Paul
Goble
Staunton, May 29 – An increasing
number of Russians are finding it impossible to rally round the Kremlin now
that it is demanding not only that they support Putin “personally” and “curse”
the West but approve the increasingly arbitrary and excessive actions not only
of a few senior officials but of ever more siloviki, according to Fyodor
Krasheninnikov.
The Yekaterinburg political analyst says
that “the times of the Crimean consensus seem a golden age about which only
memories remain” because “now a sincere patriot must almost every day adopt the
‘required’ position on ever more inconvenient disputes” brought on by the
actions of regime representatives (politsovet.ru/55432-konsolidaciya-vokrug-terrora.html).
This may be most obvious in the
requirement that Russians not question the often absurd claims or actions of
Dmitry Medvedev despite all the evidence showing them to be illegal or worse or
of those by people like Usmanov or Burkhanovich who are lower down on the state
latter but still are held up as models by the regime.
But these things “are not the worst
that can happen,” Krasheninnikov says. “The worst are [Russia’s] law
enforcement organs, loyality to which as a symbol of the faith of any patriot
and guardian occupies a principle position. ‘A man in epaulets cannot be wrong!’
has become the thesis around which all defenders of the powers are forced to
consolidate themselves.”
Any report of crimes or outrages by
such people, be it the misuse of force, massive corruption, or mistreatment of
prisoners, supporters of the regime are supposed to say, are either rejected as
false or provocations or alternatively accepted as accurate but justified
because those involved are wearing the uniform of the state.
The last such incident was the
arrest of a young boy in Moscow who was reading Shakespeare on the street. “It would seem,” Krasheninnikov says, “that
any normal individual would first of all reflect that such ‘a violation of the
law’ does not represent any threat for those around him and in no way
corresponds to the ferocity displayed by the police.
But that isn’t how regime loyalists
responded. Instead, they said the police
were right to act as they had and even demanded that the child’s parents be
punished for allowing this to happen.
For them, “loyalty to senseless
terror against unarmed and defenseless citizens, who have committed no crimes,
is a new level of ‘patriotic’ consolidation.” But this isn’t really something new,
the commentator says. It is what happens
whenever support for the existing authoritarian state becomes an end in itself.
The state, for such “’patriots,’” he
continues, “is precisely and above all the police” and thus they line up behind
those who decide whom to beat and whom not to, something that has nothing to do
with “attitudes toward Ukraine, Crimea and the West” and that is producing “a
fatal split within [Russian] society.”
That split, Krasheninnikov argues, “is
between those who with delight approve any manifestation of terror and force by
any representative of the powers that be and those for whom the unending
tightening of the screws and systemic use f force seems criminal and dnagers
both for each of us and for our common future.”
This divide is becoming “ever wider
and more dangerous,” he concludes, because “history teaches” that relying on “the
ferocity of the police” has “not saved even a single regime” anywhere or at any
time, even though it may have allowed some of them to last longer than might
otherwise be the case.
No comments:
Post a Comment