Paul
Goble
Staunton, April 24 – Analysts in the
Russian Federation are divided as to whether the Russian Federation of today is
returning to the crises of the 1980s and whether Putin’s Russia today is where
Brezhnev’s Soviet Union was at the start of that decade or closer to what
Gorbachev’s was just before its disintegration.
Ramazan Alpaut, a journalist with the
IdelReal portal, spoke with three analysts who think this analogy is correct
and provides a basis for understanding what is happening in their country now
and one who rejects this analogy, arguing that conditions now are fundamentally
different (idelreal.org/a/30571980.html).
Marat Lotfullin, a Kazan historian,
says that today’s “economy situation is approaching that of the USSR at the end
of the 1980s. But in contrast from those
years, Western countries have already freed themselves from their
illusions” about Russia’s possibilities. For them, the situation is more like
the early 1980s, not the end of that decade.
Abbas Gallyamov, a Moscow analyst
and commentator, also sees a great deal in common between the two periods. “The
main characteristics, of course, correspond. An ever-larger number of people
feel alienated. The powers no longer take the people into consideration. The
demand for participation, for new ideas and alternative figures is growing”
just as in the 1980s.
And Boris Vishnevsky, vice president
of the Yabloko Party, agrees there are commonalities but that the optimism
which informed the late 1980s is not present now and the prospects for the
future may thus be far more dire. Ever more people see the economic crisis in
political terms and believe solutions are impossible “without a change” at the
top.
But Moscow analyst Konstantin
Kalachev says that the differences between the 1980s and now are greater than
the commonalities. “Then the authorities were broadening the limits of freedom.
There was an entirely different public atmosphere. Everyone read thick journals
and dreamed about a better future.”
Now, Russians dream not about
freedom but about having enough food. They are far less concerned about rights
than those of 35 years ago. That
suggests there are two scenarios ahead, Kalachev continues. In the first, “the
quarantine ends but the depression remains.” If that happens, then economic
problems will grow into social and political ones.
That could be “really dangerous” for
the Kremlin “because it would create a demand for alternative figures and a
changed course” and would involved a growth in protest activity.
In the second, there will be “a
sharp emotional upsurge after being saved from the virus and minimal losses.” People
will be celebrating that “’we survived’ and can return to normal life.” That could
lead to greater not lesser support for Vladimir Putin and his constitutional
reforms and political course.
Kalachev says he is more inclined to
believe that the former is likely than is the latter, but in either case, the
outcome is unlikely to be the same as it was in Gorbachev’s times.
No comments:
Post a Comment