Paul
Goble
Staunton, March 5 – For much of his
career, Vladimir Putin has been remarkably successful in using propaganda to deal
with the problems he has faced; but in the first two months of 2020, Fyodor
Krasheninnikov says, he faces three new challenges which highlight the growing
inadequacy of his regime because propaganda alone can’t solve them.
The Russian commentator says that
Putin’s approach was anticipated by Viktor Pelevin’s 1999 novel, Generation P,
which suggested that Russia would be ruled by propaganda so that those in power
could remain there without ever having to address real problems because they
could always redefine them (newtimes.ru/articles/detail/191541?fcc).
Putin succeeded in large measure by
such tactics. His model victory in this regard came in 2014 when he convinced
Russians that the crisis in Ukraine affected them directly and that their
difficulties could be solved by invading. That worked for a time, distracting
people from the costs of what Putin was doing.
But only for a time because some of
what he did continues to cast a shadow on Russia, most prominently the shooting
down of the Malaysian airliner. Had he
avoided doing that Putin might have continued to reap the propaganda benefits
of 2014 but the world hasn’t forgotten this crime and won’t.
Now in 2020, Putin and his system
face three interrelated problems even as they seek to distract the population with
the rewriting of the constitution and what seem likely to be early elections
for the Duma. The Kremlin leader has
once again destabilized the situation in order to strengthen his own power, but
real events have intervened against him.
Three in particular have emerged in
the last two months: First, the coronavirus epidemic which once it reaches
Russia will hurt in the first instance Putin’s political base. Second, economic
problems arising from that epidemic including a collapse in oil prices and the
ruble, leaving the regime with less money and the population facing rising
prices.
And third, the situation in Syria
where developments are raising ever more questions even as there are ever fewer
answers. Putin has bet on Asad but it is uncertain whether that is a good bet,
and what he assumed would be a demonstration of Russia’s revival as a great
power may in fact show something entirely different – Moscow’s inability to act
successfully abroad.
Each of these problems requires real
actions, not the propaganda methods Putin typically has used. Moreover,
Krasheninnikov argues, their consequences are interrelated. If the epidemic
spread, few will be interested in coming to the Moscow celebrations of the 75th
anniversary of the Great Victory; and the weakening of China may lead Beijing
to reorder its alliances.
It is now obvious that Putin missed
the moment when he could have rewritten the constitution with ease. That was in
the spring of 2015 when he was at the height of his power and popularity. But
like many leaders at that point, he assumed that he would always be there and
could thus make changes whenever he felt like it.
Now, “the first two months of 2020
demonstrate the growing inadequacy of the authorities: objectively existing
problems are being ignored and more than that they are getting worse as a
result of the inappropriate and poorly thought out initiatives regarding the
rewriting of the constitution and early elections.”
According to Krasheninnnikov, “Putin
is raising the stakes both in Russia and in foreign policy, ignoring the
possibility that circumstances or their coming together may be stronger than he
and his plans are. He hopes for a rapid end of the epidemic, a return of
economic growth, and a resolution in Syria, but he isn’t capable of acting to
ensure any of those.
Consequently, the commentator
concludes, “2020 promises to be filled with events and news, but there are no
reasons to hope that these will be good ones. But one thing is beyond doubt
already: the main events of this year aren’t going to be the amendments to the
constitution or the Victory of 1945.”
No comments:
Post a Comment