Respect for Russia
Vladimir Putin has a catchy turn of phrase and canβt seem to help himself, with pithy remarks about sanctions and
These were the headlines, but the summit itself was This was in large measure due to the Portuguese who are in the chair, Theyβve worked hard and seem extremely efficient, but this is not what I mean.
Prime Minister Jose Socrates and his cabinet have a very romantic view of Russia. They love its music and its literature and see it as an important part of European civilisation. They think it is wrong to speak loudly or rudely to Russia, and think the EU missed an opportunity in the last decades when Russia was reaching out towards Europe. For them a smooth summit with no explosive lectures was essential.
They got agreements on and an early-warning system if there are problems with energy supply.
But as I say, Putin canβt help himself, and suggested a human rights monitoring organisation to examine abuses in Russia and the EU. One German journalist I spoke to saw this as hugely important, saying with reverence, "It will be based in Brussels." But people from the European Commission were bemused and Iβm sure Putinβs taking the micky.
These summits are odd affairs, essentially between the relevant commissioners, the presidency and the
If Poland, Estonia or Latvia had been in the chair, the mood would have been very different. (See my reports from Latvia and Poland earlier in the week.)
One of the proposals in the controversial (and it was also a key part of the constitution) is to replace the bugginsβ-turn presidency with a permanent figure - Tony Blair, some muse, though itβs more likely to be or
But how much will individual nations miss putting their own stamp on such affairs?
Iβm Mark Mardell, the ΒιΆΉΤΌΕΔ's North America editor. These are my reflections on American politics, some thoughts on being a Brit living in the USA, and who knows what else? My 
°δ΄Η³Ύ³Ύ±π²Τ³Ω²υΜύΜύ Post your comment
Mark wrote: "But as I say, Putin canβt help himself, and suggested a human rights monitoring organisation to examine abuses in Russia AND the EU."
Actually Mr. Putin may have a point and I think that for example an issue of Russian minority in Spain should be closely examined in view of reports that Madrid tries to restrict some of its business activities there.
Well, what can you expect of Portugal? Itβs a country very, very far away from Russia! Weβve never fought; weβve never been rivals in anything. So I guess Portugal has the least bias against Russia. Which is good, because Portugal thought about Europeβs best interest. If Poland held EU presidency, for example, it would be thinking about how much it hates Russia, which is highly counterproductive.
Russia and the EU need each other: Russia is the key to energy security of the EU; the EU, on the other hand, is the source of lots of money.
Economics should dominate this relationship, not politics.
Of course Russia is worth of respect as it is Russian people, but the problem here is a very actual set of policies the Russian President/Government is implementing.
About the loss of power of single countries the problem is clear: being alone and setting our own foreign policy or being together and establishing a common one?
In both cases we are not totally free.
In the first case we are not totally free because our strength will not be enough to compare with world giants such as US, Russia or China and we are compelled to simply chose the less evil boss (the US without doubt!).
In the second case we are not free because we are bound together with the other EU countries and we have to mediate foreign policy with them. But here there is no boss, all countries can make their voice heard and at the end the EU (if it will really have a common foreign policy) will be able to negotiate with the other giants in a peer to peer way (the US will remain of course our first ally!)
It's all very nice for Jose Socrates to be so cosy with Vlad. Why wouldn't he be being an ex communist? I'm wondering if the Portugeese would be so keen to do business with them if they shared a border with them? Socrates is the epitomy of the loony far left at it's romantic best.
Seeing Russia through the eyes of Poland or Lithuania is a road to nowhere. Why? Because what is commonly considered "the Polish view" for ex., is in reality a
thin layer of the Polish public opinion, represented mostly by its wealthy elite. The grass roots worldview in Poland, Checkoslovakia or the Baltic states is far from a black and white view of the enemy through the night-vision goggles. As pointed out in a some previous remarks of your readers, lots of people in Eastern Europe are in fact pro-Russian. The problem is that their voice is usually muted (although voting out Kazynskys seems to indicate some progress). And all the while, the East European elite is busy pushing their own agendas down people's throats, which is colorfully illustrated by the vote of the Chech government to not hold a referendum. Pushing their agendas down the throat of EU is their wet dream of course.
It seems they know what to be afraid of. Much like Eltsin's government in 90s' Russia, East European elites owe a lot of their power to the forces outside of their countries (financing their election campaigns, etc). That is really why they are so fearful of Russian "influence". In fact, Eastern European commonfolk are not as anti-Russian as many think. I mean, why else would eastern Ukraine talk of separation, why else would they hold demonstrations against the US missile system?
East European elites view Russia through the eyes of fear. Not fear of some "tyranny" but fear for their own political skin. Their view of Russia is a narrow-minded and extremely dangerous gamble. Their over-zealous henchmenship in regard to the missile instalation is a huge disservice to their own people, the EU and possibly to the to whole world. Nobody in their right mind should ever consider using this unique and peculiar mentality as a compass in guiding the complex and multi-faceted EU politics.
It seems to me that this post has a subtle implication that Russia has nothing to do with Europeβs history. However, it ridiculous to disregard the Russia's historical and geopolitical influence in the region.
And as you mentioned Europe, partially, must blame it self for the βtenseβ relationship with Russia now. EU leaders ignored Russia when the country was trying to reach out during 1990's. The support and compassion could have made a huge difference.
Instead EU was silently watching how Russian economy collapsed in 1998 (probably with a smirk on the faces)
Well, now after years of inferior treatment Europe must deal with more and more assertive Russia that absolutely capable (in part, due to its natural resources) revive its economy and pursue its interests on the worldwide scale.
Thank you very much, Mr Mardell, for this refreshingly upbeat account of what might well become a turning point in Russian relations with the EU. Wouldn't it be better to make gains, for everyone's sake -- and above all to collectively tackle the climate threat? Wouldn't it be wonderful if all the ominous talk of imminent war with Iran (emanating from Bush, Rice, Cheney and -- well, well, well! -- Hillary Clinton) would quietly fade away? Isn't it more important to save the planet for our children, and their children, than to settle imperfectly understood scores that have their roots in the chaos of past millenia? On behalf of millions of like-minded souls, many of them Russians, many of them Britons, many of them educated Americans and certainly many of them Europeans: heartfelt thanks to the Portuguese hosts, and to all who participated, contributed and dared to dream of better times ahead... And yes, new EU members will also benefit from transparency on human rights issues -- for example, the plight of Roma -- so the idea of continent-wide monitoring office is sound.
Mr. Mardell,
It is now a fact that the most important countries of Europe, for numerous reasons, are Germany and Russia. Most importantly, Russia has both good scientists and innovative engineers and the necessary natural resources that in 25 years from now may make it the richest and most dominant country in Europe. The really educated and intelligent people in the administration structure of the EU commission as well as in the governments and universities of the member countries of the EU realize this and try to have a properly balanced dialogue with Russia such that Russia could philosophically become closer to the political and social values that with time will be evolving in the framework of the EU structure.
What a screwed up place Europe is. "If Poland, Estonia, or Latvia had been in the chair, the mood would have been very different." What is the EU's foreign policy? What week is this? "...replace the buggins'-turn presidency with a permanent figure-Tony Blair, some muse,..." President for life. Too bad Hugo Chavez isn't available but he's occupied as president for life somewhere else and besides, he's not European. Neither are the Turks...or are they? It depends on whom you ask, France, Britain, Austria...and what week this is.
Prime minister Jose Socrates and his Cabinet have a very romantic view of Russia. They love its music and literature and see it as an important part of European Civilisation." Why is Russia part of Europe but Turkey isn't? What am I missing here? Isn't it wonderful to know that the EU's attitudes towards other nations, its foreign policy revolves around the music of Tchaikowsky and Borodin and the writings of Tolstoy and Pushkin and not around such mundane stuff as the threat to target European cities with missiles armed with nuclear warheads if the US installs radar and 10 anti missile missiles pointed at Iran in Poland and the Czech Republic? Europeans know what is really important. "They think it is wrong to speak loudly or rudely to Russia." With no missiles to threaten retaliation with, Portugal had better not be rude to Russia. If they think they can count on America to defend them after Chirac and Schroeder enlisted most of West Europe to blow up its bridges to the US it had better guess again. The next war Europe has with anyone, it will be on its own at least as far as the US is concerned. Any American politician who would suggest otherwise would be committing political suicide. No more American blood or treasure will be spent defending Western Europe. At least not this week.
European civilization would be incomplete without the contributions of Russian civilization in music, literature and the arts. European history cannot be discussed without the impact of Russia on Europe. Although more than half of Russia stretches into Asia, the core of Russian music, arts and literure comes from European Russia. The Russia that counts is found west of the Ural mountains. So what is all this repeated discussion as to whether Russia belongs in Europe?
The Lisbon Treaty, if signed there as planned, puts someone as President of the Council for two and a half years. I can only imagine that heads of government have agreed to that because 13 years is a long time to wait between goes in the chair.
The newly appointed President will look after Council meetings when they are attended by heads of government and summits with Russia and other countries. He or she may also get invited to meetings of G7/8 countries along with the President of the Commission.
But what is going to happen when the Council focuses on specific business, e.g. agriculture, environment, trade, research etc, and is attended for that purpose only by the relevant Ministers.? There are up to twenty such meetings every six months under the current system. The President cannot be expected to chair them all. Are they to be chaired instead by his vice-Presidents, and if so, how are these people going to be chosen and for how long will they hold office? Or does the Treaty propose putting an end to Council meetings in those specific formats?
Do you know the answer, Mark?
To Maria Amadei Ashot
I'd love to talk climate change too Maria. That is after the Russians stop persecuting the Chechens and America and the others pull out of Iraq. I'd love it if mr. Putin was as interested in saving the planet as you are. He's more interested in conquering it instead. What do you think they'll do now they've laid claim to the Artic? They'll melt heaven and earth to get at such riches and then you'll see some climate change. As someone once famously said "you aint seen nothing yet".
Yes it would be nice to get back to "old fashioned" diplomacy-where countries have their legitimate differences but discuss them in civilised ways (reserving the big stick perhaps for when required).
Maybe the current ideological and propaganda based system, in which some countries are demonised while others are seen as beyond reproach, is the result of the need to manipulate popular opinion in order to keep one's political job -in order to push through the policies that may be neccessary.
Perhaps when the chips are down nobody can be trusted -even though, basically, we are also all in the same boat. Collaboration or conflict -a question of aesthetics -and/or survival.
I have never understood why Russia is considered a non-European country by some people, what else should it be if it was not european? And because it is european it should be our first ally outside the European Union. Instead of this some of our european politicians critizise this country as if we were better and had the right to point our fingers at Russia which is definitly not the case. I loved the foreign politics of our chancelor SchrΓΆder, he said "no" to the USA and "yes" to our european brothers. Because of him we are not part of an illegal war in Irak. I feel that one can not trust in western countries any longer, in the close future Germany will surely concentrate again more on its eastern neighbours like it has always been except of the last 60 years. Germany has actually never been a western country and we should not pretend so. YES to a good relationship with Russia and NO to the US - anti-missile-shield on european soil.
Mr. Thomas is absolutely correct that Russian art and literature are important part of European culture.
To deny it because of the political system in Russia was at odds ( to put it mildly) with other European nations, would be similar to denying European origin of German art and literature, because of couple of decades of fascism. Schiller, Goete and Bach shouldn't have place in European culture in this case, as Tchaikovsky or Tolstoy.
So when Portuguese acknowledge cultural contributions of Russia to Europe, they don't make a mistake, however one should be aware of a bigger picture. The head of Russian state now is former KGB officer, who is not controlled any longer by the doctrines of Soviet system, and the class of "New Russian" who's geopolitical and financial interests he represents is ruthless, with voracious appetites for money and power. US government didn't expect the re-birth of such monster, when they were hoping to create a docile puppets out of Russian leaders back in nineties. The table turned, and the emerged class of Russian capitalists points ( and by the way rightfully so ) at the double standards of Western ideas of "democracy," which is governed by money, ( particularly in case of US.) As usual Russians are quite perceptive, and although they might be rude and crude, they get straight to the point with little or no pretenses.
Can anybody tell me what state Poland has ever liked? It is a small country with a great far history and a hudge infitiority complex. Actually, if there are any doubts, the USSR and other eastern european countries made their best to transform an agicultural german neighbour into an industrial country. I don't think it is a solid reason to blame Russia in all sins. Russia historically tries to be a part of the european family but finally it usually turns used and left alone with its problems. When we are talking about russians abroad nobody argues that many of them are quite disgusting but almost all of them are citizens of one or more european countries. Russia unites many polite, intellegent and respectable people, that have been throun into the rabbish bin of reforms by their government and the president. Now we are trying to get out of that, weither in Chechnya or in Moscow Region or in any other provinces. And there are no bears walking along our streets!
Another propaganda article from Mr. Mandell. The general theme, as usual, is to show that Russia is inferior.
This is achieved by the following means: the point of view of the Portuguese cabinet on Russia is called "romantic" rather than just their point of view or something else ( e.g. pragmatic, etc.) This should create a feeling that the Portuguese are naive in their attitude towards Russia.
The next step is to present Putin's proposal for a "human rights monitoring organisation to examine abuses in Russia and the EU" as laughable. While this can seem hilarious to Mr. Mandell, I cannot see why. Is EU a holy cow? Or human right violations never happen in EU?
Anybody who follows recent EU politics can give your a number of examples. So what is so funny?
I understand that Mr. Mandell is just doing his job. But after reading articles like this I understand why more and more Russians feels nothing but contempt towards the West. I guess this can be the ultimate goal of ΒιΆΉΤΌΕΔ.
The differnce in human rights abuses
between Russia and other European countries is that in Russia they are
predominantly politically motivated.
To Mark,
Lets not pretend that the US is a charitible organisation, and if you think the missile "shield" in eastern europe is about Iran, think again. i would argue that its designed to foster more devide amongst russia and its EU neighbours by cashing in on some feelings of angst and misgiuded illusions of granduer coming from former warsaw pact members.
EU has never been united and it will take awhile, if ever,before all EU members agree on all aspects of EU policy. Is that such a bad thing?? Probably not.
On war and conflict in the EU, I am sure your government can find plenty of places to shed some American blood and capture some "treasue", after all isn't that what you guys are all about?
Yes it would be nice to get back to "old fashioned" diplomacy-where countries have their legitimate differences but discuss them in civilised ways (reserving the big stick perhaps for when required).
Maybe the current ideological and propaganda based system, in which some countries are demonised while others are seen as beyond reproach, is the result of the need to manipulate popular opinion in order to keep one's political job -in order to push through the policies that may be neccessary.
Perhaps when the chips are down nobody can be trusted -even though, basically, we are also all in the same boat. Collaboration or conflict -a question of aesthetics -and/or survival.
"The Russia that counts is found west of the Ural mountains. So what is all this repeated discussion as to whether Russia belongs in Europe?'[#9]
All geographers and cartographers agree that a border between European and Asian part of Eurasia landmass runs along Ural Mountains.
[that's why China is not likely to expand westward farther than Ural to find Lebensraum needed to accomodate its 1400 million strong and fast growing population.]
So what is all this repeated discussion whether TURKEY is a European country? Can't those who claim it isn't come up with less disingenious reason for denying it EU membership, particularly after they've admitted Cyprus, a speck of land way EAST of Istanbul?
And re issue raised by Mark in #8...
[" The next war Europe has with anyone, it will be on its own at least as far as the US is concerned. Any American politician who would suggest otherwise would be committing political suicide."]
Unfriendly, nay, quite hostile policies vis-avis US conducted for years by such politicians like Gerhard Schroederov and Jacques Iraq [dubbed so by the French because of his profitable dealings with Saddam Hussein in his different capacities] have indeed resulted in a strong isolationistic streak among American public as far as EU is concerned.
If there's another conflict/genocide in the heart of Europe on the order of "ethnic cleansing" which took place in Bosnia and which affluent and well armed but impotent Old Europe could't/wouldn't stop, I seriously doubt whether calling American cavalry to the rescue will bring positive results.
Particularly since more and more Americans see that 70% of global production and trade is already based in APEC (Pacific Rim countries' economic association) of which USA is an important member together with such powerful growth engines like Australia, Canada, Chile, China, Japan, S.Korea, etc.
And as for Russia's integration with Europe I strongly recommed an article in Washington Post [Sunday. Oct. 28, p. A01] about Kremlin's plans to create a SEPARATE Internet just for Russia and other former Soviet republics.
["Oh, what a Web we weave..."]
Incidentally, Mark,
A title of your piece has reminded me of a famous Aretha Franklin's hit:
"R - E - S - P - E - C - T
COMRADES, THAT MEANS MUCH TO ME!"
[or something very similar]
P.S. And I've always thought that Socrates was a wise man. Or may be you're quoting some other Socrates, a one- to use politically correct parlance- intellectualy challenged.
Putin already has an organisation to monitor human rights in both Russia and the European Union - it's called the Council of Europe and it's based in Strasbourg.
And, rather unsuprisingly, Putin's Russia almost completely ignores it leading to Russian cases appearing before the European Court of Human Rights on a distressingly regular basis.
When Putin raises the issue of a human rights body to catalogue abuses in the EU as well, he's not taking the mickey. The perceived second-class status of the Russian minorities in the Baltic countries is something that has long annoyed Moscow.
Yes it would be nice to get back to "old fashioned" diplomacy-where countries have their legitimate differences but discuss them in civilised ways (reserving the big stick perhaps for when required).
Maybe the current ideological and propaganda based system, in which some countries are demonised while others are seen as beyond reproach, is the result of the need to manipulate popular opinion in order to keep one's political job -in order to push through the policies that may be neccessary.
Perhaps when the chips are down nobody can be trusted -even though, basically, we are also all in the same boat. Collaboration or conflict -a question of aesthetics -and/or survival.
Thomas #10
"European Civilization would be incomplete without the contributions of Russian civilization in music literature and the arts."
You forget to mention Ivan the Terrible and Peter the Great. Where would European civilization be without their contributions? They must be included just to be fair and impartial. Leaders like that didn't come along again until Hitler and Stalin.
"the Russia that counts is found west of the Ural Mountains."
I'll bet residents of Irkutsk, Novosibirsk, and Vladivostok among others would take exception to that. It seems to me that the deliniation of all of the continents is very clear and logical except between Europe and Asia. The Ural Mountains were obviously an arbitrary choice by cartographers. It could just as easily have been the Carpathians, or the Danube River, or the region bounded by Moldova, Ukraine, Belarus, and the Balkins on one side and Roumania, Hungary, and Poland on the other. That would have put all of Russia inside Asia. So what, it's just a designation, it doesn't change who or what they are one bit except in the minds of those who have some abstract notion of Europe as a unique and unified identifiable entity which it clearly is not.
Anthony #12
Do you mean that if America stays in Iraq and Russia continues to "persecute the Chechens" you will not talk about climate change? Well it seems Putin has some value after all. Were it only so easy with the rest of the eco-Nazis. BTW, when it comes to the sacrifices YOU and everyone else will really have to make to shift the climate of the earth, "you ain't seen nothin' yet." Be prepared to live in a manner comparable to life in most places 150 years ago, that's what it will take to slow and reverse climate change if the CO2 greenhouse gas model most scientists assert is correct. That or a radical change in technology we have no present indication for. Time to the tipping point is quickly running out. Better enjoy heat, air conditioning, refrigeration, electrical appliances and cars while you still can.
Russia should be very sceptical with latest European passes of New Europe and treat it with caution. Although Russian relations with other major European civilisations like Germany, France, Portugal and Spain are flourishing, there a number of American wannabes like Estonia, Poland, Latvia and Lithuania as well as US clients like UK - countries effectively without independent foreign politics - who are going against European idea of peaceful economic and political cooperation. It is therefore very counterproductive for Russia and its allies to deal with the Europe as a whole. Russia and other major European allies still remembers recent devastating bombings of the major European cities in by US, no surprise they are not enthusiastic about US building their weaponry in Europe.
Not only does Putin have a turn of phrase he has an excellent point. The treatment of Russia's diasporic populations in the Baltic states and to a different extent, Ukraine, is a very serious issue that the EU could show some leadership on.
It seems it's not Mr. Putin who 'can't help himself', but Mr. Mardell who can't resist something bad about Russia and its president. A smooth summit? Not a way to go! We should have critiscised Russia instead, offend it by all the means possible and then moan about 'Russia not cooperating'. Why should it?
"The Russia that counts is found west of the Ural mountains. So what is all this repeated discussion as to whether Russia belongs in Europe?'[#9]
All geographers and cartographers agree that a border between European and Asian part of Eurasia landmass runs along Ural Mountains.
[that's why China is not likely to expand westward farther than Ural to find Lebensraum needed to accomodate its 1400 million strong and fast growing population.]
So what is all this repeated discussion whether TURKEY is a European country? Can't those who claim it isn't come up with less disingenious reason for denying it EU membership, particularly after they've admitted Cyprus, a speck of land way EAST of Istanbul?
And re issue raised by Mark in #8...
[" The next war Europe has with anyone, it will be on its own at least as far as the US is concerned. Any American politician who would suggest otherwise would be committing political suicide."]
Unfriendly, nay, quite hostile policies vis-avis US conducted for years by such politicians like Gerhard Schroederov and Jacques Iraq [dubbed so by the French because of his profitable dealings with Saddam Hussein in his different capacities] have indeed resulted in a strong isolationistic streak among American public as far as EU is concerned.
If there's another conflict/genocide in the heart of Europe on the order of "ethnic cleansing" which took place in Bosnia and which affluent and well armed but impotent Old Europe could't/wouldn't stop, I seriously doubt whether calling American cavalry to the rescue will bring positive results.
Particularly since more and more Americans see that 70% of global production and trade is already based in APEC (Pacific Rim countries' economic association) of which USA is an important member together with such powerful growth engines like Australia, Canada, Chile, China, Japan, S.Korea, etc.
And as for Russia's integration with Europe I strongly recommed an article in Washington Post [Sunday. Oct. 28, p. A01] about Kremlin's plans to create a SEPARATE Internet just for Russia and other former Soviet republics.
["Oh, what a Web we weave..."]
One of the things, which in my opinion are less discussed, is Western Europeβs and US subconscious fear for past 50 years for USSR. They never wanted consciously recognise what kind of malice have been on their doorstep for all that time but subconsciously they have been dreading that nameless fear and that have left them drained . This is very relevant today because Eastern Europeans do not have this subconscious fear, they had and have real one and their treatment of Russia clearly shows that. They are used to bully and βpat on the backβ tactics of Russia and donβt buy that so easily, because they have learned hard way what is behind of that. Russia within its three different forms (from AD 1721 until now) has always shown need for ultimate control, manipulation and power. West maybe understand this even now but doesnβt want to go back to this subconscious fear.
Unfortunately, for the European Union its complete fragmentation has given upper hand for Russia who sees this is as a weakness and uses this to make his position much stronger than it could have been in any other situation. Thatβs not forget that Russia has historically much more experience in uniting different countries under one rule than EU and maybe failing EU has contender for power.
Rinat, NS, Sergey, Ilia,
Will Russia agree to be "just" one of many within the international community?
Please, remember that Estonians, Latvians, Lithuanians, Poles, just view themselves as equal to you.
Is this really their "illusion of grandeur? If you think so, we indeed have a problem.
Yes, indeed respectable people should think it is wrong to speak loudly or rudely to *anybody*.
So what do you have to say about the Russian music and literature? Or is it just political prejudices that set the tone of your posting? Maybe you stayed for too long in Poland?
I second NS's post. East-European nations are very divided. Unfortunately it is natural that the more radical parts of society are the ones that shout loudest and leave the impression they speak for everybody. The "anti-communist" parties use the ghost of communism and the russian threat to keep their voters in line. Intentional radicalisation is their means of prolonging political vitality. Here in UK I have a number of young polish friends and they all made special effort to see Kaczinsky go.
Kolio,
Bulgaria / UK
Europe is not Europe without Russia. Yet, there's always been conflicts with the major European powers. Whether it is the great Northern War with Sweden, Napoleon's invasion or the Crimean War led by Britain and Turkey, there has been always someone who will be critical of Russian power and influence. The best thing is to remember that Russian will always be a power, not only are people extremely educated as they benefited from a social state, but also a country that is extremely wealthy in natural resources, a country that has a steady decline in inflation and a growing GDP. So perhaps it is not perfect, but who is, look at Britain harboring criminals from Russia, U.S leading an oil war in Iraq, Baltic countries discriminating on Russian born individuals who are second class citizens who were born there yet do not have citizen ship. Should I go on. Do folks realize that Putin has the highest rating of any ruler in the world. People love him, and to truly understand Russian people and they cultural way of thinking is to embrace them as friends and stop critizing.
I would be happy to respect Russia, if "Russia" meant the people living in Russia, from the Baltic border all the way to the Chukchi Peninsula, and if "respect" in this case meant an appreciation for these persons' humanity, struggles, enrichment to the world community, and for their good deeds.
I don't think that it's a good idea to use the term "respect" if the word "country" really means a state, a particular government, a political party or a particular political leader.
Often political leaders rush to claim that they are the embodiment of the state, or that just because they got more votes in an election, that they represent the people. But they only really represent themselves alone and their own ambitions, be they good or bad. If a political actor demands respect, watch out! If they claim to represent their country, and on behalf of their country, they demand your respect, really, REALLY WATCH OUT!
In some cultures, the word "respect" carries certain dangerously ugly baggage that is scary. In some cultures, including parts of democratic Europe, my friends, "respect" is not something awarded to the good guy or gal, to the virtuous, saintly person, to the heroic freedom-fighter, but rather most frequently "respect" is offered to the person who is most feared.
Often people might say, "You don't have to like him, but you gotta respect him!" when referring to a local bully or gangster, for example, or to governments that similarly tout their ability to harm others. I have heard this phrase used, in similar ways, in numerous human languages, in most parts of the world, so I have a sick feeling that for too many people, in their most pathetic entrails, the word "respect" is reserved for those who have the power to do violence on them. Fear in the heart of these respecters is the catalyst that causes the issuance of respect to the bully.
In the case of Russia today, I believe that Mr. Putin is not telling Europe and the world that they have to respect Russians, as much as he wants us to admit that we again fear the Russian state, which seems to be run largely by Mr. Putin.
So when a Ukrainian "opposition" politician gets poisoned until he is literally green and mottled, are Ukrainians being asked to respect the Russian people, or is it really desired that they fear Mr. Putin?
So when a President of "opposition" Georgia wants to run his country independent of Moscow and finds Russian planes attacking his country, are Georgians being asked to respect the Russian people, or is it really desired that they fear Mr. Putin?
So when a Baltic country chooses to dismantle statues of Lenin, and faces unsubtle threats from Moscow, is the "opposition" Baltic government being asked to respect the Russian people, or is it really desired that they fear Mr. Putin?
So when a Russian spy is murdered in London, is the "opposition" UK government being asked to respect the Russian people, or is it really desired that they fear Mr. Putin?
When the Russian government claims the North Pole as its own, is the world being asked to respect the Russian people, or is it really desired that they fear Mr. Putin?
The Russian political leader feels the need to show his nation and the world his martial-arts exhibitions of strength. I'm no psychologist, but this really looks like a guy who feels a compulsion to show us that he himself is strong and that he wants to be "respected," meaning feared.
When Mr. Putin karate-chops wooden boards in half, he is not asking us to respect his years of hard work and dedication to his hobby. He is showing us that he could beat us to a pulp and that we should be afraid of him.
Please, dear fans of Chekhov, Pushkin and Tchaikovsky, don't be stupid. Mr. Putin is not urging the world to respect Russia's great deceased poets, composers, scientists, chessmasters, or other great Russians. Mr. Putin only wants us to "respect" him personally, to respect his will. By "respect," in the case of a leader of a militarily powerful state, I think "respect" means that we should not disagree with him and that we can best show our respect for him by facilitating his agenda. Mr. Putin is not petitioning us to respect his right to have his own opinion, right or wrong. He just wants us to give him what he wants. What better way of showing him true "respect?"
It is disturbing to see my friends in some countries say things like, "we are far away from Russia, so we don't hate Russia." Criticizing a particular political leader of a modern militarily powerful state is not about love or hate. Nobody has to hate ANY country, if "country" means the theoretically nice folks dwelling within the borders of a modern state. But at the same time, even if we do not border some country, we still should reserve the right to criticize it or any other country, don't you think????
In the case of Portugal, a country that I have much fondness for, how would you feel if Spain in 2007 attempted to overthrow your government, launch not so subtle mercenary attacks on the self-proclaimed "Spanish" parts of Portugal, assassinated your politicians or journalists or tried to cut Portugal off from allies or foreign support? Would you still "respect" such a Spanish state? If the Poles, Latvians, Lithuanians, Estonians or Ukrainians said, "Gee, we're far from Portugal, so we think that the Portuguese are crazy or too sensitive," how would you feel?
It is no fun being alone in a room with a big bully. If Europeans cannot even all agree to protect each other from neighborhood bullies, then the EU should drop its noble talk about "European values."
Frankly, when I see someone in Europe say "Hey, I'm not bordering the bully, so therefore I'm fair, while you the potential victim are crazy," I worry about the chances for democracy and peace.
How many readers of this note live right next door to the atrocities in Southern Sudan? Why care about Darfur if you're not directly involved in the neighborhood - is this your logic??? Why care about Tibet if you're in far-off Portugal? Why care about Ukraine if you're in Luton or Pittsburgh?
Times like this, I think of the Jews in Europe who were rounded up from one country in Europe after another and shipped off to their deaths, not in small part due to the Nazis' smug sense that too many Europeans thought of their Jewish compatriots as "apart from them," and therefore expendable. I guess you might say that those Europeans who welcomed the Gestapo and SS into their cities "respected" the Nazis.
(Note: My typing hands are jittery as I think of how little 21st Century Europe has learned from Hitler, Stalin, Mussolini, Franco, and the parade of European political leaders whom Europe has paid its respects to.) The ashes of the victims who were "too distant" from their fellow Europeans, have risen from the Nazi death camp smokestacks, and they still hang over European skies, even in the sunniest climes, still begging the living to recognize them, in the hopes that such history not be repeated on anyone again.)
The many ethnicities that inhabit the borders of the Russian state, like all peoples in the world, past and present, of course deserve our respect and good will. Unfortunately, Russia, like all countries, is not a person or a group of persons, but rather a state, and states come and go, rise and fall. Some states are governed well by statesmen and others by tyrants, morons, cynics, pirates, looters, bullies - or persons combining many of these traits.
Caligula, and the long line of European thug-emperors, thug-kings, thug-queens, thug-princes, thug-czars, thug-czarinas, thug-colonels, thug-generals, and other jackboots who have misruled their countries and who have plundered other countries, eventually die. The people in whose name these usurpers of nations ruled, carry on their lives, sometimes scarred, sometimes oblivious, sometimes the accomplices of evil and transmitters of evil to yet another generation, simply because they paid too much respect to the wrong person.
I think that the Russia-EU summit is another perfect example of the Russian president diverting attention from Russia to the EU. When challenged about Kosovo, he responded that the EU already has enough problems - Belgium being one of them, and he asked why the EU needed another one with Kosovo. There were no direct answers to that from the EU representatives. For me, an obvious one would have been that Russia has a lot of problems internally, also - the horrible state of the roads, South Ossetia, and so on. So why does Russia need another one with Kosovo?
Putin may have a point here.
Some of the new EU member countries have laws protecting the "purity of the nation" and discriminate openly against their national minorities. As a result, for the time being, EU has lost its moral high ground and can no longer accuse anyone of discrimination, apartheid or racism.
You have to clean your house first before pointing at your neighbors dirty laundry.
Russia is, was, and always will be a bully. No matter the form of it's tyrannical government it has always believed that might makes right. Of the cold war superpowers, only Russia has developed NEW missiles and new nuclear weaponry. The west still depends on it's cold war era weapons which may or may not work if the time ever comes. Why shouldn't the EU take the eastern countries word for things? They, after all, have had the most direct experience with them. Mr. Putin is a Stalin admirer and a Stalin wannabe.
Can anybody tell me what state Poland has ever liked? #14]
Well, Alexey, Poland has always liked United States. And from the very beginning. Perhaps that's why some Poles have become heroes of American Revolutionary War (like gen. Kosciuszko) and famous parades are staged in their honor in the US till this very day (like for gen. Pulaski). :-)
To: Sue de Nym
What second class status are russians in Baltic States? Have you actually ever been to Baltic States?
Please name me how are they treated differently to any other foreigner.
If they want estonian citizenship,they have to pass language exam which is very simple. Problem is, if these people dont want to learn estonian they cant do the exam and they cant have estonian passport, what do you expect us to give away passports to people who cant be asked to put some effort in and show respect for country it wants to live in? Even brits and americans who work over there for couple of months speak more estonian than russians who have been living there for 40 years.
If you want to get a job in Estonia, you HAVE TO speak english AND russian.
Please please please dont make comments like this about things you know nothing about, Russia has always been bully and still is, thats why Baltics cant be asked to play with Russia, we are better than that- in Russia people are getting beaten and murdered daily because of their political views and race,in Baltics such things havent happened, no one has been killed because of their race,religion or political views.We understand what is democracy,after all we fought for it and after 50 years we got it.
If baltics would be bad to live in why do you think russians dotn move back to Russia? Its only over the border next to us. Think about it eh.
Human rights....it's such a big word! Those who criticise Russia don't care that US forces are killing and torturing innocent people on a daily basis in Iraq (even a private company is doing that!!!!). Whenever a US soldier is caught and charged with anything he gets aways with a laughable sentence (you tortured today an iraqi...you're not allowed to watch TV tonight!)
Why is it that no many countries are that hard when talking about China? Why isn't there embargos on China inspite its government has such a disgraceful human rights record? Why is the US good friends with some central asian dictators? Would they still be friends if they hadn't crazy oil reserves?
There is such a huge hipocrecy in todays World politics! Money moves the World, human rights seem to be just an excuse.
'Prime Minister Jose Socrates and his cabinet have a very romantic view of Russia'-The use of the word romantic does signify a naive attitude of the Portuguese towards Russians.(Andrey #15)
But is it really so Mr.Mardell? Do you really think the Jose Socrates is a child who is seduced by the music and literature of a country (which is excellent by any accounts,I must agree) that he is blind to more pressing problems that E.U is facing today?
I think Jose Socrates is a man of shrewdness than of naivety when he treats Russia as a new emerging power.
He has played his cards well.Will others follow it as well?
Many Lithuanians who were living under the heel of the Soviets 17 years ago and saw what happened outside the tv tower in Vilnius, still have a great resentment for Russia and its people. It will take a generation or two before the population of Lithuania will be able to forgive and forget what happened under Soviet rule. It is understandable therefore that the Russians that were left behind there are resented by the rest of the population. Those that once ruled are now ruled and they do not like it.
Mike Mardell observes that Putin suggested a human rights monitoring organisation to examine abuses in Russia and the EU.
This Putin proposal is very problematic in the light of Russiaβs current co-operation with existing machinery to monitor human rights in Europe and redress violations.
In a detailed and substantiated article in the International Herald Tribune, 30 June-1 July, Judy Dempsey concludes: βIn a discreet but systematic diplomatic effort, Russia is seeking to weaken international human rights supervision so it can hinder outside scrutiny of its policies at home and in the sphere of influence it claims.β
After two years of negotiating among the 47 member states of the Council of Europe, Russia blocked a crucial reform aimed at improving the efficiency of the Councilβs European Court of Human Rights. In Vienna, meanwhile, Russia has tried to muzzle the Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights, an autonomous division of the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe. The Officeβs main success has been in the monitoring of elections. And today (31 October), ΒιΆΉΤΌΕΔ NEWS reports that Russia is seeking "unprecedented" curbs on OSCE monitoring of its parliamentary polls.
In her article, Judy Dempsey noted that despite its criticism of the Council of Europe and the OSCE, Russia showed no intention of quitting either. βInstead, it is supporting new, parallel structures more in line with its priorities.β The EU will have to take care to ensure that any new joint EU-Russian human rights structure does not become such a parallel structure, undermining rather than reinforcing existing European human rights institutions.
It seems Mr. Putin doesn't have much respect for OSCE observers. During the last Russian election their delegation was 465 persons strong; not he demands that that it's maximum 70 persons weak.
But on the other hand, should there be ANY international observers?
After all we know that next December election was democratic because it's results (already known) have been determined by the democratic government of Mr. Putin.
Russia, Turkey and EU. In the sense of geography, history and culture Russia is more a part of Europe than Turkey is. EU should first accept Russia, then think about accepting Turkey.
This article is a big joke. I will not repeat, but refer to comment no. 15, by andrey.
The western and US media talk so loud. Little do you self actually understand of how much control is actually behind the scenes of the major news stations that everyone watch and read on a daily basis. It's a big campaign to enforce the suitable public view on to people's minds, and to spread misinformation, and misperceptions. And unless you really try to search for alternative sources of information, you are watching the movie, not the reality.
Russia is sending strong signals to the US, and guess what, you will not be able to make Russia bend. Russia is back, and thank God, before the US is making hell on earth. Which they would have if allowed to continue their unilateral world-domination-game. I trust Putin any day, he got integrity and honor his statements. Bush has even publicly said that lying sometimes is necessary. O yes, true words from a President. God bless us, let's hope he is kept on leach for the remainder of his presidency.
Well it's getting rather interesting. First Europe alienates the US with its anti American rhetoric around the time of the invasion of Iraq, then Russia with its anti Russian rhetoric over human rights and internal political freedoms. (It's OK Boris, say whatever you like about the US, a 13 trillion dollar economy and ten thousand hydrogen bombs do all the talking for America we need.) It's not on good terms with China which is buying up all its gas and oil right out from under it and driving its manufacturers out of business or at least forcing them to ship their jobs to China if they want to survive. The Arab world is angry at it for everything from cartoons to bans on hijabs and racial discrimination. Africa gets mostly lip service like stupid concerts from Europe (the US sent more money to Africa to prevent and treat AIDS than the rest of the world combined and has many people of African ancestry among its most prominent citizens), Europe is not on good terms with Australia because of Australia's position on global warming and yet Europe says the US foreign policy stinks? Has Europe managed to alienate South America, India, or Japan yet? Hmmm, want to swap places? Not on your life Europe, we don't need so many enemies. Just keep up what you're doing and we'll keep on what we're doing and well see whom the terrorists nuke first.
After enlargement UK membership in the EU does not make any sense to me. We are swamped with polish immigrants and criminality. And our politicians are preoccupied with making rows with Russia instead of tackling real problems. For me as for many other Brits Russia is not a threat. I think the ideal solution would be Turkey, Poland etc joining US not EU. It would neutralize American threat to the world peace for many years to come.
I see from the Europe news that " modern democratic reasonable Russia" has barred Lufthansa cargo flights from crossing it's airspace because the company won't relocate it's hub to Siberia from Kazakhstan.
Anyone who thinks this type of behaviour will not be repeated under Putin must be wearing red tinted spectacles.
I think it is time the western world as a whole flexed its financial muscle and refused to trade with this dictator until he stopped holding our countries/businesses to ransom everytime they do not comply with his demands.
No excuse of a broken pipeline for this latest show of force. eh!
"Lufthansa cargo planes were barred from flying through Russian airspace - adding hours to flights.
Russia wants the airline to relocate its Asia hub - currently in Kazakhstan - to Krasnoyarsk in Siberia.
Detours to avoid Russian airspace had increased Lufthansa's fuel bill by about 280,000 euros a week (Β£194,400; $405,400), it said.
Germany said it may complain to the European Union over the action.
"We would like to know if other countries have problems," a spokesman for Germany's transport ministry said." [From ΒιΆΉΤΌΕΔ News]
Oh, so ONLY NOW Germans want to know whether other countries have problems with Russia as well.
ONLY NOW they want to use EU's mechanisms to deal with Putinland, whereas before Berlin was quite happy to ignore Brussels and pursue bilateral agreements with their historical friends in Moscow.
So is that all, my German friends, what falling on your knees and sucking comrade Liliputin's little...hmm...finger got you?
A ban from Russian air space? :-)))
Respect for Russia ? You're kidding me, right? Name a country which respected by Putin's Russia. Ya, really hard... However few things are here such as provocations against Baltic republics for last 15 years, ritual insulting of Ukraine on a state level, chronically bad relationship with Poland, bulling of Moldova and Belarus, practically war against Georgia, cold war with Azerbaijan... Need more, watch Russian news . Putin has to be respected no more than little school bully. People, Please remember Putin's predecessor (Lenin) words about European supporters of Russia: "WE NEED THESE USEFUL IDIOTS".
It's about time that everybody stopped
fooling around with this whole human rights issue. There is a saying that goes like this " If you choose to judge someone else, in this case judging Russia, you better start with your faults first". In my opinion, I think there is no country in the world that does not ignore human rights to a lesser or greater extent.
It's also about time that each country begins to closely examine its own history, since history does repeat itself.
Its time to contemplate the image of Russia as a bully.
Of course, such perceiption is generally understandable. Russia has been an expantionist state many times throughout its history. It also goes without saying that numerous European empires have also been hyper expantionist, ruthless and murderous imperial states throughout 18th, 19th and 20th centuries. Japan, China dominated their respective neighbourhods in their time. Lets concentrate on Europe though. Last 30 years we have seen a remarkable transformation of Europe into a relatively peaceful area. The end of the cold war brought us even better times that can be understood as a paradoxial "lull after the storm" of sorts. However, history shows that such times are not meant to last.
An illusion is being created that the contemporary Europe is somehow to be contrasted with Russia from the past, and the battle of influence over the "buffer states" between EU and Russia is somehow a battle between good and evil. One must remember that Russia is to be credited for the end of the cold was as much or even more then other parties.
Poland, Checoslovakia and other "buffer states" would not be a part of the EU if they were not needed as a, well... buffer. And of course, anybody thinking that Russia was outwardly "forced" into disintegration would do well to remember the blocade of Leningrad, Stalingrad or any other "Russian resistance to adversity" test of your choice.
A sober view of history is nesessary to understand that recent Russian behaviour was determined by 2 world wars that were started by the Europeans. When you are a in a neighbourhood of wolves, you have to act alike, you see. Let's not be fooled by the last 30 years into seeing European states as somehow inherently not murderous or not ruthlessly colonising.
One thing that is always strange: the beauty of the European culture is always confused with the reality of European behaviour throughout history. Same goes for the Russian culture of course. When judging Russian actions, let's be fair: Russia has always been a wolf among scary wolves, and states whose military power has tragically for them waned over centuries (Poland for ex.) have suffered.
While the term "bully" implies a gratuitous abuse, Russian behaviour was always dictated by the unfortunate reality and the sheer madness of the times when powerful European states acted like insane blood hungry maniacs, getting huge millions of people killed and treating small countries like small change. All the while, the European culture has flourished of course...
Today, we have a benefit of diplomacy as the main tool of solving problems between neighbours here, something US still has to learn. Russian diplomacy seems skillful anough, the new era of relations has began, and hopefully everybody can continue being civil to each other and Iran or Kosovo will not become the epicenter of the WW3. Nobody seriously believes that Russia does not want peaceful, friendly and prosperous neighbours instead of hostile frontline states they are sometimes too happy to make themselves out to be.
Coming back to the point of culture and naivete:
while European culture may be rightfully admired by
East Europeans, European and Russian wars and politics should be seen with a sober mind:
there is no "bully" among "normal people". That kind of thinking is a self-delusional folly that will get you betrayed times and times again. There is only a wolf among the scary wolves, and hopefully intelligence and the "respect factor" will help us all to hold on to the sheepskins we are wearing.
My fear is that while EU states have earned from their WWs, their prodigal son (US) is still itching for some more "action". Russia might just be able to cool things down... All that said, I love the US culture. Am I naive?
It is completely unfair for everyone else to look at Russia through the eyes of a few individuals only. It is a fundemental human right for every person reading this article, "Respect for Russia", to be provided with objective information. Therefore, the readers of this article should not be faced with biased reports. So, where do the readers' freedom stand in this case?
On a last note-- There is a strong indication, that only Poland and Russia are constanly being accused of ignoring various human rights in their countries.
"So why does Russia need another one with Kosovo?" Because the principle would have been established that a country's boundaries are not sacrosant if an American president decides to bomb a little nation from the air. Because once the principle of territorial integrity is abandoned a lot of things can and should happen for similar reasons ie the excuse can be established that Walloons should separate from the French-speakers in Belgium, a third Islamic Albanian country established in parts of Macedonia, a Kurdistan out of one third of Turkey, not to mention a Russian-speaking Crimea and the South and East of Ukraine, South Ossetia and Abkhazia independent, Catalonia separate from Spain etc. What is good for the goose is good for the gander. In today's multi-polar world anything can happen.
Russia, with its vast landmass and tremendous variety of ethnic minorities, is complex - not a simple cartoon bogeyman. But here in the USA we are taught nothing authentic about Russia. Instead we are bombarded constantly with generic propaganda against communism. I have experienced this all of my life & I am now 60 years old. Well, all the things I was "taught" in school about Russia, in that propagandist fashion, are now all being done by the USA government: no presidential election last time, only a farce rubber-stamped by a corrupt Supreme "Court." Then the same kind of top-down corruption leading to New Orleans still in chaos over a year after Hurricane Katrina, with its own New Orleans-area USA ethnic minorities having been rounded up and 'housed' in camps like prisoners or war, with unsafe living quarters and no proper schools or decent medical care. Scientific research here is daily being replaced by ideologically-driven dogma. Corrupt government leaders here are interested only in extending their sphere of 'influence' [by robbery and domination] in this hemisphere and throughout the World. So - who's calling who totalitarian? Please, let's analyze Russia in terms of its complexities and its people's challenges, not in generic terms. I am sick to death of rabidly rightwing leaders in Eastern Europe whose only claim to political legitimacy is their hatred of Russia. We world citizens need leadership that looks to the future, which currently is looking grim indeed due to worldwide lack of clean air and water, and environmental degradation everywhere. The USA has caused more of this world-threatening mess even than Russia. Time to get REAL and DEAL WITH IT.
Re: Lufthansa banned from overflights over Russia. Before you pass judgement please read up on it - there is more detail. It is an issue of overflight fees over Russian territory considered by Lufthansa to be too high. Russia sees an opportunity to increase their revenue. The current agreement has expired so now there is an issue of renewal. Kazachstan gets the landing and re-distribution of cargo fees which are a lot higher than overflight fees.
As a side issue yet somewhat related in regards of countries that allow overflights over their territory and can dictate the terms. Look at USA these days they are demmanding and going to get a list of all passangers (and personal details) from Canada overflying USA to South and Central America. They also will have the power to prevent the flights with names on their blacklist. It also applies to any other country overflying USA. Reasons of Security. I can understand their fear of another 9/11. Russia wants more revenue and USA more security. Both in order to continue their current foreign policy.
To G Manson
Do not assume that whatever the news channels give you
is the truth. I read the article about the Lufthansa Cargo
on ΒιΆΉΤΌΕΔ in both English and Russian. The essence of the English version is basically what you wrote. The Russian
version (on the very same ΒιΆΉΤΌΕΔ) gives both German and Russian views of the events. Arguments of both sides sound perfectly legitimate.
I guess ΒιΆΉΤΌΕΔ knows its market. After decades of Communism Russian readers learned to read between the lines. If it sounds to good (or bad) to be true it probably is not.
Here is my suggestion to ΒιΆΉΤΌΕΔ for an alternative title
to the Lufthansa Cargo story: "Berlin puts pressure on Russia by refusing to renew Lufthansa contract"
I especially liked the comment No.54. It draws such a nice picture of Russia - like a beautiful maiden between the European brutes. However, I would like to add some details.
First, the WW2 began with the Molotov-Ribentrop pact which was the blueprint of division of Europe between Hitler and Stalin. After some time both countries invaded Poland. Therefore your statement that "2 world wars that were started by the Europeans" is not correct.
As well the Russian diplomacy is overestimated. Who dropped a bomb recently in Georgia? Who promised to point nuclear weapons against European capitals?
However, I have to acknowledge that the statement "Russian behaviour was always dictated by the unfortunate reality and the sheer madness" is possibly the best phrase that I have read in this blog. Only I would like to add that "the unfortunate reality" and "the sheer madness" directly concerns the Russian leaders.
All that said, I really love the Russian culture and I also have some Russian friends. I have a deep respect for the Russian people, who during centuries are victims of incompetent, brutal and delusional leaders. Only a true democracy and respect for human rights can change the situation in Russia. But I am not naive...
One can respect Russia and its vast potential and great history without necessarily being naive about its politics. I do not agree with Putin's authoritarianism, but I can understand his gut instincts after the long post-Soviet wind-down and the climate of crony capitalism that set in. However, we should make it clear that members of NATO will be defended by NATO, no matter how small.
Theodore Roosevelt summed it up well: "Speak softly and carry a big stick". Diplomacy is a good thing, but so is having the means to defend yourself. At the same time, Winston Churchill (no pushover himself) once said "Jaw, jaw is better than war, war."
Russia and the EC are the main players in Europe and it makes sense to move gradually to a common position on trade, values, etc, so that we can compete with China, India, US, etc. in the future. This is the "wider picture" - together with Russia we will be able to effectively compete, without Russia we are nowhere.
Moving to a common position will only happen if we communicate with, trust and respect each other's heritage, history and customs. So let's start talking seriously and stop complaining about each other.
"My fear is that while EU states have earned from their WWs, their prodigal son (US) is still itching for some more "action". Russia might just be able to cool things down... All that said, I love the US culture. Am I naive?" [#NS #54]
I'm afraid you are. And I'm afraid that with EU's anti-American attitude there may be not enough time to learn from the New World before fat, elderly and toothless Old Europe falls pray to hungry Islamic wolves bound on creating a Sharia-based caliphate stretching from Indonesia, Pakistan, Iran, Yemen and Moroco to Spain, France, Germany, Holland and UK.
[sorry for not mentioning smaller
"buffer states" to use your parlance.]
I hope Poland, Latvia and other ex-Communist states realize that Russia too is an ex-communist state.
It is true that Russia in the past has been an expanionist state that did not regard their welfare when it crafted its foreign policy. But, I hope they realize the officials who ran Russia did not regard the welfare of their own people as well. The Russian people are as much of a victim, if not more, than the people of Poland at the hands of Stalinist Communists who ran Russia for a long time.
Poland and others need to stop generalizing, and reach out to ordinary Russians and support their efforts for democracy so that officials such as Putin does not gain more strength. After all, it's the overgeneralization of the EU that allowed it to turn its back on Russia during the 1990's when a chaotic but democratic Russia was reaching out.
Secondly, whatever happened in the last sixty years is over -- it is only meant now to teach us what not to do. Holding onto old enmities only prevent us from facing the next sixty years. And might I add -- time is off the essence. The sooner Russia and the EU can find common ground, the sooner they can use their combined strength to stay in equal footing with a rising China and India. Or will the EU have China divide and conquer it because of all the squabbles?
What is Europe? Well according to my daughter's Russian Geography book it is a sub-continent of Eurasia, similar to the Indian sub-continent.
Ask most of the 150 or so nationalities that comprise the Russian Federation whether they are European and I think most would answer No! I'm Russian.
As for comment No. 60
"First, the WW2 began with the Molotov-Ribentrop pact which was the blueprint of division of Europe between Hitler and Stalin. After some time both countries invaded Poland. Therefore your statement that "2 world wars that were started by the Europeans" is not correct."
It pays to remember that the Non-Aggression Pact was the result of the refusal of the British and French Governments to forge an alliance with the Soviet Union against the Nazis. It left the Soviet Union with no other choice than a pact with the Germans and a hope for a breathing space.
# 61 - Nick
"However, we should make it clear that members of NATO will be defended by NATO, no matter how small"
Does this mean that if any of the new-born NATO nations fires a pot shot at Russia and Russia fires back the rest of us will have to go to war with Russia?
I think Germany should build mutually beneficial relations with Russia separately from the EU. Enough is enough. We should shrug off this burden of Brussels bureaucrats and American puppets from Eastern Europe. Itβs a matter of a long-term economic survival and here no compromise is possible. Other EU states will join us later when they see the benefit of constructive engagement. When you show solidarity with idiots you become idiot yourself.
I would love to respect Russia. I enjoy the culture created by the Russian people. I would love to see the treasures of the Russian museums. I would... if only Russia had the guts to respect others. I keep on asking myself this question: Does Russia have good relationships with any of its neighbours? How come such a grand country cannot manage it? Maybe they just do not care? I imagine that if they did care, they could change it, them being such a powerful and splendid state.
Russia's belligerence and arrogance are signs of weakness rather than strength. Despite a bonanza from oil and gas over the past few years, the Russian economy is innefficient and backward. It has one of the world's worst corruption problems as measured by Transparency International. It has rates of HIV/AIDS which are heading towards African levels. Its infrastructure is crumbling - every week brings news of a building collapse, mine disaster or fire with dozens dead (and that's just the ones you hear about). Its population is collapsing in overall terms, and it has shortages of workers due to the fact that its men have rates of alcoholism, suicide and early death near the top of the world. But instead of dealing with these massive problems, Putin engages in expensive stunts like seizing the North Pole and rattling sabres at an ever-increasing list of "enemies." Classic tyrranical behaviour. Distracting the populace with circuses fed through a captive media may win grossly rigged "elections" for the ruling clique, but it will not fix a deeply sick society. In a few years time, Europe and the US may be dealing with either a collapsed state -"Congo with nukes and snow" as someone described Russia in the early Yeltsin years - or with revamped Stalinist totalitarianism, as the regime turns up the propaganda, political murders and foreign meddling to blind the populace to awful reality. Neither prospect is appetising, but the EU and US would do well to take a hard look at whether short-term economic gains such as the Russian-German oil pipeline are not traps with potentially devastating future consequences. In personal terms, do they want a co-dependent relationship with an abusive, unstable brute threatening financial and physical ruin if it doesn't get everything it wants?
Excusing Putin by saying that Russian culture has produced Tolstoy and Tchaikovsky is about the same as excusing the Nazis because Germany is the land of Goethe and Beethoven.
Russia was brought to a state of near collapse in the 1990s by draconian economic reforms demanded by the west and the US.
That is why Putin has done what he has done. He is using state power, Russia's only effective weapon, to prevent his country from being looted by foreign interests. They almost got away with it, too. After all, a US government official recently said that 'A wealthy region like Siberia should not belong to just one nation.'
This spells out PERFECTLY the TRUE US and western European attitude towards Russia.
After the Soviet Union collapsed, the West saw Russia as a defeated nation to be robbed and exploited.
Let's face the facts: All this claptrap about Putin rolling back democracy and human rights is just bitter whining by western European elites because they did not get to plunder Russia as much as they hoped they would. Everytime any nation does not want to accept the western economic status-quo, they are suddenly smeared as anti-democratic and human rights abusers. But when they comply, all is quiet. Just look at China today for an excellent example of this.
If the US and the west does not like Putin, tough! You helped create him. Just like the 'allies' helped create Hitler.
#63: Do you really believe the war in Iraq had to do with "islamic wolves"? I'm not so sure. Either way, Chechen-based islamic radicals are now quieter than Iraqui ones.
#60: I did not say Russia is a "beautiful maiden". I said it was a wolf among scary wolves.
Its pretty naive to think US can deal with any current islamic problems on its own, let alone show the way for anybody else. In the end, it is a young country striving to spend its "God given power" to dominate the world just like other big powers before it. All for the "good cause" of course.
Unfortunately some of us seem to buy into this idea because... they like Western culture. I prefer to keep the culture and the politics apart. Hopefully the "New Europe" will join US in learning from "Old" Europe's scary history.
Anybody who thinks Russia is an "abusive, unstable brute" is either in total denial of Europen history or
can't separate the beauty of EU civilisation from the bloodthirsty and treacherous war politics throughout the history of Germany, England, France, Spain etc. Russians were not angels, but they did not cause 2WWs. In fact they were crucial in ending the 2nd one. Cleaning up another European mess. So sorry #62. So, I am having to repeat myself: "Let's not be fooled by the last 30 years into seeing European states as somehow inherently not murderous or not ruthlessly colonising". Don't try to single Russia out, that's just a leftover from the Cold war.
Philip # 68 I agree with you that Russia is not a real power or even heading to be one. For example, Russia is vehement and paranoid about missile defence and the missile shield base in Poland, because its defence relies on threatning to use its nuclear weapons against any intervention or invasion of its territory. Its conventional forces can not invade anybody... and probably can not even defend Russia itself. Without its nukes Russia is nothing in militry terms.
Russia has no chance of again being anywhere as near powerful as during Soviet times. Though they can still cause trouble, especially for its smaller neighbours.
I have to laugh when I read the posts here that Russia should be treated as an equal partner to the EU, because Russia is this or that... Russia is no longer powerful.
The problem for the EU is that as Russia does not solve its problems and heads either into collapse, a totalitarian state, or another revolution... or all three... it can cause a lot of problems for Europe in the process. Russia can self destruct, but it may take others with it in the process.
To enlighted Greg S: Russia does have good relations with MOST of its neighbours. Geographically, from East to West: N. Korea, China, Mongolia, Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan, Belarus (except when the gas contract comes up for renewal:), Finland (7 countries). It has poor relations with Georgia, Poland, Latvia, Lithuania (although these are improving) and Estonia (5 countries). Japan and Ukraine cannot be easily categorised as "good" or "bad". With Japan they are generally good except for the question of "northern territories" - this has always been there like a dull tooth-ache that you don't notice most of the time. The relationships with Ukraine yo-yo depending on Ukraine's political situation, which itself is a function of a country divided between its pro-Russian (eastern, actually bordering on Russia) and anti-Russian parts.
Just a short summary illustrating the danger of lazy assumptions.
Mikhail it is easy to mislead with statistics, especially so when small numbers are involved. A better question to ask is how many countries it considers a part of its "sphere of influence" does Russia have good relations with? Azerbaijan? Armenia? Kazakhstan? I think mine is a better posed question... and the answer is clear as well.
Talking about a sphere of influence makes Russia enemies... perhaps a better tactic if Russia wants something, would be to offer something in return, and I do not mean just demands and threats. Maybe make some new friends instead of enemies?
It is amusing to read posts of "analysts' aka Rob #71, such as "Russia is nothing without its nukes, Russia is nothing without its oil and gas, etc". The thing is that Russians DO have oil and gas, and they also DO have nukes to defend themselves if it comes to the worst. So, the almighty Europe has to cope with this fact, whether it likes it or not. Being so powerful, the EU may choose not to treat Russia as an equal partner (indeed, why progressive Europeans should care about opinion of the 3rd world countries), but personally I am not sure that is the best approach in dealing with Russia (more so for the EU own sake, rather than for Russiaβs).
Every time I hear about Russia being weak etc.
I remember the western disbelief at Russian industrialisation in the beginning of the century, or its reconstruction after the WW2 without Marchall plan. By that logic, Russia seems to be the only European country headed once again for true, real souverenity. As a pro-Russian thinker, I tend to be thankful for that while respecting opinions of others.
I am especially thankful that the west wasn't the one handling Chechnya, in which case we would have had another Irak or Afganistan right there. Talking about weakness...
Russian upsurges will always be accompanied by a lot of jealosy and poisonous gossip. However, the entire ex-Soviet region will benefit economically; the only loosers will be countries like Georgia where people are driven up the wall by a president who is there for his own petty ambitions, facade-building and futile fantasy. He seems to seriously think that Georgians are some kind of an inferior race that needs to be taught how to live.
Of course it remains to be seen wether Russia uses its economic opportunities fully. However, the hi tech potential of the country is very high, business and the middle class is growing and the government, for all its shortcomings, is a bunch of fairly clever and sober individuals who's power is in reality limited by a large, powerful, and internationally minded elite. So for Russia, poison-spewing competition is to be expected. Too many politicians have too much to lose if Russia regains its geopolitical strengths and manages to build normal and friendly relations with big European countries. Some of the Russia's neighbours see it as the biggest threat to their political capital. Or do they really believe that if Russia has smooth relations with Berlin or Paris it will exercise some kind of token oppression in its neighbourhood? Look at its relations with CIS states, it is based more on market relations than ever before, and the danger of terrorism subsided considerably.
The question asked by Greg S (68) was, and I quote: "Does Russia have good relationships with any of its neighbors"? That's the question I answered, with facts.
To get around the inconvenient answer, Rob (74) asked "a better question" about "Russia's sphere of influence". Well, let me answer that as well, but you're not going to like this answer any more.
Russia's "sphere of influence" is the 14 ex-Soviet republics (excluding Russia itself). Of them, it has good relationships with the five Central Asian ones (incl. Kazakhstan - by far the biggest), Armenia and Azerbaijan (despite these two being enemies between each other), and Belarus. That's 8. Bad relationships with Georgia and the 3 Baltics (that's 4). Neutral or variable, depending on their internal politics, with Ukraine and Moldova. Relationships with Moldova have improved recently.
Still doesn't support your contention - you can only fool people if they don't know the fact.s
Mikhail, my point is you will have bad relationship with anyone to whom you start telling what to do because they are "under your influence"... even though they are independent countries. The Central Asian republics are dictatorships so Russia is able to influence them quitely. Same for North Korea... so Russia is on good terms with the dictatorships around it, but has problems with democracies. Japan is not under Russian influence simply because Japan is too powerful (I do not think Russia ever said that Japan is in its traditional sphere of influence, or objected to military bases in Japan).
Russia has genuinely good relations perhaps with Armenia and Azerbeijan... and that's because these two need Russia and Russia actualy offers them something in return (another part of my point).
Good relations with Moldova? You are joking right?
The same, I would not call relationships with Ukraine and Belaruss neutral, they are bad. Apart from those Ukrainians who feel more Russian than Ukrainian. Russia and Belaruss used to have good relations, but not anymore. Even Lukashenko is getting smart and starting to build a nuclear power plant to have some energy independence.
I think the differences here are in interpretation of facts, and pushing the borderline cases into one basket or another.
The point remains, if Russia actually offered Poland and the others something useful when asking for stuff, instead of talking of spheres of influence, the relationship might be better.
... plus ALL the states you mention as having good relations with Russia are either part of Commonwealth of Independent States or too powerful to be bothered by Russia. The first group has already joined a Russian dominated alliance, the CIS, and listen to what Russia tells them... but yes there seems to be a split among Russian neighbours, and those which are pro Western states tend to have bad relations with Russia.
Rather than anything else, it seems Russia has a problem with its neighbours being independent, or pro Western... i.e. it all goes back to Russia trying to maintain a sphere of influence around its borders. Is it part of Russian political strategy?
The interesting thing is that even some states within the CIS are arguing with Russia.
The question was very simple, "Why can't Russia have good relations with its neighbors"? I've proved twice over that the premise is false. Membership of CIS is neither here nor there, it was created as a divorce mechanism, not a "Russia adoration club".
In any case, I refer you to my first answer that mentions Finland, China etc.
Rob my friend, quit while you are behind.
Its conventional forces can not invade anybody...[#72]
Well, now that Russia's suspended its participation in the CFE Treaty
they could try and invade Georgia where "spontaneous" demonstrations have suddenly errupted at about the same time.
[if GRU's special ops there alone won't do a trick, that is.]
Re #73 [Russia's good relations with most of its neighbours]
I'm sure that Moscow's attempts to force Lufthansa to abandon its hub in Kazakhstan and move to Russian Siberia will sit very well with [Nur]Sultan Nazarbayev already outraged by contamination of Baykonur's region with poisonous leftovers of recent Russian failed space launches, not to mention Kremlin's refusal to pay for a horrific nuclear contamination of Semipalatinsk region with its numerous A and H-bomb tests there.
And as for Russia's friendly relationships with Azerbaijan and Belarus: go to Baku and Minsk and listen how local officials assess them, particularly in private.
Although I have to admit that it looks like Mr. Putin's relationship with North Korea's homicidal dictator is still going strong just as with a similar dictator of Uzbekistan. And that Kremlin is in good books of Iranian ayatollahs whom it supplies with Soviet/Chernobyl-era nuclear technology.
As for Russia's relationship with China, it must be very good indeed since so many Chinese flood Russian South East Siberia and are welcomed there by a dwindling local population which looks more to Beijing than to Moscow these days.
Friendly states will still have disagreements - about the terms of trade, who made a mess in the kitchen etc. It's their willingness to solve those disagreements through cooperation rather than confrontation (as between e.g. Russia and Belorussia, Russia and Kazakhstan) that matters.
Which should be obvious enough to Mirek Kondrazki (I assume Polish?) in light of Poland's recent blackmail of the rest of the EU over voting rights etc. That certainly generated a lot of good will between Poland and its neighbours to the West...
The Russians, excluding any of the conquered minorities still living in Russia, historically preferred autocracy. Communism was a continuation of the government of the TSAR. Putin reflects the historical paranoia of the Russians. Although the labels change, the desire for autocracy and that sense of paranoia continues. Despite the wealth from gas and oil the Russians continue to drink themselves to death and the new autocrats keep the wealth from the people.
No. 71, NS, in my opinion, has the best post I've read here in this "talkback." His picture is the truer picture of the Russian "potential for menacing the world."
Right now, in the U.S.A. many (if not most) American citizens are shocked and dismayed about our OWN president George Bush. This current president has gotten away with invading and ruining another Sovereign country JUST for its oil and strategic value, using 9/11 as HIS reason for doing this. And this occupation (of Iraq) is now bankrupting America as I write this opinion. Now, THAT is menacing---to ME (an American).
Russia HAS been invaded 3 or 4 times (including the post-World War I invasion of Russia by Poland) by European nations since the start of the 20th century, so it SHOULD be wary and skeptical of European's "perfect human rights record." Better to be secure, than be a victim of mass murder and financial ruination by such good European neighbors (Hitler's Germany, for example). And sorry, no offense to Europe's "Great Culture."
The curtain is coming down
I can almost hear the screeching
of iron
I feel for Russian people
To No.84. Poland did not invade Russia after WWI as Russia did not exist then already and the lands taken by Poland from Soviet Union where sized by Imperial Russia illegally from Poland 123 years earlier. So you may think of this as a liberation. Instead of cherry picking historical facts and twisting then to meet your agenda learn how to see then in broader historical context.
"An opposition party candidate in Russia's parliamentary elections [Farid Babayev] has been shot and seriously wounded by an unidentified gunman, officials say."
"Chess world champion, Gary Kasparov arrested"
"Marina Gaidar, former premier Yegor Gaidar's daughter arrested" [ΒιΆΉΤΌΕΔ News]
"Jackals" at work, to use pres. Putin's newest expression?
Or simply a free, democratic election in a "new, improved" USSR in a week?
Mr.Kondracki. You are not telling the whole story. The demonstration was sanctioned but the march was not which then became a deliberate provocation as the 200 strong group tried to break through the police cordon. I'd say for that you would get arrested in Washington also.
And as for Russian Democracy I'd say this is the most Democracy they can afford to have at this time. Democracies are evolutionary. France, UK or USA did not get to this level over night and they are also not identical. And even now they will tweek it to suit their needs if necessary. And next time you see a rainbow think of all the Democracies on this Planet because that is what we have - rainbow of Democracies. Since Athens 600 AD to this day there is no master mould on Democracy.
Kasparov is arrested for 5 days, Gaidar's daughter probably the same... Beresovsky says he is spending billions to finance underground anti-government groups... these elections seem to be in the midst of an internationally-sized "bulldog fight under the carpet". I suppose some of the bloggers here think that Western secret services (with Beresovsky's friends and others) are sitting pretty and watching their television sets. Or are way too busy deffusing the islamist bombs.
Anyway, two very simple things that we don's see hear often:
1) the driving force of the anti-putin demonstrations are the skinhead types with red stars on their jackets
2) Russian middle class is growing and they all want Putin government to stay. Do you think they want it to stay because of Putin's stone-faced charisma?
Or because they want USSR back?
No, they want them to stay because now it is easier to visit Europe then ever before. Because the big western companies come to set up shop instead of listening to a finely tuned orchestra called western journalism. Because a growing middle class means you can set up your own small business.
Because the contract killings of journalists and other people have gone down tenfold compared to the Eltsin times (what are the chances of reading that in a mainstream EU newspaper?).
Because they know that Kasparov-Beresovsky's gang in power and a constantly growing stubilisation fund are the two entirely mutually exclusive phenomena. Putin will beef up the economy because he sees the West as a rival. The pro-western forces are not interested in paying off the national debt or collecting the stabilisation fund because they are not concerned with depending too much on other countries. They actually think that it is a good thing. Instead of seeing West as a rival, they see it as a benevolent Tsar (will that aspect of Eastern European mentality ever expire?). They think that economical and political life of a country like Russia is a market miracle in waiting, just open everything up and things will fall in place by themselves. Oh wait, except you have to wait an unlimited amount of time for that to happen while your neighbors are beefing up their military and creeping up to the Caucasian oil and gaz resources that our grangfathers died protecting in the WW2.
Given Putin's overwheming popularity, what did OSCE have to loose by coming to Russia in lesser numbers anyway? Let's think about that.
And while we are at it, lets remember that Poland did not welcome the observers for their recent elections, either.