DOCSLIB.ORG

Beyond the Putin System

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Beyond the Putin System REP Roundtable Summary Beyond the Putin System Mikhail Kasyanov Former Prime Minister of Russia 17 November 2009 The views expressed in this document are the sole responsibility of the speaker and do not necessarily reflect the view of Chatham House, its staff, associates or Council. Chatham House is independent and owes no allegiance to any government or to any political body. It does not take institutional positions on policy issues. This document is issued on the understanding that if any extract is used, the speaker and Chatham House should be credited, preferably with details of the event. Where this document refers to or reports statements made by speakers at an event every effort has been made to provide a fair representation of their views and opinions, but the ultimate responsibility for accuracy lies with this document’s author. The published text of speeches and presentations may differ from delivery. REP Roundtable Summary: Mikhail Kasyanov, ‘Beyond the Putin System’ Much has changed in Russia since 2000, when the country was actively modernising and there were significant moves forward, particularly in the economic sphere. After the default of 1998, which wiped out the middle class and led to a complete rethink of fiscal policy, wide-ranging reforms were launched. The government taught people and business the importance of paying tax, why they should pay for heating and electricity. From growth rates of 3 per cent at the turn of the century we reached 7-7.5 per cent growth even though the oil price at the time was around $25 a barrel, not $145 as it was prior to the global financial crisis. During Putin’s second term, all democratic institutions were gradually abolished. There was hope in some quarters that the arrival of Dmitry Medvedev would lead to more liberal policies, as the new president would try to widen the gap between himself and Putin. One and a half years on there is little sign that the rhetoric has been translated into deeds. Instead of reform there has been a constitutional change extending the presidency to six years, a war in Georgia, gas cut offs and a new Khodorkovsky trial which has nothing to do with jurisprudence. Medvedev has proven his loyalty to the Putin system. On 12 November Putin gave his second address to the Federal Council. He criticised the economic situation in Russia, spoke of the risk of dependence on oil and gas revenues, underlined the dangers of Russia’s ageing infrastructure, and admitted that corruption has reached unparalleled levels. President Medvedev’s evaluation is accurate. One could applaud his bravery for speaking about these problems. But Medvedev’s evaluation has been forced on him by the reality of the situation. One cannot hide from the economic problems facing Russia. When the global financial crisis first appeared in October 2008, the elite declared that Russia would be an island of stability. However, in contrast to the rest of the so-called BRIC countries, Brazil, India and China, which are still enjoying growth rates of 6-8 per cent, Russia’s economy has contracted sharply. Despite this, Medvedev had nothing to say about the political system or the recent farcical local elections. He regards the existing political system as almost perfect. Referring obliquely to the opposition, the President promised to forcefully prevent any effort to divide society. Medvedev argues for modernisation, but he does not believe that political reform is required in order to achieve it. In seeking support for his half-hearted modernisation strategy, Medvedev is asking people to give him legitimacy. However, most Russians do not regard Medvedev as an independent politician. They can’t imagine Medvedev without Putin, so his words carry no weight. The economic www.chathamhouse.org.uk 2 REP Roundtable Summary: Mikhail Kasyanov, ‘Beyond the Putin System’ crisis will not lead to reform as it did under Gorbachev. No one in the elite will make any move which might risk upsetting the current system of power. Instead, they continue to tighten the screws. A one-and-a-half party system has been established. The system of electoral democracy has entirely disappeared, as shown by the shameless falsification of the recent local elections. In Moscow, for example, many businesses compelled their employees to vote with absentee ballots. Not just democrats but apparently loyal bureaucrats were barred from standing. In response even the tightly controlled opposition chose briefly to boycott parliament. The crisis of human rights in the country has increased the values gap between Russia and the West. It compels the West to treat Russia as a country alien to European norms and values. In recent months we have seen attempts to cooperate with Russia on a range of issues, such as proliferation and Iran’s nuclear programme. Such overtures are comprehensible from the western point of view, but they are interpreted as a sign of weakness by Moscow. The regime in Russia wants recognition of the legitimacy of the Putin system. The reset can do nothing to overcome the values gap. In terms of transparency, freedom of expression or economic liberalism, Russia is far behind the West; it is more closely aligned with North Korea and Iran in terms of ideals. For the leaders, elections mean appointments, a humanitarian operation means war, human rights and civil society means government dictat. Russia is still in contravention of the agreements reached with the EU after the war in Georgia. Nevertheless, the EU quickly lifted its veto on negotiations on a new Partnership and Cooperation Agreement. NATO has, likewise, quickly returned to business as usual with Russia. The political elite in Russia have therefore concluded that the West will provide no robust resistance to its foreign policy actions. A year after the economic crisis emerged, it’s clear that the regime has been relatively successful at managing the public mood. The political atmosphere is not as tense as one might imagine; the situation feels relatively stable. The Putin system can last for several more years thanks to an overwhelming propaganda machine and largely effective means of coercion. Twenty years after the fall of the Berlin Wall these mechanisms still function effectively. The system is not capable of reform. Putin has removed all institutions of democratic accountability and tamed the media. This means there is no feedback loop for the elite. Unlike under Gorbachev, the nomenklatura is so afraid of freedom, and the changes in power structures that this might provoke, that they will not allow any move towards liberalisation. It was clear from Medvedev’s speech that he has no intention of changing the political www.chathamhouse.org.uk 3 REP Roundtable Summary: Mikhail Kasyanov, ‘Beyond the Putin System’ system. It is likely that Putin will return to the presidency in 2012. The system of crony capitalism will remain. Many in the elite would support this. They see clearly the failings of this political model but also recognise that it is simple, reliable and generally predictable. The local elections were a rehearsal for the stage-managed process in 2012. Where could change come from? The longer the system remains as it is, the greater corruption will become. The possibility of Russia disintegrating could again appear on the agenda. A low level conflict persists in the North Caucasus; not just in Chechnya, but in several of the ethnic republics. Regional elites now see Moscow as incompetent at best. We could see a return to the ethnic bargaining of the nineties, when certain regions sought to squeeze more resources and autonomy from the centre. This will become more likely should oil prices fall. There is also growing discontent amongst the elite. Medium and even big business is growing increasingly frustrated by the stagnation at the top. Liberals in Russia and outside it should put the regime under pressure. We need to maintain criticism and undermine the illusion that Russia’s system is normal and acceptable. Questions and Discussion Does the leadership have a policy on the North Caucasus? What is Moscow trying to achieve? Putin’s intention is to transfer as much responsibility as possible to local leaders. They are put in charge of security and local administration despite clear shortcomings. A lot of concessions over autonomy and federal subsidies have been made to Chechnya, for example. This is a dangerous policy which is not bringing real security to the region. Just five years ago in Dagestan there still existed an important mechanism of stability whereby representatives of the republic’s ethnic groups discussed common problems and disputes. This no longer operates. The only solution to the problems in the North Caucasus is dialogue. It will be a very long process to establish rules by which everyone in the region is willing to live. Of course one has to consider the historical legacy of the Caucasus, but it is nevertheless a part of Europe, and life there should be governed by the same basic civilisational values. www.chathamhouse.org.uk 4 REP Roundtable Summary: Mikhail Kasyanov, ‘Beyond the Putin System’ How do you evaluate the EU’s approach to Russia, especially that of leading players, such as Germany. Do the Germans appreciate the gap in values, or is their policy governed largely by Realpolitik? It is important to separate out the interests of the people and the ruling class in Russia. The two do not coincide, indeed they are diverging. The EU and the US should note this divide and put pressure on the elites whilst engaging the people. The West must stick to its principles and insist that Russia implement its international obligations. The blueprint of a law-bound and internationally responsible state already exists in domestic Russian law and international agreements.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Kremlin Trojan Horses | the Atlantic Council
    Atlantic Council DINU PATRICIU EURASIA CENTER THE KREMLIN’S TROJAN HORSES Alina Polyakova, Marlene Laruelle, Stefan Meister, and Neil Barnett Foreword by Radosław Sikorski THE KREMLIN’S TROJAN HORSES Russian Influence in France, Germany, and the United Kingdom Alina Polyakova, Marlene Laruelle, Stefan Meister, and Neil Barnett Foreword by Radosław Sikorski ISBN: 978-1-61977-518-3. This report is written and published in accordance with the Atlantic Council Policy on Intellectual Independence. The authors are solely responsible for its analysis and recommendations. The Atlantic Council and its donors do not determine, nor do they necessarily endorse or advocate for, any of this report’s conclusions. November 2016 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 Foreword Introduction: The Kremlin’s Toolkit of Influence 3 in Europe 7 France: Mainstreaming Russian Influence 13 Germany: Interdependence as Vulnerability 20 United Kingdom: Vulnerable but Resistant Policy recommendations: Resisting Russia’s 27 Efforts to Influence, Infiltrate, and Inculcate 29 About the Authors THE KREMLIN’S TROJAN HORSES FOREWORD In 2014, Russia seized Crimea through military force. With this act, the Kremlin redrew the political map of Europe and upended the rules of the acknowledged international order. Despite the threat Russia’s revanchist policies pose to European stability and established international law, some European politicians, experts, and civic groups have expressed support for—or sympathy with—the Kremlin’s actions. These allies represent a diverse network of political influence reaching deep into Europe’s core. The Kremlin uses these Trojan horses to destabilize European politics so efficiently, that even Russia’s limited might could become a decisive factor in matters of European and international security.
    [Show full text]
  • Welfare Reforms in Post-Soviet States: a Comparison
    WELFARE REFORMS IN POST-SOVIET STATES: A COMPARISON OF SOCIAL BENEFITS REFORM IN RUSSIA AND KAZAKHSTAN by ELENA MALTSEVA A thesis submitted in conformity with the requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Graduate Department of Political Science University of Toronto © Copyright by Elena Maltseva (2012) Welfare Reforms in Post-Soviet States: A Comparison of Social Benefits Reform in Russia and Kazakhstan Elena Maltseva Doctor of Philosophy Political Science University of Toronto (2012) Abstract: Concerned with the question of why governments display varying degrees of success in implementing social reforms, (judged by their ability to arrive at coherent policy outcomes), my dissertation aims to identify the most important factors responsible for the stagnation of social benefits reform in Russia, as opposed to its successful implementation in Kazakhstan. Given their comparable Soviet political and economic characteristics in the immediate aftermath of Communism’s disintegration, why did the implementation of social benefits reform succeed in Kazakhstan, but largely fail in Russia? I argue that although several political and institutional factors did, to a certain degree, influence the course of social benefits reform in these two countries, their success or failure was ultimately determined by the capacity of key state actors to frame the problem and form an effective policy coalition that could further the reform agenda despite various political and institutional obstacles and socioeconomic challenges. In the case of Kazakhstan, the successful implementation of the social benefits reform was a result of a bold and skillful endeavour by Kazakhstani authorities, who used the existing conditions to justify the reform initiative and achieve the reform’s original objectives.
    [Show full text]
  • Kremlin-Linked Forces in Ukraine's 2019 Elections
    Études de l’Ifri Russie.Nei.Reports 25 KREMLIN-LINKED FORCES IN UKRAINE’S 2019 ELECTIONS On the Brink of Revenge? Vladislav INOZEMTSEV February 2019 Russia/NIS Center The Institut français des relations internationales (Ifri) is a research center and a forum for debate on major international political and economic issues. Headed by Thierry de Montbrial since its founding in 1979, Ifri is a non-governmental, non-profit organization. As an independent think tank, Ifri sets its own research agenda, publishing its findings regularly for a global audience. Taking an interdisciplinary approach, Ifri brings together political and economic decision-makers, researchers and internationally renowned experts to animate its debate and research activities. The opinions expressed in this text are the responsibility of the author alone. ISBN: 978-2-36567-981-7 © All rights reserved, Ifri, 2019 How to quote this document: Vladislav Inozemtsev, “Kremlin-Linked Forces in Ukraine’s 2019 Elections: On the Brink of Revenge?”, Russie.NEI.Reports, No. 25, Ifri, February 2019. Ifri 27 rue de la Procession 75740 Paris Cedex 15—FRANCE Tel. : +33 (0)1 40 61 60 00—Fax : +33 (0)1 40 61 60 60 Email: [email protected] Website: Ifri.org Author Dr Vladislav Inozemtsev (b. 1968) is a Russian economist and political researcher since 1999, with a PhD in Economics. In 1996 he founded the Moscow-based Center for Post-Industrial Studies and has been its Director ever since. In recent years, he served as Senior or Visiting Fellow with the Institut fur die Wissenschaften vom Menschen in Vienna, with the Polski Instytut Studiów Zaawansowanych in Warsaw, Deutsche Gesellschaft für Auswärtige Politik in Berlin, the Center for Strategic and International Studies, and the Johns Hopkins University in Washington.
    [Show full text]
  • Putin's Nationalist Challenge
    Conflict Studies Research Centre Russian Series 05/20 Putin's Nationalist Challenge Dr Mark A Smith Executive Summary * Putin is increasingly dominating the political system, which is becoming more authoritarian. * Administrative reform has been implemented in order to streamline the state with limited success. Three key issues: * Could "mild authoritarianism" be replaced by a harsher form of rule? * What will happen in 2008, when the next presidential elections are scheduled, and Putin will be constitutionally obliged to step down? * Could the scenario of the "orange revolution" in Ukraine be repeated in Russia? * There is now a strong possibility that Putin may either attempt to stay in power after his second term expires in 2008, or attempt to create an interim leadership from 2008 to 2012, and then return to power. * Any post-2008 leadership is likely to be more nationalist and authoritarian. 05/20 Putin's Nationalist Challenge Dr Mark A Smith The Russian political system has been going through a process of subtle evolution since Vladimir Putin was first elected president in 2000. In 2000, major changes were made to the structure of centre-regional relations: • Putin created seven federal districts, headed by a plenipotentiary representative, appointed by the president, and solely accountable to him. The plenipotentiary representative’s main task is to ensure that federal government policy is being carried out by the regional leaderships. During the Yel’tsin period, many regional leaders had often ignored federal law, and elevated regional law above it. • The regional leaders were removed from the upper house of the Russian parliament, the Federation Council, and the president acquired the legal power to dismiss regional governors who defied federal law.
    [Show full text]
  • The Quest for an Ideal Youth in Putin's Russia I. Back to Our Future!
    The Quest for an Ideal Youth in Putin’s Russia I. Back to our Future! History, Modernity and Patriotism According to Nashi, 2015‐2012. By Ivo Mijnssen. Stuttgart: ibidem‐Verlag, 2012. 215pp. Bibliography. Index. Appendix I. Appendix II. Paperback. The Quest for an Ideal Youth in Putin’s Russia II. The search for Distinctive Conformism in the Political Communication of Nashi, 2005‐2009. By Jussi Lassila. Stuttgart: ibidem‐Verlag, 2012. 205 pp. Bibliography. Paperback. Regina Smyth, Indiana University In 2005, the Kremlin’s grey cardinal, Vladislav Surkov, orchestrated the formation of a youth organization, Nashi, in order to counter youth apathy and the potential for opposition protest in Russia’s capital. By 2013, Mr. Surkov, was dismissed from his position as the daunting architect of the political strategy that guided the first decade of Putin’s rule. Nashi’s founder, Vassily Iakamenko, registered a new political party named Smart Start that quickly failed. Most importantly, the Nashi existed in name only, eclipsed by competing youth organizations, including Stal’, the Young Guard, and the multi-headed All-Russian Youth Society. Against this vast shift in the political landscape, two complementary studies exploring the arc of Nashi’s development appeared under the common title, The Quest for an Ideal Youth in Putin’s Russia. Together, these significant works by Jussi Lassila and Ivo Mijnssen illuminate the persistent central tension inherent in Putinism, the negotiation of the line between modernization (openness) and stability (state control). Further, demonstrate how this tension produced Nashi’s downfall. There are a number of similarities across these paired studies.
    [Show full text]
  • The Russian-Chinese Oil Politik
    China-Russia Relations: The Russian-Chinese Oil Politik Yu Bin Associate Professor, Wittenberg University The specter of oil is haunting the world. The battle of oil, however, is not just being waged by oilmen from Texas and done with “shock-and-awe” in the era of preemption. Nor does it have anything to do with the billion-dollar contract awarded to the U.S. firm Halliburton for the reconstruction of postwar Iraq. This time, oil, or lack of it, is clogging the geostrategic pipeline between the world’s second largest oil producer (Russia) and second largest oil importing state (China) as they haggle over the future destination of Siberia’s vast oil reserves. To be sure, the “oil politik” between Moscow and Beijing is far from a full-blown crisis. Indeed, China-Russia relations during the third quarter were marked by dynamic interactions and close coordination over multilateral issues of postwar Iraq, the Korean nuclear crisis, and institution building for the SCO (Shanghai Cooperation Organization). Russia’s energy realpolitik, however, has led to such a psychological point that for the first time, a generally linear, decade-long emerging Russian-Chinese strategic partnership, or honeymoon, seems arrested and is being replaced by a routine, boring, or even jolting marriage of necessity in which quarrels and conflicts are part normal. Business still as Usual Unlike the more turbulent and/or spectacular second quarter, the post-Iraq and post- SARS (severe acute respiratory syndrome) third quarter seemed normal for Russia and China, at least on the surface. All border checkpoints were reopened with busier transactions to make up for the losses suffered during the SARS epidemic.
    [Show full text]
  • Interview with Yulia Malysheva
    A Revolution of the Mind INTERVIEW WITH YULIA MALYSHEVA ulia Sergeevna Malysheva is one of the leading youth activists in Russia. An elected Y municipal deputy in Moscow, a researcher at the Institute for the Economy in Transi- tion, and leader of the youth organization Oborona (which she cofounded) and of the youth branch of the SPS party, Malysheva also later became the leader of the youth branch of the People’s Democratic Union, the political movement led by former Prime Minister Mikhail Kasyanov. In this interview, she speaks about the possibility of a color revolution in Russia, cooperation with other domestic and international youth groups, the Kremlin’s worried reaction, the nature of the Nashi pro-Kremlin youth group, the attempts to unite the Russian democrats, the successes of Oborona, the chances the democrats have of returning to power, and what she expects from the West. Demokratizatsiya: Tell us about Oborona. Malysheva: Oborona is a youth organization that appeared with the Orange wave in Ukraine. It was important for us that many others were waiting for us, since youth have always been in the avant-garde. At that time, our adult colleagues kept arguing as to who was more important. In the end, they got 3 percent [in the Duma elections]. It was evi- dent that they were not well presented before the Russian voters. We founded Oborona not only with young people who sympathize with SPS, Yabloko, the [former SPS leader and independent candidate Irina] Khakamada movement and other such formations—but also with those who support the democratic process and oppose the Putin regime.
    [Show full text]
  • Putin's Macho Personality Cult*
    Communist and Post-Communist Studies xxx (2015) 1e11 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Communist and Post-Communist Studies journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/postcomstud Putin's macho personality cult* Valerie Sperling Department of Political Science, Clark University, United States article info abstract Article history: Masculinity has long been Russian President Vladimir Putin's calling card. At the center of Available online xxx Putin's macho aura is his image as a tough leader who will not allow Western countries to weaken Russia or dictate what Russia's domestic and foreign policies should look like. This Keywords: article draws attention to the role of masculinity in the Putin regime's legitimation Vladimir Putin strategy, and how it became more obvious during the escalation of the conflict in Ukraine Russia in 2014 and the Russian annexation of Crimea. To the extent that there is a “personality Ukraine cult” in contemporary Russia, the personality at the center of it is defined in highly Crimea Barack Obama gendered terms, shaping the tenor of both domestic and foreign policy. © Masculinity 2015 The Regents of the University of California. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights Gender reserved. Legitimacy Domestic politics Foreign policy Since his third ascension to the Russian presidency, Vladimir Putin has attracted more attention than any other contemporary state leader. From the jacket of Time Magazine in September 2013, to the front pages of newspapers detailing Russia's annexation of Crimea in March 2014, there has been no shortage of coverage of Putin in the international press. Putin's omnipresence in the Russian media is even more striking.
    [Show full text]
  • Migration and the Ukraine Crisis a Two-Country Perspective This E-Book Is Provided Without Charge Via Free Download by E-International Relations (
    EDITED BY AGNIESZKA PIKULICKA-WILCZEWSKA & GRETA UEHLING Migration and the Ukraine Crisis A Two-Country Perspective This e-book is provided without charge via free download by E-International Relations (www.E-IR.info). It is not permitted to be sold in electronic format under any circumstances. If you enjoy our free e-books, please consider leaving a small donation to allow us to continue investing in open access publications: http://www.e-ir.info/about/donate/ i Migration and the Ukraine Crisis A Two-Country Perspective EDITED BY AGNIESZKA PIKULICKA-WILCZEWSKA & GRETA UEHLING ii E-International Relations www.E-IR.info Bristol, England 2017 ISBN 978-1-910814-27-7 (paperback) ISBN 978-1-910814-28-4 (e-book) This book is published under a Creative Commons CC BY-NC 4.0 license. You are free to: • Share – copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format • Adapt – remix, transform, and build upon the material Under the following terms: • Attribution – You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use. • Non-Commercial – You may not use the material for commercial purposes. Any of the above conditions can be waived if you get permission. Please contact [email protected] for any such enquiries, including for licensing and translation requests. Other than the terms noted above, there are no restrictions placed on the use and dissemination of this book for student learning materials / scholarly use.
    [Show full text]
  • Briefing European Parliamentary Research Service
    Briefing June 2016 Russia's 2016 elections More of the same? SUMMARY On 18 September, 2016 Russians will elect representatives at federal, regional and municipal level, including most importantly to the State Duma (lower house of parliament). President Vladimir Putin remains popular, with over 80% of Russians approving of his presidency. However, the country is undergoing a prolonged economic recession and a growing number of Russians feel it is going in the wrong direction. Support for Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev and ruling party United Russia has declined in recent months. Nevertheless, United Russia is likely to hold onto, and even increase its parliamentary majority, given the lack of credible alternatives. Of the tame opposition parties currently represented in the State Duma, polls suggest the far-right Liberal Democrats will do well, overtaking the Communists to become the largest opposition party. Outside the State Duma, opposition to Putin's regime is led by liberal opposition parties Yabloko and PARNAS. Deeply unpopular and disunited, these parties have little chance of breaking through the 5% electoral threshold. To avoid a repeat of the 2011–2012 post-election protests, authorities may try to prevent the blatant vote-rigging which triggered them. Nevertheless, favourable media coverage, United Russia's deep pockets and changes to electoral legislation (for example, the re-introduction of single-member districts) will give the ruling party a strong head-start. In this briefing: What elections will be held in Russia? Which parties will take part? Will elections be transparent and credible? The State Duma – the lower house of Russia's parliament.
    [Show full text]
  • The Militarization of the Russian Elite Under Putin What We Know, What We Think We Know (But Don’T), and What We Need to Know
    Problems of Post-Communism, vol. 65, no. 4, 2018, 221–232 Copyright © 2018 Taylor & Francis Group, LLC ISSN: 1075-8216 (print)/1557-783X (online) DOI: 10.1080/10758216.2017.1295812 The Militarization of the Russian Elite under Putin What We Know, What We Think We Know (but Don’t), and What We Need to Know David W. Rivera and Sharon Werning Rivera Department of Government, Hamilton College, Clinton, NY This article reviews the vast literature on Russia’s transformation into a “militocracy”—a state in which individuals with career experience in Russia’s various force structures occupy important positions throughout the polity and economy—during the reign of former KGB lieutenant colonel Vladimir Putin. We show that (1) elite militarization has been extensively utilized both to describe and explain core features of Russian foreign and domestic policy; and (2) notwithstanding its widespread usage, the militocracy framework rests on a rather thin, and in some cases flawed, body of empirical research. We close by discussing the remaining research agenda on this subject and listing several alternative theoretical frameworks to which journalists and policymakers arguably should pay equal or greater attention. In analyses of Russia since Vladimir Putin came to I was an officer for almost twenty years. And this is my own power at the start of the millennium, this master narrative milieu.… I relate to individuals from the security organs, from the Ministry of Defense, or from the special services as has been replaced by an entirely different set of themes. ’ if I were a member of this collective. —Vladimir Putin One such theme is Putin s successful campaign to remove (“Dovol’stvie voennykh vyrastet v razy” 2011) the oligarchs from high politics (via prison sentences, if necessary) and renationalize key components of the nat- In the 1990s, scholarly and journalistic analyses of Russia ural resource sector.
    [Show full text]
  • Baltic-American Anxiety Over Russian Aggression
    City University of New York (CUNY) CUNY Academic Works Capstones Craig Newmark Graduate School of Journalism 12-31-2014 Pawns and Paranoia: Baltic-American Anxiety over Russian Aggression Leila Roos How does access to this work benefit ou?y Let us know! More information about this work at: https://academicworks.cuny.edu/gj_etds/20 Discover additional works at: https://academicworks.cuny.edu This work is made publicly available by the City University of New York (CUNY). Contact: [email protected] Leila Roos December 14, 2014 Pawns and Paranoia: Baltic-American Anxiety over Russian Aggression Pia Polikarpus doesn’t consider herself a political person. She would describe herself as more of “an old flower child, I guess.” There is, however, one political topic she will readily discuss — the threat of Russian aggression. Though Polikarpus was born and raised in New York, she is very “Baltic-minded” because of her Estonian parents, Latvian husband and Lithuanian nephew. At 57, Polikarpus has seen Estonia struggle through occupation and flourish through independence. Given Russia’s recent provocations, she’s starting to wonder if it could go back to how it was in the Soviet times. She’ll raise concerns to her insurance firm coworkers, “trying to open their eyes a little, but they don’t even know where these countries are” — let alone what happened there. “I tell them about how Estonia was occupied and no one was allowed to leave during the Cold War. It was a country that would be like ours, except in the third world.” The ease on travel restrictions allowed Polikarpus to visit Estonia in 1989.
    [Show full text]