Russia's recent verbal attacks on America have domestic policy reasons behind them, says Boris Makarenko.
Photo: Dmitry Lebedev
| Other Photos |
 |
|
 |
Playing America, Thinking "Russia"
The Price of the Question
Our president likes calling Americans and Europeans “counterparts” and “partners” and does it as humbly as Ieshua Ga-Notsri, a Jesus-inspired character from Mikhail Bulgakov’s novel, who called his torturers “good people”. But recent weeks has seen the mercury of relations with American “good people” dropping real lows. What’s the matter?
The bilateral relations agenda is a patchwork. There are areas where progress is feasible. For example, the two countries now have a clearer idea of how to put pressure on Iran. If the conference in Annapolis comes through, there will be a chance for a breakthrough at a meeting in Moscow as the Kremlin knows how to get Syria involved in the talks. In some areas, Russian-U.S. relations are stumbling but they work in the agree-disagree way which means long bargaining and maneuvers, which is perfectly normal for diplomacy. The issues include Treaty on Conventional Armaments in Europe, Kosovo and missile defense. In most cases, Russian diplomats succeed in making headway or just “firmly stand their ground” because the Americans work at the limit of their capabilities, has no support from allies or just fail. Therefore they cannot afford arguing and try to secure Russia’s cooperation. Even though Moscow is annoyed with some of America’s backward movements (such as latest suggestion on missile defense), it acts in a sensible and clever way, which means there are no grounds to criticize “partners and counterparts”.
In areas where foreign policy influences domestic affairs the situation is quite the opposite. Russia is holding not just an election. It is holding “a referendum on Putin” which requires full mobilization of the society. The image of an enemy would be handy for this mobilization. And thanks to the abovementioned list, the image is easy to create. Then, logic starts to work.
Are the Kremlin’s fiercest critics considered West-leaning? Too bad for them – they are acting by Washington’s instructions. Where did the “good man” from the OSCE go to before he decided not to send observers to the Russian election? Washington, wasn’t? We understand. It is perfectly clear to everyone now that an Orange Revolution is impossible in Russia and Washington has had enough of playing with these games. But first, fathom pains inflicted by Kyiv’s Maidan are still felt in Moscow. Second, it is very easy to discredit the opponents reminding of Washington’s puppy enthusiasm in welcoming victories of Orange Revolutions. It is also easy to brash away criticism on dispersing the Dissenters’ Marches, arresting candidates for parliament and other things.
The most dangerous thing about these foreign policy games for domestic reasons is not about the rhetoric. Russian diplomats play one more role when they send waves of invectives on “partners and counterparts”. Everyone pictures themselves an image of a better life, while most Russians picture this image something similar to Western life even when it is called “a special Russian path”. The discrepancies between this image and the Russian reality are highly unfavorable for authorities. Therefore they are trying to discredit the West and America, its major stronghold.
Boris Makarenko, deputy director general of the Center for Political Technologies
All the Article in Russian as of Nov. 28, 2007
|
|
|
