Why growl the bear
Richard Payps, "The Wall Street Journal" (USA), 05.03.06
Why do Russians create for us problems as before despite the fact that the Cold War had been ended long ago? Why do they invite the leaders of terrorist organization KHAMAS into Moscow? Why do they cease the deliveries of gas into the Ukraine and thus is reduced its flow into West Europe? Why do they pursue foreign non-government organizations, charging them with the espionage and the instigation to the revolution? Why do they carry out the joint military maneuvers with China, which are clearly aimed against Taiwan?
There are many reasons, by which it is possible to explain such actions - from the unwillingness to collaborate to the straight hostility. It is possible to isolate from them separately two. One consists of the incapacity of Russia to find the proper place in the world community for itself. This feeling of isolative property has deep historical roots. Being the nation, which confesses the orthodoxy arrived from Byzantium, Russians always felt the alienation of Catholic and protestant Europe, to say nothing of Moslem and Buddhism Asia.
Although today the religion plays in the policy much smaller role, than in the past, a feeling of alienation remains also in the public medium. The surveys of public opinion show that the large part of the Russians considers the West enemy and it does not want to go along the western way. Russian press is overfilled by base attacks of Europe and of United States; it experiences the satisfaction, when unfavorable news come from there.
Russia remains largest country in the world even after the loss of its empire. The extensiveness of territory also contributes to the development of a feeling of alienation. Russians greatly are proud of the spaces of their earth. They get accustomed to think that their country, in contrast to others, more greatly is similar to the continent. They also consider that because of the size of their earth they have the right to pretend to status of super-power and because of such a status to have the deciding vote in the international affairs. The Russian language also contributes to the retention of this illusion, since the word "great" has both quantitative and qualitative value.
One additional factor, which amplifies a feeling of alienation and hostility to the external world, is connected with the Russian antidemocratic, authoritarian tradition. Although in the Soviet epoch Russia predominantly was received as radical state, its radicalism was reduced to the Marxist-Leninist slogans, which were being intended exclusively for the export. In the reality this was the reactionary regime, in which there was much more general with the autocracy of any Nikolai II or Aleksandra III, than with the socialist ideals of radical intelligentsia.
Russian political tradition has the durable conservative basis, so durable that even Marxism acquired there conservative nuance. Up to 1991 Russia in its history only twice moved away from the autocracy: in the beginning of the 17th century and again - in 1917. And in both cases the crash of absolute rule brought not to the creation of liberal regime, but to the anarchy, as a result of which occurred the restoration of absolutism. It seems that we observe the same process today.
Russians to the surprise are depoliticized. They do not believe in the fact that simple people can have some effect on their government although, examining it as the closed corporation of leaders, who pursue their own interests. Therefore they do not believe in the democratic choice alliances and the procedures, considering as their fraud. For them importantly is at first so that the state would reflect the interests of people (in their opinion, not one state makes this), but so that it would be strong and effective. Its main function consists in the maintenance of order. When in the course of interrogations to Russians is posed the question, what for them is more important - order or the freedom, three fourth call order, apparently considering these two things as incompatible.
One special feature, which facilitates this understanding of a good state, lies in the fact that the Russians do not entrust to each other. The mutual confidence is extremely important for the functioning of civic community, in Russia in the large scarcity. With exception of their families and close friends, the Russians usually look at each other as to the enemies. This perception also contributes to the retention of no democratic state, since the majority of Russians is designed for authority, considering that precisely he must protect them from the neighbors. They are not only depoliticized, they moreover are deprived of a feeling of collectivism and public belonging. Russia today, as in the past, consists of many tiny enclaves, before which the state does not feel the responsibility, and which waits a little from its rulers. Judging by the results of voting, only 10 percent of Russians, and that living in the large cities, divide western views on the authorities and responsibilities of state.
The reason for this to a certain degree lies in the intentional refusal of post communistic regime completely to break with the Soviet past. With exception of two capitals - Moscow and Saint Petersburg - everywhere is possible to see the relics of Communist epoch. In the entire country are scattered countless many Leninist statues, which call people to go forward, to the victory of communism. Streets frequently call in the honor of Communist events and heroes. President Putin recently affirmed old Soviet hymn as the national anthem of the Russian Federation (with the changed words). Yearly during February the country celebrates creation in 1918 of the Red Army. Therefore it is no wonder that if we judge by the surveys of public opinion, almost third of Russians, who live, apparently, mainly in the rural locality and the small towns, do not know about the fact that the Soviet regime exists no longer. They still consider it as "their" state.
***
These factors betoken prolonged problems with respect to Russia with the external peace. Neither Russian state nor population of the country can establish modus vivendi, or the temporary form of agreement with the world community. They feel themselves by something unique; they consider themselves the surrounded enemies, thinking that these enemies deprive of their legal place in the world. But authority encourages such feelings, since they create the certain related connection between it and it’s yielded - connection, which is manifested extremely weakly in all other cases.
Mr. Payps - honorable professor of history, who works in Harvard University. He is the author of the recently published book "Russian conservatism and his criticism" ("Russian Conservatism and Its Critics") (Yale, 2006).
|
