A Russian’s Nightmare: Moscow as Beirut or Ulster

Paul Goble

            Staunton, August 30 – Class, religious, and ethnic succession in Moscow is creating a situation in which the worst possible nightmare for any Russian would be the transformation of the Russian capital into something between Beirut and Ulster, according to Russian commentator Yevgeny Ikhlov.

            The Muslim “proletariat” there, consisting of gastarbeiters from Central Asia and the Caucasus, while often mistreated by businesses and officials, he argues, is in fact “close to optimal” because its members are pursuing their dream of creating a better life for their children allowing them to rise into the middle class (kasparov.ru/material.php?id=59A5B5DD751E6).

            The problem now, Ikhlov continues, is that “native Muscovites (conditionally Slavic and conditionally Orthodox) categorically do not want to multiply in numbers and their children categorically do not want to become part of the proletariat.” Both groups have higher aspirations than that.

            Russians who travelled into the city in the past to earn their keep might have been able to supplement this group, he suggests, but they were pushed into the middle class “precisely by the Muslim proletariat” in much the same way that in the musical “West Side Story,” the rise of the Puerto Ricans pushed the Irish and Poles into the category of “’real Americans.’”

            Hereditary Muscovites a generation ago viewed the “limitchiki” as outsiders in much the same way, but now they have to view them as part of their community, something that creates problems for both groups and especially for the former outsiders who now want to do everything to maintain their status against the rising Muslim proletariat.

            Moscow has been very fortunate that it has avoided the formation of religious or ethnic ghettos, Ikhlov says, although it is clearly on its way thanks to the renovation program to forming wealthy neighborhoods and slums, with the strong possibility that the latter in many cases will take on an ethnic or religious dimension.

            If that happens, he suggests, these places will become “a state within a state” in which Russian rule will be only provisional.

            But there are two other problems, one near term and one more distant. On the one hand, there is the issue of building a sufficient number of mosques. Indigenous Muscovites will oppose them on the NIMBY principle, and officials will because given that they can’t control six mosques, they certainly wouldn’t be able to control 20 to 40.

            Indeed, Ikhlov says, three-quarters of any new mosques that might be built would quickly become Salafi and hearths of radicalization in the Russian capital, something both Muscovites and Russian officials fear even more than they do having Muslim neighbors.

            And on the other, Ikhlov concludes, given the inability and unwillingness of Russians to become proletarians in the capital, the Muslim community will continue to fill that niche. As a result, he says, he very much fears that a populist will win the mayor’s job in some upcoming election.

            In that case, the commentator warns, the newly elected city head would fulfill his promises during the campaign and order the closure of mosques in the center of Moscow. In that event, the Russian capital “would very quickly be transformed into something midway between Ulster and Beirut.”

Trump Remains ‘a Real Gift’ for Russia, Moscow Blogger Says

Paul Goble

            Staunton, August 30 – Many in Russia are unhappy that Donald Trump has not delivered in the ways they expected, a Moscow blogger says; but they forget that he remains “a real gift” to Russia in what he has given it “at a minimum four quiet years in which there will not be any external interference” by the US in Russia’s  internal affairs.

            That is far more valuable, the blogger who uses the screen name “Manzal” argues, than any losses Moscow may have suffered from the anti-Russian sanctions which Trump opposes but could not block or his occasional criticism of Russian policies or expressions of support for NATO (manzal.livejournal.com/610948.html).

            Had Hillary Clinton won the US presidency last year, he continues, Russia would have undoubtedly faced interference in the form of American efforts to promote a color revolution of some kind in Russia. But with Trump, Manzal suggests, there is no danger of that at least for the next four years – and that gives Moscow time it needs.

            Evidence of this is overwhelming, he says. On the one hand, Trump has cut the financing of all agencies like USAID and the National Endowment for Democracy which had promoted such things in the past. Without money, they will not be in a position to cause trouble for Russia in the future.

            And on the other, Trump has exacerbated problems within the US to the point that American elites have been forced to turn inward even though they don’t want to and to focus on conflicts racial, economic and otherwise. That will keep them busy and keep them from doing anything in Russia.

Moscow Diplomats Said Behind Formation of Militarized Russian and Cossack Groups in US

Paul Goble

Staunton, August 30 – Ruslan Gurzhiy, a journalist for a Russian émigré publication in Sacramento, California, says that Russian diplomats and oligarchs linked to them are actively promoting the organization of militarized pro-Moscow youth groups, including “boot camps” and biker organizations in the United States.

In a 3500-word article this week, he writes that “employees of Russian consulates … are involved in the creation of a network of pro-Russian militarized youth detachments on the territory of the United States” (nashdom.us/home/sootechestvenniki/compatriots/zachem-kremlju-voenizirovannye-otrjady-na-territorii-ssha).

On the one hand, of course, the involvement of Russian diplomatic personnel with émigré organizations is a normal part of their work, something the diplomats of other countries routinely do as well in other countries. And thus, it is difficult, perhaps intentionally so, to separate what the Russian diplomats are doing legitimately from what they are doing that isn’t.

But on the other, some of the stories that Gurzhiy offers suggest that the Russian diplomats on the west coast of the United States and oligarchs living in Florida cross lines that should not be crossed and suggest intentions on the part of Moscow that are worrisome in the extreme.

Many Russian social and youth groups in the US, the émigré journalist writes, “instantly fall under the direct influence and often are created and financed by employees of the Russian émigré, the consulate generals of the Russian Federation and other diplomatic agencies” that include on at least some occasions visits by Rosmolodezh staffers from Moscow.

Many émigré organizations are hostile to the Russian government but some are not, and this often leads to curious developments. In one Russian youth camp near Seattle, Washington, a Russian Orthodox priest delivered his message in front of a red banner with the Soviet symbols of the hammer and sickle.

In other cases, some Russian Cossack groups in California have organized what they call “boot camps” to provide sports and military training for young Russian emigres (slavicsac.com/2015/03/24/russian-orthodox-cossacks-in-california/ and compatriotsru.uanet.biz/russian/nashi-sootechestvenniki/nashi-sootechestvenniki-v-raznykh-stranakh-mira/mid-rossii-gotovit-voenizirovannye-molodezhnye-otrjady-na-territorii-ssha).

And some emigres who were opposed to Moscow while in Russia now are openly supportive. In one case, Russian Pentecostals who refused to serve in the Russian armed forces and received asylum in the US on the basis of the problems that caused them while in their homeland are engaged in the military training of their children now that they are in the US.

Gurzhiy points as well to the way some Russian groups have created charter schools to promote their ideas, simultaneously getting money from the state government and providing ideological training hostile to the US.  Among such institutions in California are the Community Outreach Academy and the Futures High School, whose organizers officials at the Russian consulate general in San Francisco have praised.

The Sacramento journalist also points to an odd development in Florida. There Russian oligarchs have put money into a Russian bikers club known as Spetsnaz. This has attracted more attention because some of the oligarchs involved have invested in Trump properties (miamiherald.com/news/local/community/miami-dade/article157640179.html).

The bikers use a symbol resembling that of the FSB and have relations with both Putin’s Night Wolves in Russia and some US law enforcement agencies. 

Gurzhiy ends his article with a truly provocative reference. He notes that newly appointed Russian ambassador to the US, Anatoly Antonov, was earlier awarded the Russian medal “For the Return of Crimea” given to those most directly involved in Putin’s Crimean Anschluss in 2014.

 And he points out that in the Crimean city of Evpatoria, the Russian occupiers set up a monument which includes a call for future generations of Russians to act elsewhere as their ancestors have in Crimea. “We returned Crimea,” it says. “You must return Alaska!” Gurzhiy provides a picture of this (slavicsac.com/2016/11/29/russia-alaska/).