Paul
Goble
Staunton, May 18 – Vladimir Putin,
who exploited Russian euphoria over the Anschluss of the Ukrainian peninsula of
Crimea three years ago to boost his own power, now wants Russians to pay less
attention to that region so that they will not be as inclined to complain about
the costs to them of that annexation, according to Yevgeniya Goryunova.
“Russian euphoria about the annexation of
Crimea has significantly weakened under the press of social and economic problems,”
the Crimean political scientist says. “The Crimean theme is losing its
importance,” and the only aspect of it that Moscow outlets now talk much about
is the Kerch bridge (ru.krymr.com/a/28489804.html).
In 2014-2015,
Putin made “the sacred importance” of Crimea the centerpiece of his speeches,
but already by 2016, as the economic crisis in Russia deepened and the costs of
the occupation became more obvious, he shifted away from this theme. And by the end of that year, the Kremlin
leader mentioned the annexed peninsula only in passing.
That both drove and reflected changing
Russian attitudes, Goryunova says. On the one hand, “with each passing year,”
the share of Russians who believe that Crimea is part of Russia has grown, from
89 percent in March 2014 to 97 percent now, although polls suggest Russians are
less confident that the Anschluss has been a good thing for them.
But on the other, the share of those
who viewed the annexation in a negative way hs grown from 18 percent to 23
percent over the last three years, according to the independent Levada Center
surveys, although the Kremlin-linked VTsIOM pollsters say that those opposed, after
rising between 2014 to 2016 has fallen this year from 22 percent to 13 percent.
Perhaps more important for Putin’s
decision to reduce public attention to Crimea are some two other poll numbers.
VTsIOM reports that the share of Russians opposed to giving special aid to
Crimea has risen from 21 percent in 2014 to 84 percent now, and the Levada
Center says that 55 percent of Russians oppose cuts in programs benefitting
them to help the peninsula integrate into Russia.
“The logic of Russians regarding the
peninsula is simple,” Goryunova says: “Crimea is of course ours but we do not
want to support it. Let the people there do so on their own.” Russian tourism
to the region is down, and Russians clearly are less focused on Crimea than at
any time since before the Anschluss.
“The single thing which still
generates interest among Russians is the construction of the Kerch bridge,”
which the Moscow media re treating as a Russian analogue to Soviet projects
like the Baikal-Amur Mainline. As long
as construction on the bridge is going on, Crimea will get some coverage in
Moscow outlets.
But Crimea is something Russians
think about less and less, the political analyst says; and that will be true
even if the Kremlin changes the date of Putin’s re-election to make it coincide
with the official annexation of the Ukrainian peninsula. After that, the regime
clearly hopes, it will become just one more Russian region.
According to Goryunova, all this
reflects the fact that both domestically and internationally, Putin’s seizure
of the Ukrainian peninsula has been “a Pyrrhic victory” at best. The West hasn’t
been willing to recognize his action as legitimate, and Russians when they
focus on it see only costs rather than benefits.
“The Putin regime passionately needs
rapid results,” the analyst continues; and “therefore for the Russian leader in
this case, the best way out will be to mention Crimea as rarely as possible,”
to allow it to recede into the myths of the past as just the “latest” Russian
acquisition rather than the unique and special one Putin insisted upon only a
few years ago.
No comments:
Post a Comment