of world politics. Today we announce the bipartisan Congressional Russia Caucus to help make sure that the relationship we share with Russia is equitable and friendly.  I look forward to working with Congressman Price and other members who share our goals of ensuring that the future of American-Russian relations is strong and peaceful," said Kucinich. 

"Few matters in the international arena can be discussed today without giving due consideration to Russia's influence in global affairs," said Rep. Price. "By opening a dialogue and engaging in diplomatic fact-finding, we hope to advance a stronger understanding of Russian policy and how it affects the United States and its allies. Congressman Kucinich's breadth of knowledge of foreign affairs is considerable, and I look forward to working together to move the U.S.-Russia relationship in a more productive and principled direction."   

The Russia Caucus will serve to maintain an open and constructive relationship between lawmakers from both countries by encouraging dialogue and the free exchange of ideas.

RUSSIAN FEDERATION WEEKLY SITREP

By Patrick Armstrong

History again. Tuesday was the anniversary of the German attack on Poland, which is generally taken as the beginning of the Second World War and many gathered in Gdansk to commemorate it. Putin was there for Russia and preceded his visit with an article he wrote (or caused to be written) in Gazeta Wyborcza. It called for a balanced view: one that speaks of the Soviet-German Non-Aggression Pact to be sure, but also of the Munich agreement and the generally flabby response to Hitler than many countries practised. All very historically accurate and reasonable (although he couldn’t resist the temptation to remind us that Poland grabbed a bit of Czechoslovakia after Munich). As to Western MSM coverage of this, ya pays yer  money and ya takes yer chances,  but I’ll bet you won’t see this quoted: “The people of Russia, whose destiny was crippled by the totalitarian regime…”. In any event, none of this is very new and Putin is quite correct: no country has much to be proud of. Here’s Putin’s speech (Eng Russ) making the same points.

Military reform. Yesterday the top military leaders of Russia met to discuss military reform. A no doubt painful discussion. One topic would be whether to bring naval units under command of the North Caucasus Military District. It is said that one of the problems last year was the lack of unity of command.