The Wrongs of Spring and the Western Media

[Admiral_Kolchak]

Thursday, Apr. 15, 2004. Page 6

The Wrongs of Spring and the Western Media

By Eric Kraus

Scanning the U.S. press, one is surprised to learn that Russia lives under an increasingly Stalinist dictatorship: "with all dissent suppressed, a palpable sense of fear rules the streets"; "The KGB has seized power, reimposing Soviet-era censorship"; the good-hearted and selfless Mikhail Khodorkovsky rots in prison, while President Vladimir Putin's cronies grab his assets. Western views of Russia have historically been colored by demonology, and after a brief love affair with Boris Yeltsin, Cold War rhetoric is increasingly back in fashion.

Putin can apparently do no right: He allows the oligarchs free rein -- he's "their puppet"; he cracks down on them -- he's "a dictator"; he retains Yeltsin-era holdovers -- he's "weak and indecisive"; he replaces them -- he's "a Stalinist." Putin's overwhelming popularity is ascribed solely to his iron-fisted control of the media. The one-third drop in poverty in just four years, the five years of 6 percent to 8 percent economic growth, the dramatic reversal in capital flight, the huge budget and trade surpluses -- all are written off as merely reflecting high oil prices (which, oddly enough, had no such magical effect during their previous 1995-96 peak.)

Democracy can be broadly defined as governance based upon the consent of the governed and, by this criterion, Russia clearly qualifies. No one can deny that Putin is hugely admired: People live far better than four years ago; they have at least some confidence in the future; and perhaps most critically, Russians no longer feel slightly embarrassed by their nationality. Polls show that Putin has 75 percent to 80 percent approval, and this in a country that traditionally hates those in power.

Yes, the Kremlin has virtually complete control over the audiovisual media (as opposed to beacons of pluralism such as Fox TV). Yet the print media remain more critical than in most Western countries (apparently, the rampaging siloviki simply forgot to confiscate Boris Berezovsky's Russian newspapers ... ). In Russia, as elsewhere, television retains a huge potential for electoral manipulation, yet this does little to explain Putin's popularity. Despite equally complete control over television by oligarchs supportive of the Kremlin in the mid-'90s, Yeltsin's ratings rarely exceeded high single digits (perhaps, much like the rest of mankind, Russians do not believe everything they see on television).

Russians travel abroad in the millions; international news channels are widely available on cable television; the Internet is totally uncensored; a tell-all book slamming the president is a bestseller in Moscow, while numerous bitterly anti-government commentators and think tanks distill their venom quite unmolested. Anyone who asserts that the Soviet system can be rebuilt on such a base is either blissfully ignorant of Soviet realities or, more likely, is pushing a political agenda.

In fact, foreign commentators are missing the essential point: We, both Russia and the West, have been pretty incredibly lucky. Following the chaos of the Yeltsin years and the trauma and humiliation of the 1998 crash, Russia was indeed ripe for dictatorship: Bonapartism at best, a return to the Soviet Union at worst. Instead, it got Putin. Rather than a reimposition of Soviet-style bureaucracy, we have the most reformist government in Russian history; rather than military expansionism, a begrudging acquiescence to the expansion up to Russia's borders of a potentially hostile alliance; rather than growing poverty and economic dislocation fueling fascist and centrifugal tendencies, a stable country rapidly becoming middle-class.

Russia is currently living through a period of accelerating change. The Soviet edifice has been torn down, with the new structure still under construction. Inevitably, certain much-needed economic reforms will prove unpopular and many still bitterly regret the loss of old Soviet certainties. While Russian democracy falls well short of the Swiss model, before writing it off consider for a moment Western Europe's seemingly hopeless attempts at economic reform, frustrated at every turn by entrenched sectoral interests. Certainly, anyone lamenting the loss of the "checks and balances" provided by the rapacious Russian oligarchs is insane.

Putin has shown himself remarkably moderate in his exercise of power. More than one errant soul has been offered a second chance (often undeservedly). And only when Khodorkovsky et al. flatly refused to back down from their challenge to the basic authority of the state, seeking instead to raise support abroad, were they finally crushed.

While it is unarguable that the concentration of authority in the president's hands carries a long-term risk, given the current state of Russian society there may be no better alternative. Putin is a man with a mission, and he has a limited period of time in which to accomplish that mission. Had he failed to restructure the state at the beginning of his mandate, there would have been a very real danger of it continuing to disaggregate, leaving the road open for someone far more sinister. He will now certainly brook no further delays to his reform program.

This is fertile ground for misunderstandings. Many Russians sincerely believe that the West would like nothing better than to see Russia weak, dependent and poor. Western governments and media adulated Mikhail Gorbachev and generally loved Yeltsin -- that adorable drunken bear who, in the view of most Russians, gave the West everything it wanted in return for a few kind words. The "young reformers" (Boris Nemtsov, Anatoly Chubais et al.) received enthusiastic support, despite the fact that their policies, perhaps necessarily, led to the rise of the oligarchy, contributing to the vast misallocation of wealth, corruption of the media and the impoverishment of the Russian people.

The road to hell is paved with good intentions: The West failed signally in its noble attempt to steer Russia's early post-communist recovery in the desired direction. Now Russia is rapidly recovering from its post-Soviet complexes and from its desperate need for Western approval. Russia shall now sink or swim solely on its own virtues. The West has vanishingly little ability to influence the course of events in any positive fashion.

This relative impotence is, unfortunately, asymmetrical -- what the West has retained is a non-negligible potential for mischief. Tendentious and carping press coverage encourages the Russophobia of old; the resultant ostracism and blunt political pressure on Russia to set her domestic policies to the liking of Brussels or Washington will result not in the desired changes, but simply in further deterioration in the dialogue. To antagonize and alienate Russia as she evolves toward a stable, middle-income member of the European concert would be stupid almost beyond belief.

The integration of Russia with the West is of vital interest to both sides. For Russia, it ensures further opening: Economically, this restrains domestic oligopolies and rent-seekers looking to perpetuate their stranglehold; politically, it provides a vital counterweight to isolationism and self-referential ideologies. For the West, it ensures a stable neighbor and valuable trading partner. To treat Russia as some sort of renegade -- the reactionary Slavic backwater hated and feared by European liberals since the Congress of Vienna; the communist monster berated by the right since Yalta -- serves only the interests of the worst elements on both sides.


Eric Kraus, chief strategist for Sovlink Securities, contributed this comment to The Moscow Times. For his full views on the subject see: http://www.sovlink.ru

http://www.themoscowtimes.com/storie...04/15/006.html

[Voyager13b]

OK, sounds like a leftist apology to me. I think Russia is held in good stead in America, by and large. Of course, there are some problems, as it would be nice if Russia had the benefit of free and open media, and fair access to government controlled media by all parties.

Putin is very popular, and it is doubtful that the various abuses of State controlled TV had much to do with the outcome of this election (Putin is pretty popular in the US as well), but it would be healthier in the long run if Russians had the freedom to form their own Fox network. The US suffered from decades of left oriented national news, and after Fox entered the picture, the public gave it's support in a big way. In fact, the only people who complain are those from the left that lost their information monopoly.

Russia can survive freedom of expression on the public airwaves as well. It's one thing for a government to represent the population. It's very different when that same government decides that it is best for the electorate to only be exposed to incumbent opinion on nationwide broadcasts. Who is controlling who?


Voyager

[Admiral_Kolchak]

>>>>>>OK, sounds like a leftist apology to me<<<<<<<


The author of this article is a prominent Western financial analyst living in Moscow. I doubt he is a leftist apologist.

[Voyager13b]

I'm sure he is sincere, and it really doesn't matter who he is, or where he lives. I agree with some of the things he said, but he pushed a number of stereotypical buttons that (in my view) lead me to believe that he is grounded on the left.

You pasted his words, I posted an observation. If he were here, I'd ask him straight up. Walter Cronkite had been a prominent western news figure for decades, and he is to the left what Osama Bin Ladin is to Islam. Cronkite could have filled in for Vladimir Posner from Washington, and no one would have noticed the change (my apology to Posner, as his TV tune changed since the Soviet censors lost their jobs).

Voyager

[Rain]

You mean the FOX Tv Series?

Voyager, these bums are responsible for making 40% of Americans think Saddam was behind 9/11. Cant believe you watch that freaky mix of journalism and reality-tv...

R

[Rain]

Putin and Russia took a backstage since 9/11 and Iraq, Bushi has got his own plan right now. With the expansion of NATO and new voting rights for the people oppressed by Russian terror earlier, sooner or later Russia will have to shape up or face a regime change. And those rotting nukes dont scare anyone anymore...

( Let alone the 'army' that lost to a few thousand Chechen volunteers... )

R