Paul
Goble
Staunton, January 1 – Ekaterina Schulmann
says that in contrast to democratic systems, the current Russians adapt to
social changes before elections begin and make mid-course corrections before
campaigns begin, an arrangement that she says is less adequate than the
democratic process but that it is “better than nothing.”
In a commentary for the Republic.ru
portal which she has posted on her Facebook page as well, the Moscow analyst
argues that all the activities of the Presidential Administration now,
including the drafting of new programs are “attempts at correcting things
before the elections” (republic.ru/posts/78121, facebook.com/Ekaterina.Schulmann/posts/10211854965480517).
What will emerge from all this
activity, of course, is “a big question because the system can be changed only
as much as it can,” Schulmann writes. “It cannot reform itself” in a profound
send because it exists as a certain kind of organization. But “all the same,
the agenda for 2017” is currently subject to “an attempt at correction” to win
more support.
But for all the talk, there is a
real question about how far the Kremlin can go.
It can’t simply change course in a major sector because “there are
interest groups with corresponding budgets who are interested” in particular
policies, such as “an extension of ‘the policy of war,’” Schulmann argues.
These include “powerful members of
our ruling elite – the military industrial complex, the defense ministry and
the members of the Security Council. To say: ‘that’s it guys, forgive us but we
are changing direction’ isn’t going to happen” instantly. For it to happen at
all, these plays must be compensated with something. How to do that is a major
issue for the year ahead.
One place where the Presidential
Administration has been forced to try to find a new approach concerns education
and health care, areas where “a very dangerous, even radical break between the agenda
of those in power and the agenda of society is in evidence,” the Moscow analyst
says.
For people, she writes, these issues
are “becoming ever more important first because the population is aging … and
second because of the cult of children that has been developing in recent years
and the view by people of their parental role as a social one and even
partially as a political one as well.”
At the same time, the government is
cutting back its spending in these areas, creating a situation that it is difficult
to imagine a more unhappy conjunction.
Clearly, something needs to be done because people are angry and “do not
understand why the state is acting in the way that it is,” especially since the
government hasn’t explained why.
Of course, there is the argument
that there is no money, an argument that represents a kind of return to the situation
that existed in the 1990s. But at the
same time, now the government is in full control of educational and health care
institutions, so it has to support them or its inability to do so will be on
full display.
The Kremlin could decide to
privatize some of these institutions or hand them over to NGOs, but for that to
happen, Schulmann points out, the regime would have to “liberalize” the
situation in these sectors, something very difficult because “control,
supervision and repression are the bread of powerful people in authority.”
They won’t want to lose any of their
powers, and so doing anything about this will not be simple or easy.
No comments:
Post a Comment