Tag Archives: Russia

Ekaterina Schulmann

Below is a translation of a speech given by Russian political scientist and human rights activist Ekaterina Schulmann, cut and pasted in its entirety from an essay by Alexey Vlasenko who is the translator and a contributor to The Daily Kos. Schulmann has an interesting take on Putin’s motivation for the Ukraine invasion.

“Many people will ponder this question and come up with many different answers, all of which will seem logical.  Naturally, I have my own hypothesis, which I don’t claim is the one truth.  Nevertheless, since we are having such a remarkable discussion, I will share it.

He did this to halt time.  I’ll try to explain what this implies.

I think that these processes which we [political scientists] were observing, including the transformation of values, of worldviews, of public opinion [specifically in Russia], were real.  I do not think that we were all in thrall of illusions when we noted that violence in society is decreasing; that crime rates are falling; that new generations have a new value system; that video games actually reduce violence, rather than increase it; that, in general, the younger the social stratum, the more pronounced the decline in violent crime and in consumption of hard liquor; that imperial nostalgia is fading into the past.

Now, turn this picture around, and imagine yourself on the other side.  There you sit and watch as the sands of time slip through your fingers.  You will inevitably be succeeded by — let’s use his language — traitors.  Your children are traitors.  They do not share your view of life, they do not share your view of the world, they do not see that which you see with such clarity. You are the last defender of the fortress.  They will surrender it to the enemy, because they do not even consider him an enemy, and no matter how much you try to convince them, they still won’t consider.

A sizable, cultured and educated segment of the public sits around you at a safe distance, looks on and says:  “Go on, we’ll wait.  When you die, it will be our turn.  The sympathies of the future are on our side.  The youth idolizes us, not you.  But do go on, sit there for now, why not.  We will not storm the Kremlin, we only need to wait.”

A year passes, and another, then a third.  Everything continues in the same vein.  At the same time, your head is full of geopolitics, and the neighboring country is causing you unease.  It had somehow made progress, which is very disturbing.  And you realize that a little more, just a tiny bit longer, and that’s it, your historical time will end.  Your window will shut.  They will tell you: “Well, that’s enough, get down from there.  The next ones are coming.” And these next ones are unacceptable to you.  From your point of view, they are worse than useless, they will doom everything, they will ruin everything.

“He’ll smash to bits the sacred vessels, he’ll feed the dirt with royal oil, he’ll squander everything – and by what right?” [from The Covetous Knight, by Alexander Pushkin].  Read that again, and realize that this is not about money.  You will be seized with horror, at this hatred for one’s heirs, hatred for the living simply because they shall go on living.  “It’s time for me to rot, and you to blossom.”  A reasonable person can accept this, can caress a baby, understanding that “yes, I will turn to dust, but you will live on and prosper.”

But if you happen to be constituted a little bit differently, and you also happen to hold a great deal of power in your hands, then you can do this trick: onto the heads of all these future generations, you will overturn a heavy concrete slab, which will crush them forever, or least in any foreseeable perspective. That future that they wanted, they won’t get.  Instead, they will get the future your way, even after you are no longer among the living, because you will do such a thing, oh my…

You are inside, you understand?  Yes, inside this fortress that you’re guarding, you will figuratively detonate an atomic bomb.  True, there will be no life left in the fortress, but it will be radioactive and therefore unapproachable, and so it will forever remain “unconquered”, so to speak.

Not to speak of the specific culprit, with all due respect for him and his functions, but of a whole social and demographic stratum. Have you seen our average age figures?  But it’s not just age per se. It’s a certain social affiliation, a certain kind of experience, a certain world view that is formed by this experience.  Anyone who can’t accept the flow of time and come to terms with it, yet possesses power, could do this kind of thing.

This is my explanation.  It’s only a working hypothesis, but that’s how it is.  I do see confirmation from many sources, as well as in very public official pronouncements about how “we need to do this right now, tomorrow would be too late”, just another moment and everything will turn to irrevocable regret and musings of “we should have…”

This sentiment of “time flowing away” is something that I have been hearing for a long time, I think.  I speak about this whenever I discuss generational change.  The feeling that somehow history is not headed “in our direction”, this hatred and disgust for tomorrow, because “it is not what I need”, is clearly audible [in Putin’s speeches].  What was hard to grasp is that someone would go to such ends in an attempt to drown out these apparently unbearable feelings.

The trouble is, of course, that this terrible work of isolation is being done from both sides.  The wall is being built from both outside and inside.  We cannot blame the outside world for wanting to protect itself from, let’s say it out loud, an aggressive regime that is attacking and killing people.  Still, the labor of isolation is being worked by four hands.  It’s horrible.  [To repair the damage] will take a lot of work over a very long time.  Simply returning to a level that, until now, we took for granted, will require an unimaginable expenditure of effort and resources.  

It’s remarkable and tragic how humanity can squander its strength like this.”

Lavrov Speaks

According to an article published in Newsweek and reposted by MSN, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov reportedly said-

“”Our special military operation is meant to put an end to the unabashed expansion [of NATO] and the unabashed drive towards full domination by the U.S. and its Western subjects on the world stage,” Lavrov told Rossiya 24, according to a translation from Russian state-run media outlet RT.”

The purpose behind Putin’s “special military operation” seems to be shifting a bit. Originally it was meant perform the “denazification” of Ukraine. Now Lavrov is saying that the purpose is to stop domination of the US and NATO in the world. To its dismay, Russia has embarrassed itself by the poor performance of its military and its equipment so it is trying to distract observers from its bloody nose by posturing itself to be against a more global threat.

Putin is hypersensitive to sharing a border with a NATO country. As this is being written, there are reports of Russian military equipment moving towards the border with Finland. Earlier, the Kremlin sternly warned Sweden and Finland against joining NATO.

Outwardly, Putin acts like he thinks that NATO is an active threat to Russian territory. What he really thinks will probably never be known for sure, but he definitely seems to be afraid of the influence of western culture and openness on Russia. What many observers suggest is that Putin was horrified and deeply embarrassed by the collapse of the Soviet Union and he seeks to reclaim what he believes was its power and respect in the world.

A common theme in Russian media is that America is a failed empire and its global influence has gone too far for too long. They point to the cultural and political disorder in America and to instability in its governance. All the while, we keep shoveling coal into that fire. Russian media pays great attention to Fox News personalities like Tucker Carlson because of his sharp criticism of the actions of the US and NATO in the war in Ukraine. Now is the time for Carlson to stop aiding the other side with his fratricidal talk. Carlson’s handlers need to step up and do the right thing. Lachlan and Rupert Murdoch should be feeling some heat over this.

America is already in a very real war with both Russia and China over democracy vs autocracy. Both countries seek to knock America from its position of influence in the world. China is perhaps a bit more patient than Russia. The irony is that we may knock ourselves out of this position.

Russia’s Dark Future

For you Russophiles out there, Nina L. Khrushcheva, great-grand daughter of Nikita Khrushchev, has written a short essay on how Putin’s war might play out. In an earlier essay, she asks the question-

Stalinism didn’t die until Stalin did. The same was true of Maoism. Will it be true of Putinism as well?

Like others, Khrushcheva makes a case for Putin’s desire to establish an “Orthodox Christian kingdom of Rus”. These are interesting but very dangerous times.

Hard and Soft Propaganda

There is an interesting Op-Ed in the LA Times on the nature of propaganda and how it is used, written by Megan Hyska of Northwestern University. Putin’s recent exercises in the application of propaganda is used as an example. Persuasion isn’t always the goal. You’ll probably recognize that these techniques are used everywhere. I won’t repeat any of it here, but it is worth a glance.

Will Russian Sanctions Work?

It remains to be seen if the economic sanctions imposed on Russia by the west will have even a smidgen of effect on Putin. Western sanctions on the USSR had substantial effect on the Soviet people back in the cold war days, but the leadership of the USSR lasted for a very long time in this condition. It is naive of us to think that it will be any different with the Putin regime. Look at Iran and North Korea. They have lived under extreme sanctions for a very long time while under the tight control of their leadership and even have developed or will develop nuclear weapons.

One difference today in Russia is the relatively large middle class. They are accustomed to a lifestyle where goods and services are abundant. The smack down of the Russian economy will adversely affect them. But will it make a difference in Putin’s autocratic behavior? In the past, Putin’s response to dissent has been to crack down using the police and security services to enforce draconian law. Putin does not report to the Russian people. Like the old story of boiling the frog, he has cannily built a tight power structure around himself over time.

Will pinching the finances of the oligarchs make the difference? There is already talk of them turning to block chain schemes to park their money. Sanctions mean that money will begin to flow elsewhere. It seems doubtful that Putin would have allowed this kind of Achilles Heel of a powerful class to exist. Some think that the oligarchs report to Putin and not the other way around.

One beneficiary of this situation is thought to be China. It surely hasn’t gone unnoticed in China that the disconnection of western business will provide a great many business opportunities in Russia as well as an expansion of their sphere of influence. All we can do is to watch it unfold.

Putin’s invasion of Ukraine will bring negatives to his regime. Whether it will bring him down seems unlikely. Historical precedence does not give much hope to the idea that Putin will have a ‘come to Jesus’ moment and cause him to relent.

Russia’s status as a nuclear power worries everyone, of course. Adherence to the strategic doctrine of Mutual Assured Destruction (MAD) between nuclear states has limited warfare to the use of conventional arms for generations. It has been the doctrine of the US to incorporate a fire break between the use of conventional and nuclear arms. Whether this is true for Russia is unclear. They may see nuclear arms as part of a normal escalation in force. This would be most unfortunate if true. How the west would respond to the release of nuclear weapons in Ukraine or against other states of the former Soviet Union is also unclear, but there are surely contingency plans for this eventuality somewhere in the pentagon. I hope.

The unifying affect on the west in responding to Putin’s aggression is encouraging but it may not be enough to stop Putin from further invasions. Let us hope that this madman can be contained.

Are we sufficiently unified in purpose going forward?

An article I read in Spiegel online deserves comment. My German is too paltry to be of use so I read Spiegel because it is in English and seems credible.

The article in question is titled “Russian Foreign Policy: ‘We Are Smarter, Stronger and More Determined’ ” and is the transcript of an interview by Christian Neef of Spiegel. Neef interviewed Sergey Karaganov, known as the honorary head of the Council on Foreign and Defense Policy and Dean of Faculty at National Research University Higher School of Economics in Russia according to Wikipedia.

Karagonov is quite blunt in his distrust of NATO and confident in Russia’s determination to take it’s place as the dominant Eurasian power. Just a few bits of the interview-

Karaganov: The Russian media is more reserved than Western media. Though you have to understand that Russia is very sensitive about defense. We have to be prepared for everything. That is the source of this occasionally massive amount of propaganda. But what is the West doing? It is doing nothing but vilifying Russia; it believes that we are threatening to attack. The situation is comparable to the crisis at the end of the 1970s and beginning of the 1980s.

SPIEGEL: You are referring to the stationing of Soviet intermediate-range ballistic missiles and the American reaction?

Karaganov: Europe felt weak at the time and was afraid that the Americans might leave the continent. But the Soviet Union, though it had already become rotten internally, felt militarily strong and undertook the foolishness of deploying the SS-20 missiles. The result was a completely pointless crisis. Today, it is the other way around. Now, fears in countries like Poland, Lithuania and Latvia are to be allayed by NATO stationing weapons there. But that doesn’t help them; we interpret that as a provocation. In a crisis, we will destroy exactly these weapons. Russia will never again fight on its own territory …

July 13, 2016. Spiegel Online International.

It should not be a surprise that Russia has been steadily acquiring a gleaming confidence and a recharging of energetic nationalism under Putin. Too much ink has been spilled on Putin the man rather than Russia the state. I would question whether sufficient resources are being applied to diplomacy with this confident Russian state. I sincerely hope that our elected officials have the intellectual bandwidth to understand what is happening.

I shall now veer in a somewhat different direction.

It is my impression that the Fourth Estate in America is consistently failing in it’s responsibility to participate in the very democracy that facilitates its existence by not keeping the spotlight on the powerful.  Worse yet, a distracted, flaccid American populace consistently fails to hold this pillar of our society accountable.

Elected officials and the agencies they fund are only too willing to keep our country on a perpetual war footing because the production of war materiel keeps people employed and stockholders fat and happy. Defense dollars pour into military installations in the US and the world round to maintain staff, pay contractors for supplies, and drive money into the local economy.

The influential petrochemical industry is only too happy to warn of the dire consequences of lost American influence in the far flung oily spots of the world. That the US is willing to send and keep forces abroad to protect petroleum interests- in the name of liberty- only adds credence to the meme that oil is worth almost any sacrifice in blood and treasure. Against such a longstanding and compelling circumstance, how can elected officials support alternative energy technologies that might undermine the profits of big oil who we’ve fought so hard to support?

Politicians find strident support from the electorate by the evangelical rhetoric of flexing our military might for God and country. And liberty, if you were lucky enough to be born in the US. They well know that a large segment of the electorate is susceptible to all of highly produced emotional imagery of flag waving, weeping veterans kneeling before a tombstone, and country singers belting out patriotic lyrics. Yet with all of the concern for American veterans, nobody has demanded satisfaction on the following question: Are we being careful enough in choosing where we send our troops? Is it based on rock solid information and against qualified threats? The youth who become our troops are national treasure. Yet we send them into battle spaces where combatants look like non-combatants and are fighting over conflicting religious doctrines. When they come home injured we turn them loose in a shamefully inadequate Veterans Administration hospital system. Perhaps a bit of time on the 4th of July and Veterans Day should be devoted to a meditation on this rather than beer and burgers? Is this our best effort?

Electronic media have a clear conflict of interest in their focus on the costly horse race aspects of politics. “Money has corrupted our electoral politics!!” is the shrill cry. But what fraction of that filthy lucre is channeled to the very media in the form of political advertising?  More than a little, perhaps?

Once again we will have conflicting superpowers vying for global influence and resources. With Russia on the rise, do we have the unity and compelling interest to avoid armed conflict with them? What caliber of elected officials do we need to grapple with a future that seems sure to bring the threat of nuclear conflict back? Are we ready? We have never needed a quorum of mature adult voices demanding civilized behavior as much as we do today. Heaven help us all.

 

US Russian Policy is Pathetic

I just have to say that in regard to the deteriorating situation with the Soviet Union Russian Federation, it does not appear that either the EU or the US have their best thinkers working on it. I think US leaders have misunderstood Putin from the beginning and I see very little to convince me that Obama’s people, the Congress, or any other high level functionaries known to me have a clue how to get their arms around Russian behavior or a workable diplomacy.

Certainly recent (post-Ford) US incursions into foreign lands with troops or drones have taken us off the moral high ground in this regard. How can the US lecture Russia on the invasion of Crimea when we invaded Iraq based on lies, subterfuge, and outright errors?

Bush 43 and Clinton had historical opportunities to gain better alliance with Russia. But we supported Yeltsin in the Clinton years and ignored Putin’s offers of assistance after 9/11. The Russian people were mystified when the US supported Yeltsin, widely regarded as a drunken buffoon. Gorbachev’s memoirs paint a lackluster and untrustworthy picture of Yeltsin.  And the US has done nothing but confirm Putin’s paranoia about US intentions by adding membership to NATO, ABM’s in Poland, petroleum wars in the middle east, and the general appearance of weakness by in-house political fratricide.

We have no use for milquetoast administrations like Obama’s, nor do we need rabid swingin’ dicks like John McCain or his hawkish brethren. We do need Russian and Slavic scholars who speak the language and understand the history of Russia at least back to Peter the Great. They can be immigrants from former Soviet territories of the ilk of Zbigniew Brzezinski, Madeleine Albright, or even a world savvy guy like Henry Kissinger. Who are the current brain trust for eastern European politics and is the CIA giving them good intelligence? Did the CIA predict the takeover of Crimea?