| 
 Al-Jazeerah History
 
 Archives
 
 Mission & Name
 
 Conflict Terminology
 
 Editorials
 
 Gaza Holocaust
 
 Gulf War
 
 Isdood
 
 Islam
 
 News
 
 News Photos
 
 Opinion 
	
	
	Editorials
 
 US Foreign Policy (Dr. El-Najjar's Articles)
 
 www.aljazeerah.info
 
	  
           |  | Russia's White Revolution
 
 By Eric 
	Walberg
 
 Al-Jazeerah, CCUN, February 13, 2012 
 All the meticulous plotting to avoid Ukraine’s Orange Revolution 
	resulted in -- Russia’s very own coloured one. But Russia is not Ukraine, 
	discovers Eric Walberg
 
 Russia’s electoral scene has been transformed 
	in the past two months, without a doubt inspired by the political winds from 
	the Middle East and the earlier colour revolutions in Russia’s “near 
	abroad”. Prime Minister Vladimir Putin’s casual return to the presidential 
	scene was greeted as an effrontery by an electorate who want to move on from 
	Russia’s political strongman tradition, and to inject the electoral process 
	with ballot-box accountability.
 
 Putin’s legendary role in rescuing 
	Russia from the economic abyss in the 1990s, staring down the oligarchs, 
	reasserting state control over Russian resource wealth, and repositioning 
	Russia as an independent player in Eurasia (not to mention in America’s 
	backyard) -- these signal accomplishments assure him a place in history 
	books. He and Dmitri Medvedev are considered the most popular leaders in the 
	past century according to a recent VTsIOM opinion poll (Leonid Brezhnev 
	comes next, followed by Joseph Stalin and Vladimir Lenin, with Mikhail 
	Gorbachev and Boris Yelstin the least popular). He will very likely pass the 
	50 per cent mark in presidential elections 4 March, despite all the protests 
	during the past two months calling for “Russia without Putin”. So why is he 
	back in the ring?
 
 It appears he was caught by surprise when the 
	anti-Putin campaign exploded in November, fuelled by his decision to run 
	again and the exposure of not a little fraud in the parliamentary elections 
	in December. For the first time since the collapse of the Soviet Union, the 
	opposition was able to unite and stage impressive rallies, one after 
	another. Despite the chilling Russian winter, they keep coming -- this week 
	saw four gathering around Moscow, totalling 130,000.
 
 The opposition 
	poster children even include Putin’s minister of finance Alexei Kudrin. 
	Presidential hopefuls are Communist leader Gennadi Zyuganov (backed for the 
	first time by the independent left forces), nationalist Vladimir 
	Zhirinovsky, A Just Russia’s Sergey Mironov and the oligarch playboy Mikhail 
	Prokhorov -- none of whom stand a chance of defeating Putin. This time there 
	are 25 televised debates which began 6 February among the contenders, who 
	are sparring with each other and “Putin’s representative”.
 
 Is this 
	quixotic march back to the Kremlin heights a case of egomania? Or is it a 
	noble attempt to both cast in stone Russia as the Eurasian counterweight to 
	an increasingly aggressive US/NATO, and shaking up the domestic political 
	scene to make sure it will not slump into apathy when he himself passes the 
	torch? And if things go wrong, is this Russia’s very own White Revolution, 
	long feared by the Russian elite, and long covetted by Western intriguers?
 
 Russian politics has always confounded Western observers, and continues 
	to do so. Putin is famously imperious and gets away with it. He taunted the 
	opposition by saying he thought the original demonstrations were part of an 
	anti-AIDS campaign, that the white ribbons were condoms. But he nonetheless 
	sanctioned the largest political opposition rallies in the past 20 years.
 
 US democracy-promotion NGOs such as the National Endowment for 
	Democracy -- a key player in Ukraine’s 2004 Orange Revolution -- are active 
	in Russia’s opposition, but Putin is clearly gambling that Russians can see 
	past US efforts to manipulate them. Besides, the winners in the Duma 
	elections were the Communists and nationalists, with pro-Western liberals 
	placing a distant fourth -- hardly the results NEDers would have wanted.
 
 He is also famously willing to tell US politicians they wear no clothes 
	-- the latest, last week in Siberia: “Sometimes I get the impression the US 
	doesn’t need allies, it needs vassals.” Russian foreign policy is now firmly 
	anti-NATO, both with respect to the West’s misguided missile system and its 
	eagerness to turn Syria into a killing fields. Rumours that a Russian 
	Iran-for-Syria deal with the West have proved empty. There are even hints 
	that Iran may still get its defensive S-300 missiles from Russia in exchange 
	for Russian access to the downed US drone. Iran claims to have four already 
	and recently announced they have developed their own domestic version.
 
 Pro-Putin rallies are almost as large as the opposition’s, with an 
	official count of 140,000 attendees at the festive gathering Saturday. The 
	Putinistas even bill theirs as the Anti-Orange rally. “We say no to the 
	destruction of Russia. We say no to Orange arrogance. We say no to the 
	American government…let’s take out the Orange trash,” political analyst 
	Sergei Kurginyan exhorted at Moscow’s Poklonnaya Gora war memorial park. 
	Putin thanked organisers, commenting modestly, “I share their views.”
 
 The real reason for Putin’s return is due to the failure during his 
	first two terms of his “sovereign democracy” to limit corruption in 
	post-Soviet Russia. Instead, of producing a modernising authoritarianism 
	along the lines of post-war South Korea, Putin’s rule deepened corruption -- 
	the bane of late Soviet and early post-Soviet society. Instead of trading 
	political freedom for effective governance, he clipped Russians’ civil and 
	political rights without delivering on this vital promise. Neither did he 
	end collusion between the state and the oligarchs. That was the handle that 
	badboy Alexei Navalni used to catalyse the opposition around his slogan that 
	United Russia is the “party of swindlers and thieves”.
 
 This was the 
	scene in the 2000s in Ukraine, where it was possible for the NEDers to 
	undermine the much weaker Ukrainian state and install the Western candidate 
	Viktor Yushchenko in 2004. However, instead of addressing the problems that 
	led to the Orange Revolution, Putin focussed on foreign threats to Russian 
	political stability rather than paying attention to domestic factors, 
	creating patriotic youth organisations such as Nashi (Ours) and the 4 
	November Day of Unity holiday – the latter quickly hijacked by Russia’s 
	nationalists.
 
 But Russian fears of Western interference are hardly 
	naïve. Russia was sucked into the horrendous WWI by the British empire, 
	suffered devastating invasions in 1919 and 1941, and another half century of 
	the West’s Cold War against it. Further dismemberment of the Russian 
	Federation is indeed a Western goal, which would benefit no one but a tiny 
	comprador elite, Western multinationals and the Pentagon.
 
 Putin’s 
	statist sovereign democracy – with transparent elections – might not be such 
	a bad alternative to what passes for democracy in much of the West. His new 
	Eurasian Union could help spread a more responsible political governance 
	across the continent. It may not be what the NED has in mind, but it would 
	be welcomed by all the “stan” citizens, not to mention China’s beleaguered 
	Uighurs. This “EU” is  striving not towards disintegration and 
	weakness, but towards integration and mutual security, without any need for 
	US/NATO bases and slick NED propaganda. The union will surely eventually 
	include the mother of colour revolutions, Ukraine, where citizens still 
	yearn for open borders with Russia and closer economic integration. The days 
	of dreaming about the other EU’s Elysian Fields are over. The hard, cold 
	reality today has bleached the colour revolutions, making white the 
	appropriate colour for Russia’s version of political change.
 
 Of 
	course, the big problem -- corruption -- is what will make or break Putin’s 
	third term as president. At the Russia 2012 Investment Forum in Moscow last 
	week, Putin outlined plans to move Russia up to 20th spot from its current 
	120th in the World Bank index of investment attractiveness, by reducing 
	bureaucracy and the associated bribery. “These measures are not enough. I 
	believe that society must actively participate in the establishment of an 
	anti-corruption agenda,” he vowed. Reforming the legal system and expanding 
	the reach of democracy will be key to fighting corruption, not just via 
	presidential decrees, but through empowering elected officials and voters. 
	He confirmed this in his fourth major pre-election address this week by 
	promising to provide better government services by decentralizing power from 
	the federal level to municipalities and relying on the Internet.
 
 So 
	far things look good. For the first time since 1995 there will be a hotly 
	contested transparently monitored presidential election, with the distinct 
	possibility of a runoff (unless the new US Ambassador Michael McFaul keeps 
	inviting NED darlings to Spaso House). The sort-of presidential debates, 
	large-scale opposition rallies and the new independent League of Voters 
	intending to ensure clean elections are a fine precedent, making sure that 
	this time and in the future there will be an opportunity for genuine debate 
	about Russia’s future.
 
 Despite all attempts to forestall Russia’s 
	colour revolution, it has begun -- Russian-style -- with no state collapse, 
	but with a new articulate electorate, wise to both Kremlin politologists and 
	Western NGOlogists. Its final destination is impossible for anyone to 
	predict at this point.
 *** Eric Walberg can be reached at 
	http://ericwalberg.com/.
 
 
 |  |  |