PUTIN'S TEN BLOWS
by Vyacheslav Tetyokin
This article originally appeared in Russian in "Sovietskaya Rossia"
(Soviet
Russia) on 10 November 2001.
President Putin's recent visit to the USA finalised a major turn in
Russian
foreign policy towards full subordination to the West. The symptoms
of this
major turn were evident right from the start of Mr. Putin's term in
office.
One may recall the ratification of the START-2 treaty that might deprive
Russia of its heavy missiles - the cornerstone of our security. But
the
presidential decisions to support US operation in Afghanistan, and
to close
Russian bases in Vietnam and Cuba made the sharp turn in the Kremlin's
foreign policy evident.
It becomes clear that the intention to join NATO expressed by Mr. Putin
in an
offhand manner last year reflected a long-matured idea of a far deeper
(than
in Mr. Gorbachev's or Mr. Yeltsin's case) "integration into the world
community". It fact the intention is to squeeze Russia into the Western
economic, political and military system. Even as a junior partner.
Even at
the price of sacrificing independent foreign policy.
For the time being Mr. Putin was just testing the ground. Evidently
he was
waiting for a pretext to make a strategic turn publicly. The terrorist
attacks in the USA provided such a pretext. The commitment to joint
struggle
against "international terrorism" signaled the move to "the other side".
Of
course the Kremlin will deny even the idea that they have dropped an
independent foreign policy. But their actions speak to the contrary.
A recent statement by a group of public and political figures referred
to
"Putin's Ten blows" against Russia, i.e. destructive 'reforms' of land,
labour, education, health, housing, the military, energy, transportation
and
other systems.
Now one can talk of 'Putin's ten blows' against Russia's international
interests.
FIRST BLOW
The main threat to Russia's security originates not from 'international
terrorism' but from NATO expansion to the East. (1)
The November, 2002 NATO summit in Prague will obviously admit a number
of
East European countries including Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia to
the
Alliance. If this happens we shall get NATO air bases close to Moscow,
Saint
Petersburg and other centers of Russia. This is very dangerous. The
sad
experience of Yugoslavia confirms that quite convincingly. (2)
But the Kremlin does not even show signs of real opposition to NATO
expansion. More than that, Mr. Putin's statements during his recent
visit to
Helsinki were perceived as a go-ahead for NATO membership not only
for the
Baltic States but also for traditionally neutral Finland and Sweden.
SECOND BLOW
The threat to Russia's security is increasingly felt from the South.
And not
from the Muslim world but from NATO which is penetrating the zones
of
Russia's vital interests in the Balkans (3), in Transcaucasia and in
Central
Asia. But instead of reinforcing our Southern frontiers the Kremlin
is
withdrawing Russian troops from Abkhazia, Adjaria and Transnistria
despite
protests of the population, which is anxious to retain an alliance
with
Russia. There is an impression that the recent fighting in Abkhazia
was a
long-awaited pretext for the Kremlin to speed up its departure from
that
strategically important region.
THIRD BLOW
Yugoslavia was Russia's only ally in Europe. Mr. Yeltsin contributed
to its
defeat by refusing to supply anti-aircraft weapons. Mr. Putin refused
Yugoslavia political and economic support by cutting gas supplies right
before the 2000 presidential elections. (4) Slobodan Milosevic, committed
to
friendship with Russia, landed in prison. Power in Belgrade was taken
over by
persons fully dependent on the West, primarily Germany. The present
Germany
achieved what Hitler failed to achieve, i.e. the conquest of Yugoslavia.
And
then the Kremlin declares 'a new stage of relations with Yugoslavia.'
Absurd?
No. It reflects a strategy aimed at Russia's withdrawal from the Balkans.
FOURTH BLOW
In the Middle East the Kremlin's inconsistent policy in the Arab-Israel
conflict pushes further away traditionally friendly Arab countries
allowing
Israel to play 'the Russian card' against both Arabs and the West,
which is
no longer prepared to unconditionally support Israel.
FIFTH BLOW
Opening Russian air space for the U.S. Air force and supplying intelligence
information, as well as the silent agreement to allow recruitment of
mercenaries in Russia, means the Kremlin is directly involved in the
U.S. war
in Afghanistan. The Americans have gotten the Kremlin's backing for
a
permanent U.S. presence in Central Asia - that is, in the zone of Russia's
vital interests. Russia is being encircled by U.S. military bases.
The premature and unconditional support by the Russian president of
US
retaliatory action is a major foreign policy error as he failed to
assess
even the short-term consequences. It is evident that the Muslim world
is
angrily protesting the US repressions against their brothers and that
U.S.
Western allies are trying to avoid participation in the 'operation'
by all
means. Meanwhile, the main deliveries of drugs into Russia comes not
from the
Taliban but from the 'friendly' Northern Alliance.
SIXTH AND SEVENTH BLOWS
Another major blunder is Mr. Putin's intention to close the Russian
Naval
base in Vietnam and the Electronic Surveillance Center in Cuba. It
is
impossible to think of a bigger gift to the USA. Russian public opinion
is
shocked. The damage to Russia's interests is so great that even the
pro-presidential newspapers find it quite difficult to explain these
decisions.
EIGHTH BLOW
Let's add Mr. Putin's nearly religious desire to get Russia into the
World
Trade Organization (WTO) which will completely open Russian borders
for the
expansion of powerful Western capital and will totally eliminate Russian
industry and agriculture already only half alive as a result of 'reforms'
started by Yeltsin and continued by Putin. (5)
NINTH BLOW
There is no doubt that sooner or later the Kremlin will stop resisting
'modification' of the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, i.e. will simply
agree
to creation of this Star Wars system. Naive attempts to get a simultaneous
reduction of U.S. nuclear warheads will lead nowhere. U.S. leaders
are well
aware of the pitiful state of the Russian nuclear force. Soon even
without
any treaty Russia will not be able to have more than 1.5 thousand warheads.
Why should the US reduce its nuclear arsenal if the Russian arsenal
will
collapse by itself?
TENTH BLOW
Russian-Chinese relations will inevitably be spoiled as Russia previously
promised China to take a firm position on NATO and ABMT. China is obviously
watching with deep concern Russia's surrendering of these positions
as well
as the appearance of the U.S. Air Force close to its borders in Uzbekistan,
Tajikistan and Kyrgyz. One does not easily forget such things.
Everything that Mr. Putin has earned by spectacular improvement of relations
with China, India, Vietnam, Cuba and some other countries collapsed
nearly
overnight. What has surfaced was Gorbachev's primitive concept of 'common
human values' - i.e. subordination of Russia's interests to those of
the
West.
Recently Mr. Putin visited Germany and Belgium. We have not seen for
a long
time such an overt desire to please the West. It was a vintage Gorbachev
-
like 1989 when he surrendered everything to the applause of Mrs. Thatcher.
The humiliating desire of the current host of the Kremlin to get the
acceptance of the West has become completely shameful. (6)
We have not yet returned to the 19th century Sacred Alliance in the
framework
of which the Emperor Alexander I put the interests of European monarchies
above those of Russia. But when the head of the Russian State plunges
into
the creation of the alliance against "international terrorism," one
recalls
that the Sacred Alliance led to the 1854 Crimean War of Britain, France
and
Turkey against Russia.
The West readily accepts this no-lose game. The artificial flattery
of the
Russian leader, who staunchly marches into the mousetrap, allows the
West to
solve strategic tasks without spending an extra penny, without endangering
the lives of their soldiers.
Furthermore the flow of money from Russia to Western banks continues
non-stop, softening the effects of the economic crisis in the West.
And what does Russia get in return? Nothing. The Kremlin seems to enjoy
demonstrating a selflessness that confuses even cynical pro-presidential
journalists.
But it doesn't smell of selflessness. It smells of a secret agenda that
obviously corresponds to Mr. Putin's long-term personal interests.
Of course
he has started thinking about the 2004 presidential elections. A favourable
attitude by the West will be beneficial??¦
So what is behind the radical changes in Russian foreign policy? Nothing
special. Mr. Putin has simply thrown away the veil of statements about
the
protection of Russian national interests. His policy acquires a clearly
expressed class character. Pragmatism, the defense of some 'national
interests' that Mr. Putin likes to talk about at press conferences
- this is
just for fools. In fact we are observing a clear shift to a policy
defined by
the interests of the Russian oligarchs very closely connected with
Western
transnationals and completely dependent on their Western counterparts.
If one can privatize whole branches of industry why can't one privatize
foreign policy? The Land Code allowing the sale of lands to foreigners
and
the opening of Russian air space to the U.S. air force are links in
a chain.
Having handed over the national economy to Mr. Chubais, Hodorkovsky,
Fridman
and Co., one should forget about an independent foreign policy. But
the
Kremlin hardly thinks about that. The outer expressions of independence
(receiving a red-carpet reception, and so on) are sufficient.
Russian public opinion is clearly reluctant to recognize the West as
a
friend. But the Kremlin behaves like a girl in a fairy tale who, with
wonderful persistence, fails to see the sharp ears and even sharper
teeth of
the wolf that has just eaten her grandmother. Mr. Putin's main principle
of
running the State is, "If one mustn't do something but wants it very
much
then he\she can do it". Russia will not travel far on this principle.
The
president should better recall the plight of his predecessor, Mr. Gorbachev,
who at the top of his popularity did what he wanted without any regard
for
the country's interests. The real hatred that the nation now feels
for Mr.
Gorbachev should at least make Mr. Putin think a bit.
They say that in his youth Mr. Putin was a judo expert. He does not
look like
one. He is far more skillful in playing into the hands of the other
side.
(c) "Sovietskaya Rossia" 2001 * Reprinted for Fair Use Only
Your
opinion |