Sunday, April 5, 2020

Coronavirus hasn’t Changed Russia’s Trajectory toward Collapse, Only Accelerated It, Savvin Says


Paul Goble

            Staunton, April 2 – Many Russian commentators have suggested that the coronavirus pandemic is a turning point in their country’s history, but Dimitry Savvin argues that in fact, the coronavirus has not so much changed Russia’s direction as accelerated processes that were already well advanced.

            “No one could have foreseen” is the constant refrain of those looking at recent developments in Russia, the editor of the Riga-based conservative Russian Harbin portal says, a false perspective which leads to suggestion that this or that “unexpected” black swan event must change everything (harbin.lv/chto-prinesut-rossii-chernye-lebedi).

                In fact, Savvin points out, “unpredictable crises and catastrophes are predictable in exactly the same sense in which for example are predictable cold winters or droughts.” One can typically assert that “sooner or later” something of this or that kind will take place. Thus, “state and society must be prepared for this the crew of any contemporary ship is for stormy waves.”

            “In the case of the neo-Soviet regime of the Russian Federation, the appearance of such ‘black swans’ cannot change the picture in principle of the fact that in the mid-range historical perspective, its collapse is inevitable as a result of the following objective causes:”

            “An ineffective and corrupt economy in which gradually are being destroyed all the remnants of market mechanisms;

            “An irrational but ideologically motivated policy of neo-Soviet revanchism;

            “An open confrontation with the countries of NATO and the EU which began in 2014 and the resulting sanctions pressure;

            “The outflow from the Russian Federation of a significant number of specialists in the most varied spheres;

            Their replacement by immigrants from Central Asia;

            “A bloated, ineffective and corrupt state apparatus;

            “The domination f the special services, in the first instance, the FSB, in all spheres of life;

            “The degradation of education and health care and of social infrastructure as a whole; and

            “The degradation of transportation and economic infrastructure.”

            “The conjunction of these factors by itself is a death sentence to the regime,” Savvin says. The coronavirus and the resulting economic crisis may bring that closer but it doesn’t change the basic trajectory of the Russian Federation.

            One should not make the mistake that many do that the Kremlin doesn’t understand this. It does and “quite clearly.” That understanding is behind the constitutional amendments and the growing repression which also shows what the regime is afraid of and also what it is not afraid of at all.

            The Putin regime is not afraid of the opposition systemic or extra-systemic. It either controls or can suppress either with relative ease. But it is very much afraid of social risings or “to put it in simplest terms, hungry revolts.”  The reason it understands and fears these is that its core leadership lived through the 1990s and saw the power of popular action.

            But at least at present, the Putin regime has only one answer to such threats – more repression – and it is certainly prepared to use it, however counter-productive such actions will prove, the Russian commentator says.

            As long as the pandemic is going on, the situation in Russia from a political standpoint is likely to be relatively quiet, he suggests.  But as soon as things begin to improve, the population will become more restive and the regime will respond with repression against small business and the population at large.

            And that will result in an economy fully in correspondence with the Brezhnevite constitution which as everyone should remember provided the possibility for some small service businesses even though in the event it cracked down on them. That “neo-Soviet” arrangement, Savvin concludes, will be no more stable or long-lasting than its predecessor and model.

           

No comments:

Post a Comment