Paul
Goble
Staunton, December 4 – President Vladimir
Putin’s speech to the Federal Assembly is the subject of intense interest for
the light it will shed on where the Kremlin leader is headed next. But there is
one question Russians are asking that he cannot possibly answer without calling
into question whether he should be the person to lead that country into the
future.
That question, prompted by the
current collapse of oil prices and the ruble and now being raised by ever more
commentators, is this: why did Russia fail miss the opportunity it had to use its
enormous income from the sale of raw materials over the last six years to
transform the country’s economy and thus reduce its dependence on the vagaries
of international markets?
Among those who have posed the
question most clearly is Yury Pronko, an award-winning Russian journalist who
covers business and financial questions for Moscow outlets (ruspolitics.ru/article/read/rossija---strana-upucshennyh-vozmozhnostej.html).
But he is far from alone in doing so: see also chaskor.ru/article/mest_upushchennyh_vozmozhnostej_37056).
(And
it is even implicit in a joke now circulating in Russia. What do Putin, the
price of oil, and the ruble exchange rate all have in common? the question
goes. The answer: They will all be 63 next year. Putin will mark his 63rd
birthday. Oil will fall to 63 US dollars a barrel. And the ruble will be no
better than 63 to the dollar as well.)
Pronko
addresses the question directly: “why did we miss those possibilities which we
had over the last six years, from the time of the last global crisis? … Why was
nothing done in order to reduce to a minimum the dependence of the country on
global prices for raw materials? Why did we turn into ‘outcasts’” with whom no
one wants to deal?
The answer
lies, he suggests, in the desire of elites to enrich themselves here and now
and the population to see its short-term standard of living rise, with neither
group giving much if any thought to the longer term. As a result, he says, Russia during this
period lived in the condition of “’lethargic sleep.’”
And
consequently, he writes, the dependence of the country rose dramatically. “Instead
of innovations and modernization, instead of a bet on small and mid-sized
business was chosen the conception of ‘a besieged fortress’ where so-called ‘institutions
of development’ – state companies, state banks and state corporations – played ‘first
fiddle.’”
Moreover, because the rest of the world wasn’t “sleeping,”
Russia fell further and further behind. It “excluded itself from the Western
community” and refocused on China, the result of its own decisions that left it
trapped in a corner despite the regime’s assurances that “nothing terrible has
happened.”
“Why
did [Russians] miss those chances which [they] had? Pronko asks rhetorically
and replies that “the answer will be harsh: because the current authorities
live day by day … and the citizens” were prepared to trade getting scraps from “the
nobleman’s table’ in exchange for ‘not raising such questions.”
“Why,”
the financial journalist continues, “did we forget about the causes which led
to the destruction of our Fatherland at the beginning of the 20th
century? Why didn’t we learn the lesson of history? Then too it seemed that all was wonderful and
that the country was dynamically developing, but the end was fatal.”
The
current situation is in no way different, he argues.
Indeed,
it may be even worse because the rest of the world is going through an economic
revolution in which wealth will come not from production of goods and services
but rather from the development and dissemination of ideas. The rest of the world is “rushing ahead,” but
Russia is simply “proud to be a raw materials supplier not only to Europe but
now to Asia as well.”
“Such
‘stability’ has already led the country to a complete stop,” and Russians need
to ask why and to change course.
“Economics,
finance, and the budgetary process all depend on the outside world with which
we have decided to get into an argument by defending our ephemeral geopolitical
ambitions.” And Russia will have to pay
for that dearly now and in the future.
“Is
there a way out? Yes, but then the authorities must sacrifice their high
ratings and begin a global perestroika both of the country’s economy and the
state as a whole.” That is not now on offer, he suggests, and may not be
anytime soon.
Pronko
ends by expressing the hope that Russia will be given another chance, “possibly
its last,” and that it will not miss it as it has these last six years. But it seems unlikely, although the
journalist does not say so, that Putin can either admit what he has done wrong
in the past or change course for a different and less disturbing future.
No comments:
Post a Comment