Paul Goble points to an interesting comment by Vladimir Nadein points out in today’s Yezhednevny zhurnal.
“Even Hitler,” even when it was obvious that he was losing the war “retained allies up to the end of 1944. But Putin, after ten years of uninterrupted rule doesn’t have any.”
Instead of following “the first rule of ancient diplomacy: assemble around oneself more friends and thus destroy more quickly the coalition of enemies, Putin has pursued a policy that has offended and driven away Russia’s neighbors and not gained Russia many of the advantages it might have gotten had it not followed Putin’s lead.
And as a result, with the possible exception of China, Belarus and Kazakhstan, about whose attitudes toward Russia there are still “some doubts,” “all other countries bordering us are clearly not disposed in our favor,” something that Nadein insists did not have to happen and that could be reversed with different policies.
“To deny this would be stupid,”the longtime journalist argues, and consequently, Putin and thosearound him have tried to suggest that this is the way things “ought tobe” – “a kind of diplomatic variant of the Stalinist maxim according towhich the class struggle sharpens as the country advances towardsocialism.”
But however that may be, “a diplomacy which leavesone’s country in such isolation deserves the very lowest grade.” Andnowhere is this situation worse than with regard to Ukraine, a countryin whose presidential elections Putin openly interfered and whosehistory he and those around him were openly, unnecessarily, andcounterproductively offensive.
Subscribe by Email
3 Comments
It’s okay. Russia was friendless while Kozyrev was running Russian foreign policy too. The present Russian government understand that since Russia will have no reliable friends whatever they do, there is no need to pay much attention to what others say about Russia, but to create situations where others need Russian support more than Russia needs theirs. Afghanistan, for example.Then, and only then, will Russia have allies.
Wow, what classic neo-Soviet gibberish from Mr. RKKA. In any civilized nation of the world, when confronted by so many facts indicating that the government had alienated the entire world, the people would be asking questions and seeking change. In the US, a whole government was toppled just because of such issues.But in Russia? Just as in Soviet times, we get only the most barbaric and ignorant types of denial, exactly as if he speaking for the Kremlin itself. Not a single question about what Russia might have done wrong, starting with choosing to be governed by a proud KGB spy, then buzzing Americans with nuclear bombers, then providing weapons to their most hated enemies (Venezuela, Iran, Syria) and even as RA reports paranoid fantasies about daylight savings time.So pathetic. One can only pity these wretched Russians who live in darkness like cavemen, and of their own choosing obliterate their nation over and over. Firt the Tsar, then the Politburo, and now Putin — all thrust into the ashcan of history while the nation decays and perishes (men don’t leave to see 60, work for $4/hour).Barbarism, pure and simple. Revolting.
Phoby, Phoby, Phoby.Perishing? Russians now work for $4.00 and hour? Amazing! According to The Economist, in early 1999, Russians working common jobs like clerical and teaching jobs made $20.00 a month, and that often years in arrears! So lemme see… Because of Putin’s policies, Russians earn in five hours what they used to make in a month! No wonder Russians understand that Mr. Putin has done very well for them. We can see from the example you kindly provided that Mr. Putin’s popularity, far from being an aritfact of the “Kremlin-dominated media”, is grounded in actual accomplishments that have made the lives of ordinary Russians better.