Paul
Goble
Staunton, February 15 – The conflict
that has broken out over the decision of St. Petersburg officials to hand over
St. Isaac’s Cathedral to the Russian Orthodox Church represents a rare case of genuine
public politics in Putin’s Russia and highlights the impossibility of managing
everything from above, according to Moscow’s Gazeta.
Not only has the controversy involved
large numbers of people and continued “by Russian standards” for a long time,
the paper says, it has also become “an act of real politics that expresses the
real will of the people and not just
that sanctioned by a command from on high” (gazeta.ru/comments/2017/02/13_e_10523465.shtml#page1).
Moreover, the
openly anti-Semitic remarks by United Russia Duma deputy Vitaly Milonov about
the leaders of those opposing the handover and the size of the demonstrations
organized by those who do not want the museum to become a church again have
guaranteed that this action has attracted the attention of Russia as a whole.
And what Russians have seen is “a
clear indication” that the authorities have no
intention of entering into “a constructive dialogue” and that they are
prepared to use “marginal” figures like Milonov and unsuccessful petitions from
rectors (two of whom denied they had signed it) to shut people up.
The chances that the authorities in
St. Petersburg will reverse their decision to give the building back to the
Russian Orthodox Church are “extremely small.” But at a minimum, what has
happened is that this “situation has already gone beyond the limits of a
private history of conflict between the museum and the church.”
Instead, the back and forth over the
fate of St. Isaac’s now looks to be “an indication that in the country there
still remains normal politics with the participation of people who publicly
declare their positions and seek to influence the authorities with the help of
peaceful protests.” That is vitally
important, the paper says.
After the mass protests of
2011-2012, “everything was done so that politics in Russia would consist of
only that which the state itself sanctioned. As a result, federal politics is
what the federal authorities think it should be; regional what the governors
think, and municipal what the mayor or head of the district does.”
And as the dismissal of regional governors
who were not “extra-systemic opposition figures” shows, the Kremlin wants to
tighten that arrangement still further apparently convinced it can manage
everything this way and that no one will take the risk of challenging any of
its decisions.
But “even failed protest efforts are
not forgotten,” Gazeta says. And the
number of things Russians might protest about if they so choose is large and
growing. At the very least, the powers that be are going to have to explain to
the people why they are doing what they are, something that did not happen in
this case.
“There was no political, economic or
any other necessity to transfer [St. Isaac’s] just now,” the paper says. “But thanks to the decision a space for free
politics was unexpectedly created.” That
terrifies the authorities who are now seeking to limit meetings between the
voters and those they have elected.
In short, the St. Isaac’s controversy
shows how difficult it is to manage people without taking their opinions into
account and how dangerous things could be if the powers that be don’t. Excluded
for too long, the population will as the people of Romania are showing come
into the streets in massive numbers and demand more fundamental changes.
And this conflict in the northern
capital also shows, the paper says, that despite the silence of the majority of
the population, there will “always be found people are not indifferent” to any
decisions, who will demand explanations and who will as they can show that they
don’t view politics as only that which the authorities permit.
No comments:
Post a Comment