| Submit your comments on this article |
| Russia |
| Vlad I centralizes control of Russia post-Beslan |
| 2004-09-13 |
| Responding to a series of deadly terror attacks, President Vladimir Putin on Monday moved to significantly strengthen the Kremlin's grip on power, with new measures that include the naming of regional governors and an overhaul of the electoral system. Putin told Cabinet members and security officials convened in special session that the future of Russia was at stake and urged the creation of a central, powerful anti-terror agency. "The organizers and perpetrators of the terror attack are aiming at the disintegration of the state, the breakup of Russia," he said. "We need a single organization capable of not only dealing with terror attacks but also working to avert them, destroy criminals in their hideouts, and if necessary, abroad." He said he would propose legislation abolishing the election of local governors by popular vote. Instead, they would be nominated by the president and confirmed by local legislatures - a move that would undo the remaining vestiges of the local autonomy already chipped away by Putin during his first term in office. Putin explained his move by the need to streamline and strengthen the executive branch to make it more capable of combating terror. His critics immediately assailed the proposal as a self-destructive effort that could fuel dissent in the provinces. "The abolition of elections in the Russian regions deals a blow to the foundations of Russian federalism and means the return to the extremely inefficient system of government," said Sergei Mitrokhin, a leading member of the liberal Yabloko party. |
| Posted by:Dan Darling |
| #22 Back on topic, Russians in the Amur River and other border regions of the Far East are now learning Chiinese-- note that's actually learning real, practical Chinese for daily use, not studying it in adult education classes so as to fill time or meet members of the opposite sex. It's all about economic survival. The far east Russians are deeply dependent on Chinese suppliers, Chinese customers, Chinese bosses in many cases. Note also that Russia's birthrate and even her population overall are actually falling. A shrinking and-- forget oil prices, focus on manufacturing-- economically stagnant Russian Far East will inevitably fall under Chinese influence. How on earth could any Moscow-based leader halt this trend AND protect Russia's southern flank AND provide greater democracy and debate AND stimulate competitive export-oriented industries to ensure growth when oil falls to $25/bbl again and....? Again, Russia's barely governable even under the most optimal conditions. A Russian collapse, like a Pakistani collapse, would be catastrophic for the free nations. We need Russia to survive as a viable, defensible, reliable, effective entity. Expanding democracy in Russia is secondary to the above. |
| Posted by: lex 2004-09-13 11:42:32 PM |
| #21 As I said -- a most horrible telepath. |
| Posted by: Aris Katsaris 2004-09-13 9:21:03 PM |
| #20 Now you are assuming so horrible *motivations* of mine. Not assuming, observing. There's a difference. |
| Posted by: Robert Crawford 2004-09-13 8:47:36 PM |
| #19 Mrs Davis -- the moment I claim that Greece is superior to America, you are free to attack Greece and call it relevant to my wider arguments as part of an effort on your part to prove me a hypocrite. Until that time, your attacks on Greece when it is not relevant on a thread, are nothing but a reference to my ethnicity, and thus an ethnic jab. Or should I think that my being a Greek had *nothing* to do with your reference to Greece and you might have just as well said "That's how they do it in Iceland"? |
| Posted by: Aris Katsaris 2004-09-13 8:29:11 PM |
| #18 Crawford, if I assumed something wrongly, then I atleast assumed lex meaning something differently that he meant in his *words*. Now you are assuming so horrible *motivations* of mine. If I am a bad reader, then you are definitely a most horrible telepath. Zarathustra, if I ever mindlessly chorus "Just what an American would say", the same way I'm receiving all those Greece-jabs from the various non-sentient automatons here, I'm hereby granting you permission to shoot me dead -- it'll be a mercy kill: I'll have also failed the sentience test. Paul> Is there a significant emigration factor from China, then -- and by significant we mean in the millions? Chinese population is more or less stable, I believe, and unless there's a collapse of *China* (possible but currently unforseeable) the numbers needed for such a majority shift, seem improbable to me. |
| Posted by: Aris Katsaris 2004-09-13 8:24:07 PM |
| #17 Aris, it was political. A statement about Greece. Just like you make digs constantly at America. If it had been ethnic it would have been "That's how Greeks debate" as applicable to Greeks in America as in Greece. |
| Posted by: Mrs. Davis 2004-09-13 8:21:39 PM |
| #16 3.2 on the derail. Piss poor Aris. I expect better. |
| Posted by: Shipman 2004-09-13 8:16:17 PM |
| #15 Aris, I assume he means that the Far East of Russia is only loosely populated (under 10 million), while just accross the border there are hundreds of millions of Chinese. Given the aging population in Russia, there is a need for immigrants, and most of them have come from China. It is not hard to see ethnic Chinese becoming a majority in the area in a generation or two, which at the least could mean that the local government takes a pro-China position. |
| Posted by: Paul Moloney 2004-09-13 8:10:24 PM |
| #14 Well, Aris, this time I have to agree with you that Lex's scenario requires clarification. "and try to occasionally display some hints of sentience" Well, well, Aris... I think that could be applied to you too. The only occassional hints of sentience are present in this thread, but beside that and some more I could count on fingers of one hand, you need to remember that suggestion when posting as well. |
| Posted by: Zarathustra 2004-09-13 8:05:57 PM |
| #13 Crawford would you be so kind as to let lex himself explain what he meant, rather than make your own assumptions about his words? Touchy, aren't you, Aris? You *assumed* something so that you could attack a strawman. And, Aris, there's a difference between "breaking away" and "being stripped away". Becoming Chinese satellites sounds more like the latter to me. But we'll let lex explain, now that you've decided that's the best course. |
| Posted by: Robert Crawford 2004-09-13 8:02:40 PM |
| #12 If he didn't mean that, then I apologize, but I *assumed* that "leaving Siberia and western and parts of southern Russia to form a much smaller entity with Moscow at its core", meant that those regions would be the only thing that'd be left of Russia, aka the Far East regions would *break away*. Else I'm at loss to understand what this "smaller entity" would be (if not a smaller country/federation/confederation), and I again beg for an explanation. Crawford would you be so kind as to let lex himself explain what he meant, rather than make your own assumptions about his words? And Mrs Davis, would you stop being the ethnic jabs chorus and try to occasionally display some hints of sentience? |
| Posted by: Aris Katsaris 2004-09-13 7:51:05 PM |
| #11 That's how they debate in Greece. |
| Posted by: Mrs. Davis 2004-09-13 7:41:10 PM |
| #10 Aris, would you care to point out where lex said the Russian Far East would "break away"? He only mentioned them becoming Chinese satellites, which doesn't require them to break away from Russia first. Why are you asking someone to defend a position you invented? |
| Posted by: Robert Crawford 2004-09-13 7:37:45 PM |
| #9 What are the forces that would cause the Russian Far East to break away? I believe they are strongly predominantly Russian in ethnicity so plain nationalism wouldn't cut it-- and as you say separation would cause them to inevitably turn into Chinese satellites. So, what would be the motivation for such separation? |
| Posted by: Aris Katsaris 2004-09-13 7:32:35 PM |
| #8 Sure, it's possible that the Russian Federation could become a full-fledged democracy, just extremely unlikely. Moscow cannot even project authority into its distant regions, let alone effective order, which is a condition for democracy. What's much more likely is the devolution of the Russian Far East regions into de facto Chinese satellites, leaving Siberia and western and parts of southern Russia to form a more or less pro-western, much smaller entity with Moscow at its core. |
| Posted by: lex 2004-09-13 5:48:13 PM |
| #7 Around the world dozens of countries experience democracy when they never had before. Taiwan. South Korea. When had these ever been democratic, before they became? What those two and probably all the others also have in common is a strong link to the United States either through mutual friendship or America kicking their ass in a war. Russia has had neither of these. Russia has been ruled by opressive autocrats since the formation of the Muscovy Principality in the 1300s. Over 700 years is a lot of generations under the iron boot of the Tsars or General Secretaries. |
| Posted by: moocow 2004-09-13 4:00:39 PM |
| #6 Remember this above all: Russia will never be both united and democratic Because you've looked hundreds and thousands of years into the future and you know that Russia will *never* be blah-and-blah. You are calling bullshit the belief that a democratic Russia might one day exist? Spare me your bullshit that it "never" can. People that use the word "never" with such certainty, tend to have views of "never" that hardly ever extend beyond the present decade. Around the world dozens of countries experience democracy when they never had before. Taiwan. South Korea. When had these ever been democratic, before they became? |
| Posted by: Aris Katsaris 2004-09-13 2:46:43 PM |
| #5 There perhaps once existed a way for a democratic united Russia -- but Putin has now extinguished that possibility, during his lifetime atleast. Oh, spare me such bullshit. Remember this above all: Russia will never be both united and democratic, and things in Russia are never as good or as bad as they seem. Some degree of free expression and a fair degree of private property rights are the best anyone can hope for there. To say that Putin "extinguished that possibility" is to indulge in the kind of ridiculous and extremist blather that westerners always do about Russia. It's either The-Coming-Russian-ECONOMIC-BOOM with libbetry n justice fer all or else it's Vlad the Terrible. The truth is that Russia's different and will never be fully democratic and prosperous. It's an extraordinarily difficult country to govern, and no one has ever governed it well. Russia's regional governors have controlled their fiefdoms and thumbed their noses at Moscow for hundreds of years. Herzen's Autobiography passages describing his first encounters with these bandits as an internal exile in the 1840s could have been written today. |
| Posted by: lex 2004-09-13 2:38:36 PM |
| #4 In my view, Democracy and freedom must be instilled in a people and passed down from generation to generation. Russia has never known true democracy. The only flirtation prior to the collapse of the Soviet Union was after the 1917 revolution before the Bolsheviks took control. An autocratic government is what is ingrained in the Russian psyche. Probably works better in a country the size of Russia anyway. We just need it to be a capitalist autrocratic government. |
| Posted by: moocow 2004-09-13 2:36:28 PM |
| #3 Let's not believe Putin's claims that this is happening in response to the Beslan attacks -- as the article itself notes it's simply the end-result of the process he started long ago, in his bid for dictatorship. Lex, between dictatorship and disentegration I see no way for the Russian state to "succeed" by western standards. There perhaps once existed a way for a democratic united Russia -- but Putin has now extinguished that possibility, during his lifetime atleast. |
| Posted by: Aris Katsaris 2004-09-13 2:22:07 PM |
| #2 Well..if this just doesn't prove my point. The Belsan massacre just created a monster that they cannot control. Nor can we. Good? Bad? Doesn't matter. It's a fact. |
| Posted by: feeling bitchy 2004-09-13 2:12:18 PM |
| #1 Most of Russia's regional governors are thuggish bandits who are no more friends of democracy than the clownish autocrats ruling ex-FSU states like Aliyev and other Central Asian overlords. Typically, in Ekat or other siberian regions, the governor and his posse own a controlling stake in the major cash-generating industries of the region, dominate the courts, and muzzle or kill off critical voices in the media. There's no "democracy" to preserve there, just a power struggle between the distant boyars and the tsar in Moscow. Russia's failing, folks. Pakistan with white faces and black shirts. FSB's thieves and their machincations in Iran are nearly as dangerous to our interests as the ISI. We need to help the Russian state succeed because if it fails, we're screwed. |
| Posted by: lex 2004-09-13 2:04:21 PM |