Russia: Other Points of View

THE LIMITS OF COOPERATION WITH RUSSIA

REPRINTS

MSNBC.com

April 22, 2013

By Fiona Hill

Fiona Hill is director of the Center on the United States and Europe at the Brookings Institution. She served on the National Intelligence Council as the officer for Russia and Eurasia from 2006-2009. She is the author, with Clifford Gaddy, of the new book "Mr. Putin: Operative in the Kremlin."

In the wake of the Boston bombings, some have speculated whether  cooperation on counter-terrorism could put the U.S.-Russian relationship back on a more stable footing at a particular tense moment in bilateral relations. This will not be an easy task, even if both President Putin and President Obama are willing to try.

When Vladimir Putin became Russian president in the 2000s,  coordination on anti-terrorism efforts was his central idea for Russian-U.S. cooperation. Chechnya was an integral element for Putin. Even before the events of September 11, 2001, Putin repeatedly warned the United States of the connection between Russia’s Chechen insurgency and international terrorism. Now, 12 years later, when terrorists of Chechen ethnicity have struck the United States itself, that connection appears to have been made for him.

WHAT PUTIN AND THATCHER HAVE IN COMMON

REPRINTS

Moscow Times

22 April 2013

By Martin Sieff

There was a great irony in seeing the outpouring of heartfelt tributes to former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher after her death on April 8. Many of the loudest, most exaggerated expressions of praise came from fierce critics of current President Vladimir Putin. Conservative admirers, especially in the U.S., repeatedly maintained that no British or European leader of comparable stature had been seen anywhere since she was forced out by her own party in a political coup in December 1990.

Yet Thatcher does have a true heir in the world today — a leader who shares her iron will, her shrewd, crystal clear political judgment and her determination to restore and uphold the rights and interests of her long impoverished, long-demoralized people and restore them to their historic leading role on the world stage.

That leader is Putin.

During both the Soviet Union under the bungled leadership of Mikhail Gorbachev, and Russia under the incompetent presidency of Boris Yeltsin in the 1990s, there were entirely justified fears that society might break down in chaos, famine, urban riots and even civil war. Terrorist groups from ethnic minorities on the territorial fringes of both nations carried out repeated mass bombings that killed hundreds of civilians. The disintegration of both nations appeared inevitable.

RUSSIAN FEDERATION SITREP

by Patrick Armstrong

Russia Inc. A growing nervousness about the economy: the Economics Ministry has substantially dropped its forecast of GDP growth to 2.4% from 3.6% and the Minister warns of a possible recession this autumn; the outgoing and incoming heads of the Central Bank of Russia are concerned and so is Putin. Russia is still too dependent on energy exports and, as Europe sags, so do they. Coming over the horizon is North American energy production; dominance, some predict – the USA is close on Russia’s gas output already and, together with Canada, exceeds it. Diversifying its economy will not be easy for Russia Inc – perhaps desperately, Medvedev has offered a state prize to anyone who can solve the conundrum. As one strategy, Russia is more and more looking to China as a customer for energy but, while that gives Russia a growing market, it doesn’t do much for diversification.

Corruption. And still more cases opened, arrests and sentences – too many to keep listing. The Prosecutor General told the Duma that recorded corruption crimes were up nearly 25% to 49,513 and that more than 13,500 individuals had been prosecuted. I imagine the number is up because the pace of investigation has stepped up. Fraud, misappropriation of budget funds (defence contracts especially) and embezzlement involving abuse of office predominate: in short, officials are the greatest thieves. There can be no doubt that an effort much bigger than anything we have seen in twenty years (ever in Russian history?) is under way. One may wonder, however, given the slowness with which these sorts of crimes are investigated and prosecuted, whether the prosecutors have bitten off more than they can digest.

TANDEM 2.0: ITS NATURE, ORIGINS, AND CLOUDY FUTURE

by Gordon M. Hahn

Much has been written about the ‘death of the tandem’ of Vladimir Putin and Dmitrii Medvedev since they switched offices in the Kremlin.  Although analyzing the tandem has been akin to reading the tea leaves of Soviet politics in the era of ‘Kremlinology’, it is worthwhile examining whether the tandem still exists and what the nature of the relationship between Russia’s president and its prime minister are under the new configuration of power.

Although the tandem 2.0 is different from the tandem 1.0, it seems there is more than enough evidence suggesting the tandem survives and reason therefore to hypothesize about its political basis.  I have addressed on ROPV and elsewhere the disagreements over specific policies as well as the differences in general political orientation between the tandem’s two halves.  Suffice it to say here that Medvedev is more laissez faire in economics – having even referred to the ‘new’ conservatism of Reagan and Thatcher as models – and more pluralist, decentralized, and society-oriented in politics. Putin is more of a Russian “statist” and traditionalist (rather than socialist bent) preferring a strong state over both the polity and the economy.  Medvedev is more Western and more inclined to support Western positions in foreign policy; Putin decidedly ‘not so much.’

PUTIN 2.0 - YEAR ONE

By Gordon M. Hahn

It has been just about a year since Vladimir Putin 2.0 was inaugurated in the Kremlin as Russian president.  He was succeeding his own interregnum successor Prime Minister Dmitrii Medvedev and the liberalization policy carried out under the Medvedev-Putin tandem, referred to be the present author first as a ‘thaw’ and then with deepening liberalization, ‘perestroika 2.0. 

Perestroika 2.0 left several tasks unresolved: democratization, market liberalization, and political instability characterized by opposition mobilization, splitting within the Putin elite, and a malaise among Putin’s constituency within the population.  With Putin’s return to the Kremlin, democratization and market liberalization were no longer near the top of the agenda; stabilizing politics moved unequically to the top.  This does not mean that democratization and marketization are off limits for the mid- to long-term, but rather that they will not be pursued as ends in and of themselves and without pressure from below exerted by the opposition or external circumstances.

With political stabilization at the top of the agenda, Putin needed to accomplish three tasks: weaken the street opposition, consolidate the elite, and re-mobilize his popular constituencies.         

RUSSIA REPORT AND THE NATURE OF RUSSIAN DEMOCRACY ARTICLE

by Sharon Tennison

Hi y'all, from Georgia!

A six-day book tour within a 75 mile radius of Atlanta is winding down. Numbers of Kiwanis Clubs which hosted PEP delegations over the years also hosted me.  Other presentations included a Rotary luncheon, a library event, an article in the Newnan newspaper,  two TV spots that were taped, and an evening "book reading" for a house full of local residents interested in international affairs, and Russia in particular (after being part of the home hosting teams).

After sharing with you an analysis written this month, I'll touch on a bit of  exciting local color of Georgia.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 The following article answers a lot of the questions asked of me when traveling in middle America.  It is one of the best explanations of Russia's experience with growing a democracy (and America's frustration with it), that I've read.  Vlad Sobell, a highly respected Russia analyst who earlier fled Communism as a youth (google him),  provides insights we don't get in our US media.  Since leaving the USSR, Vlad has been obsessed with political systems around the world, what works, what doesn't, and what it would take to create a workable system.  Over the past 30 years he has followed Russia's bumpy efforts to try to democratize and become part of the free world after three and half generations of heavy Communist indoctrination. 

BACK ON TRACK TO NORMALCY INSTEAD OF RESET. IN THE WAKE OF MUNICH CONFERENCE

REPRINTS

by Pyotr Iskanderov

http://www.strategic-culture.org/

The 49^th Munich international security conference had some hidden obstacles. First of all, it took place at the time of utter uncertainty concerning the Syria’s situation. A solution requires close cooperation between the USA and Russia just exactly when the bilateral relations go through hard times. 

There were two major issues defining the agenda. First: is it possible to find a solution to the Syrian conflict aggravating the whole situation in the Middle East? Second: is the reset still in force or its initiator Barack Obama decided to alter priorities after being re-elected for the second term? 

The answers are still hanging the air. No reset speeches were heard this time. In February 2009 Vice President Joe Biden used the term, but this time he said something else. According to Biden, the USA want to get the relations with Russia «back to normal». 

The US Vice President didn’t hide the fact that there were many contradictions between the United States and Russia. The independence of Abkhazia and South Ossetia, the Syria’s crisis, the missile defense and further expansion of NATO and, finally, the human rights and democracy, the issues that have come to the fore recently. The Vice-President emphasized, «These differences are real, but we continue to see opportunities for the United States and Russia to partner in ways that advance our mutual security interest and the interest of the international community».. That’s what defined his meeting with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov. 

PUTIN'S POLITICAL PERESTROIKA: CONSTRUCTING A SYSTEM, OBSTRUCTING THE STREET

COMMENTARY

By Gordon M. Hahn

Amidst his ongoing crackdown on the more irreconcilable (in some cases, radical street opposition leaders, Russian President Vladimir Putin has continued some aspects of Dmitrii Medvedev’s political liberalization or ‘perestroika 2.0’.

         

Medevedev proposed a number of important liberalizing political reforms prior to the December 2011 Duma elections. Riots and subsequent mass demonstrations erupted which were led by a coalition of democratic, nationalist and socialist organizations.  Almost all of the reforms were implemented before Putin’s return to the Kremlin.  Of the two that were not, the most important was Medvedev’s proposal to return to the pre-Putin “Yeltsin era” electoral system for the State Duma, Russia’s lower house of parliament.  Under that system Duma deputies were, and now will be elected again (in 2016), in two ways. First, 225 deputies are elected according to the percentage of votes given to political parties; the other 225 elected in single-mandate districts.

RUSSIAN FEDERATION SITREP

by Patrick Armstrong

Adoptions. Putin would have been wiser to have vetoed the adoption ban and forced parliament to overturn it (Art 107.3): it has become the latest leitmotif of anti-Russia propagandists and has taken attention away from the equally absurd Magnitskiy Bill. But here we are. Protests in Moscow, St Petersburg and some other cities against it on Sunday attracted maybe 20K in total and have given the opposition something new to object to. There is said to be a petition calling for its ban and some opposition deputies are going to attempt to have it overturned in the Duma. And, as always in Russia, it’s far from clear exactly what the ban affects. However it wasn’t just a reaction to the Magnitskiy Bill: 19 adopted Russian children (out of about 40,000) have been done to death by their adopters in the USA (here’s one, another and an abuse trial) and there have been misgivings in Russia for years. (The usual “news” sources pretend the 19 are the total number of adoptees who have died). Putin complained that existing treaties are useless for allowing access by consular officials (federal-state jurisdictions are apparently the problem). So there is some background here.

Malfeasance. The OboronServis case continues with another arrest of a senior official and probably another one to come. Meanwhile the former Defence Minister refused to testify to the Investigative Committee, giving a written response instead. So this case is neither over nor is it being swept under the rug and nor is Serdyukov out of it. The St Petersburg corruption case has seen another arrest. Defence Minister Shoygu dismissed a senior military doctor following the deaths of some soldiers from pneumonia. Another police crime.

RUSSIAN FEDERATION SITREP

by Patrick Armstrong

Putin. On the 12^th Putin’s address to the Federal Assembly and on the 20^th his marathon press conference (not such bad health, after all). Nothing new – principal emphasis on domestic issues: corruption, qualitative growth, infrastructure and transparency. Foreign issues are what we’ve heard for years: Russia will pursue its own interests and resist being pushed around. An understandable pride in the Team’s achievements: from the press conference, in the last ten years “we have nearly doubled the country's GDP… We have increased the real incomes of the population by several fold…. The birth rate is the best in 20 years. We are taking the necessary steps, it is not enough so far, but progress is evident in healthcare, education and so on.” And, as always, slow and steady is what he wants in Russia and in the world. Perhaps it would not be too much of a stretch to say Putin I was about stopping the downward momentum; Medvedev was about loosening things up and starting towards qualitative growth; Putin II will be a continuation of that and, perhaps, (quite a lot in the Federation Council speech) a heavy attack on corruption. But, I say again: same program, same team.

Dima Yakovlev Bill. So named after a baby who died from negligence, the bill passed both houses with heavy support and Putin signed it into law. It’s retaliation for the US “Magnitskiy Bill” (and in my opinion a rather ineffective and misguided one. Although some amusing reactions: “callousness unusual even by Vladimir Putin’s standards” and the US Senate is offended.). There are a number of adoptions already in the pipeline; it’s not clear what will happen in these cases but Prokhorov says his Civic Platform party (ie he) will pay $50,000 to Russian families that adopt one of them.