Paul
Goble
Staunton, February 12 – Many governments
view anti-corruption drives as a way to solidify their positions by winning the
support of the population against corrupt officials; but oftentimes,
governments that choose such a strategy fail to see that corruption exists
almost everywhere and that they cannot limit it as they want.
Indeed, what may look like a winning
strategy when it is applied to a single portion of the country or a single part
of the elite can become the first step to a major defeat when people begin to
ask why this region or this segment of the ruling class is so different from
all the others with whom they have experience.
That happened in the closing years
of the USSR when Moscow launched an anti-corruption campaign against Tashkent
officials, only to discover that the “Uzbek Affair “ as that came to be known, raised
questions about the Soviet system as a whole, questions that contributed to the
demise of that system (begamot-74.livejournal.com/78242.html).
Now some analysts
are suggesting that Moscow’s anti-corruption campaign in Daghestan could have
the same effect not only because the Kremlin itself has promised to take
similar actions against other “corrupt” regions but because Russians can see
that corruption is hardly limited to a small republic in the North Caucasus but
exists everywhere in the Putin system.
One
analyst, orientalist Anatoly Nemiyan who blogs under the name El Murid, makes
this argument extremely directly in a comment for an article prepared by Ruslan
Gorevoy of the Versiya portal (versia.ru/provorovavshimsya-regionalnym-yelitam-vporu-zakazyvat-sebe-tyuremnye-roby).
“The solution of the problem of the borderlands
is always considered a task of fist importance for any country. Everywhere
these resolutions have an extremely serious and unbelievably long-drawn-out
character.” And one must always remember that what is true in one place is true
at least in part in many others.
What is happening in Daghestan
today, Nemiyan says, could “without doubt” happen tomorrow in “Tuva, Karelia,,
and the Russian North and possibly Buryatia and Sakha.” But for that to occur,
Moscow will have to transform the governors into “governors general who will rely
on force from outside the republic.”
Such a strategy may seem for a time
to be a winning one, he continues, “but such an active purge of elites” as the
one now being conducted by outsiders backed by Moscow in “unsettled and
multi-national Daghestan” may come to “play against the federal center” if it
makes mistakes as it is likely to.
Any such action, Nemiyan argues,
must be pursued very carefully and with regard to what can happen if the
lessons of the past are ignored. The
Kremlin needs to recall “the history of the cotton affair in Uzbekistan where
Soviet power demonstrated its decisiveness against the background of a
collapsing economy.”
“We remember how that turned out,”
the orientalist concludes.” It led to the growth of “separatism in the
borderlands and the flight of the republics from the USSR.”
No comments:
Post a Comment