What Russia does: Dizzying Kremlin pirouettes
Recently, in Russia, the USA, Europe and the Middle East occur political events that do not fit into familiar standards. I will not talk about the unpredictability of US policy with the advent of Trump, this topic is already stuck in the teeth. Much closer and more interesting for us are the inexplicable zigzags of Russia's foreign and domestic policy, which has been headed by Vladimir Putin for nearly two decades.
Let's try to understand a little what is happening. Keep in mind that we live in the real world, and not in a Disney fairy tale. It is not painted exclusively in black and white, it does not have one hundred percent heroes and villains. Events do not develop according to a smooth scenario with a mandatory happy ending.
In reality, everything is much more complicated.
Pirouettes of domestic politics
After Putin's next victory in the election and the appointment of a new government, a significant part of the Russian population developed a sense of cognitive dissonance.
Most of the members of the government remained, some of them exchanged one portfolio for another. Despite expert forecasts, Dmitry Medvedev remained the head. The former Minister of Sports, who was unable to deal with the doping issue and almost deprived Russia of participation in the Winter Olympics in South Korea, has now become vice prime minister for construction. Alexey Kudrin became chairman of the Accounts Chamber.
It seemed a little strange to many that the work of the previous Government was satisfactory, but a breakthrough was required to get out of unsatisfactory economic situation. At the same time, the head of government and most of its members remained with the portfolios. Not quite compatible with the point of view of elementary logic.
Remembering that the world is not black and white, you can find the logic in the formation of the cabinet. Indeed, despite a number of mistakes, the result of the work of the Medvedev government as a whole can be called positive. At least not a failure.
The government, on the other hand, has two branches. One of them deals with internal economic and financial problems, and the second consists of foreign policy and security sectors. The first branch of the Medvedev government consists, both earlier and now, of the proteges of large Russian business and financial organizations. These people are also associated with representatives of international financial and industrial structures. This is understandable, because global business has long become an international phenomenon.
And if Putin sincerely plans to make an economic breakthrough, he certainly needs the support of these structures. Therefore, the economic bloc of the government has not changed much.
But this is one of the versions. According to another, Putin did not change the composition of the Government, as he does not plan any major changes in the economic course. Or maybe he was simply not allowed to do this.
It is also worth noting that the above-mentioned people who remained in power today do not have a very high rating in society. Maintaining key posts for them can be called an unpopular measure, but Putin went for it. Such actions, without regard to the reaction of society, may mean that the credibility of the incumbent President is so great that even the introduction of unpopular measures will not cause significant indignation.
Foreign policy factors
Undoubtedly, Putin in Russia has crazy support from the population. In the world there are not so many leaders of countries that have a similar level of support. Moreover, international sanctions, coupled with small and large provocations (for example, the “Skripals case” or the Olympic doping scandal) were aimed at increasing dissatisfaction with the current government, but led to the completely opposite effect. Putin’s rating, which is already quite impressive, under the influence of international pressure on Russia simply took off and led to his convincing victory in the elections.
As you can see, this way of influencing Russia is not effective enough. Direct force pressure on Russia too. The latest weapons demonstrated by the President in his annual address to the Federal Assembly have become a significant deterrent to the United States and NATO.
To admit, at first I was shocked that Putin devoted almost half of his speech to weapons, but in my good judgment I thought that this made practical sense. It turned out that the American attack and defense systems are quite vulnerable to Russia, and this discourages talking to her from a position of strength.
Another new trend in modern politics has become a split among the countries of the “collective West”. He is now not so collective. Trump’s hard pressure on partners begins to cool them. Europe, Japan and even Canada and Great Britain contradict the USA and defend their own interests. This may mark the beginning of a new era in international politics. I will not be surprised at all if in the near future there will be a close rapprochement between Russia and Western Europe.
Clash of interests in the Middle East
Today, the most intricate geopolitical hub has formed in the Middle East. The interests of many large and small international players clash there. Several coalitions were formed, consisting of forces whose interests at the moment coincided. Russia now actively supports official Damascus led by Assad and Iran. Lebanese Hezbollah is also their ally. They are opposed by the United States, Israel and Saudi Arabia.
But here everything is more complicated. For example, Russia is actively criticizing the United States, but has a more restrained attitude towards Israel, preferring to come to an amicable agreement with it. If Iran is irreconcilably at odds with Israel, then Russia remains neutral.
To a large extent, this can be explained by the strong pro-Israeli Jewish lobby inside Russia. You can, of course, start an “old song about the main thing” about the worldwide Zionist conspiracy, secret societies and governments, but here, in my opinion, everything is much simpler. Jews, unlike Russians, have a closer relationship between their own state and foreign diasporas.
Russians abroad can, in a narrow family circle, nostalgia for faraway Russia. And Russia in some cases can look at the position of Russians abroad through their fingers. There are many examples of this (Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan, Estonia, etc.).
The Israelites are not so at all. They created their state in the Middle East thanks in large part to the efforts of the diaspora. And the Jews who came to Israel from all over the world are patriotic.
Many other peoples also have mutual support between national states and foreign diasporas.
The Armenians living in Russia support each other, stimulate the study of the language, persistently demand recognition by the world community of the Turkish genocide that took place more than a century ago. Hungary, protesting against the infringement of the rights of ethnic Hungarians in Ukraine, is blocking all international initiatives of Kiev. And there are many similar examples of close interaction between diasporas and national states.
The same thing happens with the Jews. And given the fact that the Jewish lobby has significant financial and political leverage in many countries, including the United States and Russia, one can observe a loyal attitude towards Israel in most countries of the world.
Benjamin Netanyahu’s visit to Moscow was most likely quite productive. The parties identified the so-called "red lines" that do not need to be crossed. That is, Israel is acting in Syria against Iran and Hezbollah, warning Russia of its steps and not affecting its interests. But Russia does not impede these actions.
It should be understood that such a policy of Moscow cannot be considered a betrayal in relation to Damascus or Tehran. With Iran, we simply have some common goals. And Russia's contribution to the liberation of Syria from the Islamists is generally invaluable. So Russia in this region owes nothing to anyone.
The conclusion from all of the above is quite simple. Not knowing all the underwater currents, it is difficult for a simple layman to assess the correctness of the actions of the country's leadership. And the manual employs people who are prone to human weaknesses and can make mistakes. But here, as in a war. A tactical error in a single battle does not at all mean complete defeat.
And further. In big politics, there are no friends for life and sworn enemies. There are only fellow travelers with whom our interests coincided today.
Let's try to understand a little what is happening. Keep in mind that we live in the real world, and not in a Disney fairy tale. It is not painted exclusively in black and white, it does not have one hundred percent heroes and villains. Events do not develop according to a smooth scenario with a mandatory happy ending.
In reality, everything is much more complicated.
Pirouettes of domestic politics
After Putin's next victory in the election and the appointment of a new government, a significant part of the Russian population developed a sense of cognitive dissonance.
Most of the members of the government remained, some of them exchanged one portfolio for another. Despite expert forecasts, Dmitry Medvedev remained the head. The former Minister of Sports, who was unable to deal with the doping issue and almost deprived Russia of participation in the Winter Olympics in South Korea, has now become vice prime minister for construction. Alexey Kudrin became chairman of the Accounts Chamber.
It seemed a little strange to many that the work of the previous Government was satisfactory, but a breakthrough was required to get out of unsatisfactory economic situation. At the same time, the head of government and most of its members remained with the portfolios. Not quite compatible with the point of view of elementary logic.
Remembering that the world is not black and white, you can find the logic in the formation of the cabinet. Indeed, despite a number of mistakes, the result of the work of the Medvedev government as a whole can be called positive. At least not a failure.
The government, on the other hand, has two branches. One of them deals with internal economic and financial problems, and the second consists of foreign policy and security sectors. The first branch of the Medvedev government consists, both earlier and now, of the proteges of large Russian business and financial organizations. These people are also associated with representatives of international financial and industrial structures. This is understandable, because global business has long become an international phenomenon.
And if Putin sincerely plans to make an economic breakthrough, he certainly needs the support of these structures. Therefore, the economic bloc of the government has not changed much.
But this is one of the versions. According to another, Putin did not change the composition of the Government, as he does not plan any major changes in the economic course. Or maybe he was simply not allowed to do this.
It is also worth noting that the above-mentioned people who remained in power today do not have a very high rating in society. Maintaining key posts for them can be called an unpopular measure, but Putin went for it. Such actions, without regard to the reaction of society, may mean that the credibility of the incumbent President is so great that even the introduction of unpopular measures will not cause significant indignation.
Foreign policy factors
Undoubtedly, Putin in Russia has crazy support from the population. In the world there are not so many leaders of countries that have a similar level of support. Moreover, international sanctions, coupled with small and large provocations (for example, the “Skripals case” or the Olympic doping scandal) were aimed at increasing dissatisfaction with the current government, but led to the completely opposite effect. Putin’s rating, which is already quite impressive, under the influence of international pressure on Russia simply took off and led to his convincing victory in the elections.
As you can see, this way of influencing Russia is not effective enough. Direct force pressure on Russia too. The latest weapons demonstrated by the President in his annual address to the Federal Assembly have become a significant deterrent to the United States and NATO.
To admit, at first I was shocked that Putin devoted almost half of his speech to weapons, but in my good judgment I thought that this made practical sense. It turned out that the American attack and defense systems are quite vulnerable to Russia, and this discourages talking to her from a position of strength.
Another new trend in modern politics has become a split among the countries of the “collective West”. He is now not so collective. Trump’s hard pressure on partners begins to cool them. Europe, Japan and even Canada and Great Britain contradict the USA and defend their own interests. This may mark the beginning of a new era in international politics. I will not be surprised at all if in the near future there will be a close rapprochement between Russia and Western Europe.
Clash of interests in the Middle East
Today, the most intricate geopolitical hub has formed in the Middle East. The interests of many large and small international players clash there. Several coalitions were formed, consisting of forces whose interests at the moment coincided. Russia now actively supports official Damascus led by Assad and Iran. Lebanese Hezbollah is also their ally. They are opposed by the United States, Israel and Saudi Arabia.
But here everything is more complicated. For example, Russia is actively criticizing the United States, but has a more restrained attitude towards Israel, preferring to come to an amicable agreement with it. If Iran is irreconcilably at odds with Israel, then Russia remains neutral.
To a large extent, this can be explained by the strong pro-Israeli Jewish lobby inside Russia. You can, of course, start an “old song about the main thing” about the worldwide Zionist conspiracy, secret societies and governments, but here, in my opinion, everything is much simpler. Jews, unlike Russians, have a closer relationship between their own state and foreign diasporas.
Russians abroad can, in a narrow family circle, nostalgia for faraway Russia. And Russia in some cases can look at the position of Russians abroad through their fingers. There are many examples of this (Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan, Estonia, etc.).
The Israelites are not so at all. They created their state in the Middle East thanks in large part to the efforts of the diaspora. And the Jews who came to Israel from all over the world are patriotic.
Many other peoples also have mutual support between national states and foreign diasporas.
The Armenians living in Russia support each other, stimulate the study of the language, persistently demand recognition by the world community of the Turkish genocide that took place more than a century ago. Hungary, protesting against the infringement of the rights of ethnic Hungarians in Ukraine, is blocking all international initiatives of Kiev. And there are many similar examples of close interaction between diasporas and national states.
The same thing happens with the Jews. And given the fact that the Jewish lobby has significant financial and political leverage in many countries, including the United States and Russia, one can observe a loyal attitude towards Israel in most countries of the world.
Benjamin Netanyahu’s visit to Moscow was most likely quite productive. The parties identified the so-called "red lines" that do not need to be crossed. That is, Israel is acting in Syria against Iran and Hezbollah, warning Russia of its steps and not affecting its interests. But Russia does not impede these actions.
It should be understood that such a policy of Moscow cannot be considered a betrayal in relation to Damascus or Tehran. With Iran, we simply have some common goals. And Russia's contribution to the liberation of Syria from the Islamists is generally invaluable. So Russia in this region owes nothing to anyone.
* * *
The conclusion from all of the above is quite simple. Not knowing all the underwater currents, it is difficult for a simple layman to assess the correctness of the actions of the country's leadership. And the manual employs people who are prone to human weaknesses and can make mistakes. But here, as in a war. A tactical error in a single battle does not at all mean complete defeat.
And further. In big politics, there are no friends for life and sworn enemies. There are only fellow travelers with whom our interests coincided today.
Information