Can Russia Replace Cold War Mindset With 'Liberal Empire'?
Julian Evans, Financial Times (London, England), 12/06/04
Sir, Philip Stephens' comment on Russian expansionism ("The dangers of dealing with the Russian Mephistopheles", November 26) is very much in line with the FT opinion pages' usually severe judgment of President Vladimir Putin. I too am disheartened by Russia's apparent interference in Ukraine's domestic affairs. However, we should at least briefly observe the situation from Russia's perspective.
The key to engaging with Russia is to understand how deep its imperial tendencies go. As Geoffrey Hosking, the historian, has written, Russia has never considered itself divorced from an empire. It has always defined itself in terms of dominating its neighbours. The wishes of its people are, profoundly, imperial wishes - to be respected and feared abroad, to be able to do what one wants, as America does.
This imperial tendency has been utterly humiliated and frustrated over the past 20 years - by the defeat in Afghanistan, the dissolution of the Soviet Union, the steady move east of Nato, the establishment of US military bases in central Asia, the victory of a pro-US candidate in Georgia. Above all, Russians fear that if they do not appear strong internationally they will eventually be invaded by a resurgent China, just as they were conquered by the Mongols for several hundred years.
The question is not"How can this imperial tendency be checked?" but"How can it be channelled in a positive way?" The challenge for Russia is whether it can make the switch from dominating its neighbours through cold war methods - the use of military force or KGB interference - to dominating them through economic power, its products, brands, culture and economy. We should reflect that, while US tanks never made it to Red Square, Mickey Mouse certainly did - he is there every day.
Russian entrepreneurs are also beginning to build up Russia's own economic and cultural allure, through companies and brands such as Norilsk Nickel, Russian Standard vodka, MTS mobile telephones and Yukos (RIP), or cultural products. This is where the new attractiveness of Russia lies - paradoxically, exactly where the government is least present. Russia's entrepreneurs are building a country whose brands can dominate neighbouring and western markets, if only the political bureaucracy would get out of the way.
Among the Russian political elite, only Anatoly Chubais, the former prime minister, seems to understand this paradox. He talks of building a"liberal empire" based on economic dominance and power. He understands that Russians need to be sold a new form of empire to satisfy their desire for international respect and influence. But too many others in the government are stuck in the cold war model of empire. Germany made the switch from one form of empire to another, so did Japan, and China seems to be making it. Can Russia?
Sir, Philip Stephens' comment on Russian expansionism ("The dangers of dealing with the Russian Mephistopheles", November 26) is very much in line with the FT opinion pages' usually severe judgment of President Vladimir Putin. I too am disheartened by Russia's apparent interference in Ukraine's domestic affairs. However, we should at least briefly observe the situation from Russia's perspective.
The key to engaging with Russia is to understand how deep its imperial tendencies go. As Geoffrey Hosking, the historian, has written, Russia has never considered itself divorced from an empire. It has always defined itself in terms of dominating its neighbours. The wishes of its people are, profoundly, imperial wishes - to be respected and feared abroad, to be able to do what one wants, as America does.
This imperial tendency has been utterly humiliated and frustrated over the past 20 years - by the defeat in Afghanistan, the dissolution of the Soviet Union, the steady move east of Nato, the establishment of US military bases in central Asia, the victory of a pro-US candidate in Georgia. Above all, Russians fear that if they do not appear strong internationally they will eventually be invaded by a resurgent China, just as they were conquered by the Mongols for several hundred years.
The question is not"How can this imperial tendency be checked?" but"How can it be channelled in a positive way?" The challenge for Russia is whether it can make the switch from dominating its neighbours through cold war methods - the use of military force or KGB interference - to dominating them through economic power, its products, brands, culture and economy. We should reflect that, while US tanks never made it to Red Square, Mickey Mouse certainly did - he is there every day.
Russian entrepreneurs are also beginning to build up Russia's own economic and cultural allure, through companies and brands such as Norilsk Nickel, Russian Standard vodka, MTS mobile telephones and Yukos (RIP), or cultural products. This is where the new attractiveness of Russia lies - paradoxically, exactly where the government is least present. Russia's entrepreneurs are building a country whose brands can dominate neighbouring and western markets, if only the political bureaucracy would get out of the way.
Among the Russian political elite, only Anatoly Chubais, the former prime minister, seems to understand this paradox. He talks of building a"liberal empire" based on economic dominance and power. He understands that Russians need to be sold a new form of empire to satisfy their desire for international respect and influence. But too many others in the government are stuck in the cold war model of empire. Germany made the switch from one form of empire to another, so did Japan, and China seems to be making it. Can Russia?