Russia 20 years later: Still a challenge
The-Daily-Record.com - Russia 20 years later: Still a challenge
In Soviet history, "kompromiss" invariably brings to mind the vision of weakness in front of injustice, the schizophrenia of sacrificing one's principles in order to survive.
The next Great Decisions lecture features New York Times correspondent Peter Baker, who has served as a correspondent in Russia and the Middle East and now covers the White House. Baker will discuss "Reset: Russia and America 20 Years After the Fall of the Soviet Union." It will be held at 7:30 p.m. Tuesday at Scheide Music Hall, Beall and University Streets, on the College of Wooster campus.
By YURI CORRIGAN
Special to The Daily Record
More often than not, in Russian, the word compromise ("kompromiss") has a distinctly negative meaning. Technically, it means the same thing as in English, but in the West it tends to have an optimistic ring, evoking notions of bi-partisanship and open-mindedness.
In Soviet history, "kompromiss" invariably brings to mind the vision of weakness in front of injustice, the schizophrenia of sacrificing one's principles in order to survive.
This is why I am eager to hear Peter Baker address the issue of the current U.S. relationship with Russia in his public lecture. Very few people can match his insight into the far-reaching outcome of "kompromiss" with a country that has still not come to terms with its totalitarian past. Baker lived in Russia with his wife, fellow Washington Post correspondent Susan Glasser, for four years following the election of Vladimir Putin in 2000, and husband and wife have documented, chillingly and compellingly, the Soviet nature of Putin's Russia in their book "Kremlin Rising."
Some of the most moving pages of the book deal with the tragedy of the 2004 Chechen terrorist attack in Beslan -- the devastating bloodbath that took place in the town's school on the first day of classes after the summer holidays.
During a protracted stand-off between Chechen terrorists and about 1,000 men, women and children (hundreds of whom were killed), all of Russia's major television stations were forced, in true Soviet style, to run comedies and soap operas.
Russians who wanted to know what was happening had to tune into an independent Moscow radio station that was reporting what it saw on CNN. Having fudged the numbers of casualties and blurred the connection with Chechnya, Putin responded to the tragedy by taking control of gubernatorial elections, thus proceeding with a policy that had been in the works for some time.
Until Putin's rise to power, "what do you think of Stalin?" was a softball question for Russian politicians. In 2002, when asked to give his opinion about Stalin's place in history, Putin had this to say: "Stalin is of course a dictator. That goes without saying. He was a man guided to a great extent by the interests of keeping his personal power which explains a lot, in my view."
But, having gently condemned history's worst tyrant, he went on to address the more positive side of Stalin's legacy: "The problem is that it was under his leadership that the country won the Second World War, and the victory to a large extent is connected with his name. And it would be foolish to ignore this circumstance. So this is my incomplete answer," he concluded, rather mysteriously, "and it should satisfy you."
In subsequent years, Putin would revisit the topic of Stalin, adding a firmer condemnation to his balanced view while at the same time ordering the revision of school history books to include praise for Stalin's prudent management abilities. Russia's students are now educated by this material.
Thus, according to Baker and Glasser, the initial warmth towards Stalin on Putin's part was no anomaly. The authors also explain that Russian people who support Putin or who, at least, don't dislike him, often don't want to know anything about politics, aren't interested in Russian history, and believe that the problems Russia faces all started in 1991. "These Russians are not Bolsheviks by conviction," argues one of their interviewees, "but they are still for Soviet power."
Dissidents who struggled with the Soviet authorities discovered early on that Putin would uphold a KGB-style policy with regard to civil rights. As one Moscow scientist once told me: "you can't be sly with the KGB -- you either play along and do whatever they say, or you risk everything and refuse."
In the meantime the West is honing its policy in dealing with Putin and Medvedyev, especially with Russia's growing wealth and influence in the international sphere.
The West searches for a middle ground, but arrives at a "kompromiss," and Baker and Glasser remind us how hazardous it would be to overlook the dead journalists who criticized the Kremlin, the forceful takeover of national television networks, and the widespread enthusiasm for the tactics and stature of the Soviet past.
How to press "reset" in the light of all of this is a fascinating topic, and I invite the public to come join in the discussion.
Yuri Corrigan is assistant professor of Russian Studies at the College of Wooster.
In Soviet history, "kompromiss" invariably brings to mind the vision of weakness in front of injustice, the schizophrenia of sacrificing one's principles in order to survive.
The next Great Decisions lecture features New York Times correspondent Peter Baker, who has served as a correspondent in Russia and the Middle East and now covers the White House. Baker will discuss "Reset: Russia and America 20 Years After the Fall of the Soviet Union." It will be held at 7:30 p.m. Tuesday at Scheide Music Hall, Beall and University Streets, on the College of Wooster campus.
By YURI CORRIGAN
Special to The Daily Record
More often than not, in Russian, the word compromise ("kompromiss") has a distinctly negative meaning. Technically, it means the same thing as in English, but in the West it tends to have an optimistic ring, evoking notions of bi-partisanship and open-mindedness.
In Soviet history, "kompromiss" invariably brings to mind the vision of weakness in front of injustice, the schizophrenia of sacrificing one's principles in order to survive.
This is why I am eager to hear Peter Baker address the issue of the current U.S. relationship with Russia in his public lecture. Very few people can match his insight into the far-reaching outcome of "kompromiss" with a country that has still not come to terms with its totalitarian past. Baker lived in Russia with his wife, fellow Washington Post correspondent Susan Glasser, for four years following the election of Vladimir Putin in 2000, and husband and wife have documented, chillingly and compellingly, the Soviet nature of Putin's Russia in their book "Kremlin Rising."
Some of the most moving pages of the book deal with the tragedy of the 2004 Chechen terrorist attack in Beslan -- the devastating bloodbath that took place in the town's school on the first day of classes after the summer holidays.
During a protracted stand-off between Chechen terrorists and about 1,000 men, women and children (hundreds of whom were killed), all of Russia's major television stations were forced, in true Soviet style, to run comedies and soap operas.
Russians who wanted to know what was happening had to tune into an independent Moscow radio station that was reporting what it saw on CNN. Having fudged the numbers of casualties and blurred the connection with Chechnya, Putin responded to the tragedy by taking control of gubernatorial elections, thus proceeding with a policy that had been in the works for some time.
Until Putin's rise to power, "what do you think of Stalin?" was a softball question for Russian politicians. In 2002, when asked to give his opinion about Stalin's place in history, Putin had this to say: "Stalin is of course a dictator. That goes without saying. He was a man guided to a great extent by the interests of keeping his personal power which explains a lot, in my view."
But, having gently condemned history's worst tyrant, he went on to address the more positive side of Stalin's legacy: "The problem is that it was under his leadership that the country won the Second World War, and the victory to a large extent is connected with his name. And it would be foolish to ignore this circumstance. So this is my incomplete answer," he concluded, rather mysteriously, "and it should satisfy you."
In subsequent years, Putin would revisit the topic of Stalin, adding a firmer condemnation to his balanced view while at the same time ordering the revision of school history books to include praise for Stalin's prudent management abilities. Russia's students are now educated by this material.
Thus, according to Baker and Glasser, the initial warmth towards Stalin on Putin's part was no anomaly. The authors also explain that Russian people who support Putin or who, at least, don't dislike him, often don't want to know anything about politics, aren't interested in Russian history, and believe that the problems Russia faces all started in 1991. "These Russians are not Bolsheviks by conviction," argues one of their interviewees, "but they are still for Soviet power."
Dissidents who struggled with the Soviet authorities discovered early on that Putin would uphold a KGB-style policy with regard to civil rights. As one Moscow scientist once told me: "you can't be sly with the KGB -- you either play along and do whatever they say, or you risk everything and refuse."
In the meantime the West is honing its policy in dealing with Putin and Medvedyev, especially with Russia's growing wealth and influence in the international sphere.
The West searches for a middle ground, but arrives at a "kompromiss," and Baker and Glasser remind us how hazardous it would be to overlook the dead journalists who criticized the Kremlin, the forceful takeover of national television networks, and the widespread enthusiasm for the tactics and stature of the Soviet past.
How to press "reset" in the light of all of this is a fascinating topic, and I invite the public to come join in the discussion.
Yuri Corrigan is assistant professor of Russian Studies at the College of Wooster.
Megjegyzések
Megjegyzés küldése