Paul
Goble
Staunton, October 17 – It has become
a commonplace to observe that “the Kremlin is losing control of the situation”
and that it is using “preventive repressions” against not only its obvious
opponents but even its own followers, Liliya Shevtsova. But despite regular
predictions of its imminent demise, the Putin regime remains entrenched in
office.
There are many reasons why this is
so, reasons reflecting the political culture of the country; but one of the key
sources providing the Kremlin with “a cushion” against change deserves more
attention than it has often received, the Russian commentator argues (svoboda.org/a/28791261.html).
This
source involves “the discrediting of the leading ideological trends and their
party formation which form the essence of normal politics.” Instead of such people
playing their expected and necessary roles, they have become among the regime’s
chief props and have yield the political arena to others who also help the
regime stay in power.
“A special role in the imitation of
ideological-political life is being played by ‘the systemic liberals.’ They not
only took part in the rebirth in Russia of the system of personal power, but it
is precisely they (and not the siloviki) who today are the decisive force in securing
the continuity of this system.”
“What
would the Kremlin do without Nabiullina and Dvorkovich, Siluanov and Oreshkin?”
Shevtsova asks rhetorically. “’The systemic liberals’ not only guarantee the
economic resource for a degrading construction and thus extending its life but
also deprive liberalism of the opportunity to become an alternative to
autocracy in Russia.”
In
a similar fashion, the KPRF is also a prop for the system, the Russian
commentator says. It ensures the channeling of left-wing protest in directions
that do not threaten the Kremlin and thus “has become an obstacle on the path
of the rebirth in Russia of independent left-wing forces, including social
democracy.”
Without
these trends, the political field would seem to have been left to the Russian
nationalists, but they have been gelded by the Crimean Anschluss and the regime’s
crackdown against their leaders, Shevtsova continues. Those who remain outside
of prison have become “allies of the authorities and have lost their
anti-regime tone.”
The
absence of any political channels for the expression of grievances leaves the population
with only one option: the street. And
that channel, Shevtsova says, almost certainly will be brutal reflecting the
brutality that has been visited upon it by the current occupations of positions
of power.
Those
members of the liberal or left elites who thought they could cooperate with the
Putin regime and change it from the inside should recognize that any
possibility for that has been ended by the arrests of Belykh and Ulyukayev as
well as by the unending replacement of governors with those who are little more
than cogs in the Putin machine.
In
short, Shevtsova writes, “the Kremlin has closed the question of the
reformation of Russia ‘from above’ and ‘from within,’ leaving society only one
scenario—the scenario of the street revolt. And what else could one expect if
the powers that be aren’t prepared to lift the cover on the bubbling teapot?”
And
that has another consequence everyone should face up to: “Any mass street
protest always is directed at destruction and not at construction, toward
radicalism and not compromise, to one-man leadership and not the search of
coalitions, and finally to revenge and not forgiveness and peacemaking.”
The
Putin regime, “seeking to secure itself eternal survival has prepared a
symmetrical response. And the harsh force from above is today, the more
powerful will be the future response of those below to force. And no one can
anticipate when this cause and effect link will go into effect, a year from now
or five years? Or perhaps tomorrow?”
But
whenever it is, the protests that will bring the regime down will “put off the
real transformation of the system” because they will represent only the change
of the occupants of the positions of power and not of the regime itself. “Regime change without a change in principles
will lead to the reproduction of autocracy albeit with different persons in
charge.”
No comments:
Post a Comment