Paul Goble
Staunton,
December 13 –Toomas Hendrik Ilves, who has just completed his service as
president of Estonia, once remarked that “if the Russians come back again, they
won’t be constrained by communism” and the rule they would impose on
non-Russians would be much worse and hence the likelihood that any new “union”
end violently would increase.
His words
should be remembered not only by those in Russia who are following Mikhail
Gorbachev’s suggestion this week that a new union could be established within
the borders of the USSR but also those in the West who may assume that any such
entity would not be a threat to others and to itself.
A
Russian-nationalist Russia as the Moscow-centered country is increasingly
becoming under Vladimir Putin could only hope to dominate that region by the
kind of force and violence that not even Stalin dreamed of and that would
immediately provoke resistance and begin to disintegrate in violent ways.
Speaking
to TASS today, the first and only Soviet president said that it is not possible
to restore the Soviet Union but that it is possible to restore a Union “in its
former borders and with the same composition, in a voluntary fashion … I
consider that a new Union can come into existence” (tass.ru/opinions/interviews/3865994).
(regions.ru/news/2596703/).
Polls
show that Vladimir Putin and more than half of the population of the Russian
Federation regret the demise of the USSR and that Russians would like to have
the USSR back. But that goes beyond what Putin has said and most believe; and
it is noteworthy that his spokesman refused to comment on Gorbachev’s remark (govoritmoskva.ru/news/102793/).
The Regions.ru portal, as it often
does, summed up reaction to Gorbachev’s remarks by citing the comments a Duma
member and a CIS business center official gave to other outlets and
interviewing a Moscow-based Russian researcher (regions.ru/news/2596703/).
Yevgeny Fedorov,
a United Russia Duma deputy, told Nation-News.ru that he is “certain that a new
Union will be created.” This isn’t about
the choice of people now, he said; “this is an issue of the results of World
War II.” At that time, the entire world recognized the borders of the USSR that
were established at the cost of 30 million lives (nation-news.ru/231381-v-gosdume-veryat-v-sozdanie-novogo-soyuza-v-granicah-sssr).
That remains a
unifying factor, he continued, as does Russia’s possession of nuclear weapons.
Any major international clash, such as the Caribbean crisis “will lead to the
restoration of the state in these borders.” But “this will not happen only as a
result of foreign pressure.” Interest in reunification is obvious to anyone “who
knows the laws of politics.”
Vladimir
Savchenko, the director of the CIS business center, is somewhat more nuanced in
his views. In thinking about the future,
one must start by recognizing that those who were 10 when the USSR collapsed
are now 35 and that “half of the population of Russia” and “more than half” of
some other former republics “does not remember” the Soviet Union (rueconomics.ru/212791-novogo-soyuza-ne-izbezhat-predskazanie-gorbacheva-sbudetsya-neozhidannym-sposobom).
“Of course,” he continues, “the
present-day states on the territory of the former USSR are strongly attached to
their sovereignty, and in many of them there are nationalistic tendencies in
politics. But integration processes are occurring, chiefly in the economic
sphere … and new unions are emerging not according to a territorial principle
but to a completely different one.”
And Aleksey Zudin, an expert at the Moscow
Institute for Socio-Economic and Political Research, said that it is hard to
imagine that the USSR could be restored, especially in its former borders. There are integrative projects led by Russia,
and none of the other efforts at integration have succeeded.
According to the researcher, “integration
processes with the participation of the Russian Federation have been
successfully going on for a long time. Here is the Union State, and the
Eurasian Economic Union and the Organization of the Collective Security Treaty,
and one should mention the Shanghai Cooperation Organization.”
All this, Zudin says,, “points to the fact
that the extent of integration exceeds those which existed during the period of
the existence of the USSR, and they go far beyond the borders of the former
Soviet Union. This is our new reality and world-wide processes are promoting
the success of integration.”
But to say this does not mean that the USSR
will reemerge given that “the elites of part of the countries [on the former
Soviet space] have chosen not in favor
of a union with Russia: they are involved in geopolitical groupings opposed to
us,” Zudin said, adding that “of course this is not the choice of [their]
peoples.”
Gorbachev clearly did not learn what
he might from his own experience. His time in office demonstrated that a
liberal Russia might have been possible but a liberal Soviet Union would be a
contradiction in terms. Now, with Russia smaller and weaker, other countries
larger, stronger and more integrated with others, the prospects for a liberal
“union” are nonexistent.
Fortunately for the nations that had
been ruled from Moscow during Soviet times, the USSR avoided a Yugoslav-type
demise 25 years ago, something Gorbachev can take some credit for; but if
Gorbachev and those who think like him get their way this time, the entity they
want to create won’t be able to avoid an even greater disaster the second time
around.
No comments:
Post a Comment