| Submit your comments on this article |
| Caucasus/Russia/Central Asia |
| Putin: Soviet collapse a 'geopolitical catastrophe' |
| 2005-04-26 |
| Posted by:Fred |
| #26 Given the number of siberian tiger hunting trips the locals have organized for western and Japanese businessmen, leasing the region isn't that far-fetched. Halt settlement, relocate the locals, turn it into a Russian national park and sell mineral and O&G leases the way BLM does in the western US. |
| Posted by: thibaud (aka lex) 2005-04-26 7:11:39 PM |
| #25 Russia may well forstall a Chinese takeover of the far east and much of Siberia by leasing the area to another country. The USA and Japan are the obvious leasees. The area is rich in many natural resources and has enormous tourism potential. |
| Posted by: phil_b 2005-04-26 7:08:35 PM |
| #24 Exactly. We can expect that Russian Far East territories lacking oil reserves will be quietly divested to China within our lifetimes. Which would reduce Russia's population still further, to maybe <100m as early as 2030, putting Russia in the ranks of the third-tier, medium-sized "emerging market" nations. Perhaps then, and only then, will Russians realize that their future prosperity and dignity rests on emulating Finland rather than China. |
| Posted by: thibaud (aka lex) 2005-04-26 2:59:34 PM |
| #23 lex: Unlikely. Primorsky Krai and the other far east regions will almost certainly become Chinese satellites within another generation. Czarist Russia held the empire together by force. Soviet Russia held it together via a combination of ideology (socialist brotherhood) and force. Today's Russia has neither an ideology capable of holding the country together nor the coercive power to keep it together. |
| Posted by: Zhang Fei 2005-04-26 2:53:24 PM |
| #22 The real question is whether even the Russian Federation will hold together Unlikely. Primorsky Krai and the other far east regions will almost certainly become Chinese satellites within another generation. Today's Russia is a tale of two societies: a prosperous, westernized Moscow metropolis with ~12M western-inclined sophisticates and an impoverished third-world conglomeration of criminalized fiefdoms. Note also that the Soviet Union (and its predecessor, Czarist Russia) was an anachronism - a multinational empire where Russians were outnumbered by the other denizens of the empire. In the final analysis, this is why most of the European empires broke up True. Though the defect is IMHO less ethnic than one of a deep structural political failure. Note that the tsarist empire was a political-economic basket case as well. Russia has never been governed well; neither is it clear that it can be governed well. Its East Siberian and West Siberian regions, that is to say, well over half the country, have been bandit fiefdoms for hundreds of years. Read Herzen's autobiography about his internal exile, and you feel as though the man had only yesterday toured Russia's regions. By contrast, the nations that emerged from the Habsburg Empire's collapse have evolved into reasonably normal countries. Russia's an outlier. |
| Posted by: thibaud (aka lex) 2005-04-26 2:47:53 PM |
| #21 lex: When the USSR collapsed, the CPSU as the only marginally competent or effective government authority collapsed as well. I guess my point is that the dissolution of the Soviet empire did not cause the dismal state of Russia today. Both events were precipitated by decades of incompetent government under the banner of communism. The Soviet Union's breakup and Russia's sorry state are merely the symptoms. Note also that the Soviet Union (and its predecessor, Czarist Russia) was an anachronism - a multinational empire where Russians were outnumbered by the other denizens of the empire. In the final analysis, this is why most of the European empires broke up - the Soviet Union was merely the last of the old-line empires. Even today, ethnic Russians are only approximately 60% of the Russian Federation, and are possibly declining in numbers relative to Russia's minorities (notably Muslims, who form 20% of Russia's population). The real question is whether even the Russian Federation will hold together. |
| Posted by: Zhang Fei 2005-04-26 2:37:05 PM |
| #20 The biggest source of human misery today is incompetent, kleptocratic, brutal governments that won't or can't govern. Amazing that anyone still believes that shitty regimes like Putin's or Chavez's or Mugabe's etc etc etc deserve the dignity and legitimacy accorded by the UN or the "international community." |
| Posted by: thibaud (aka lex) 2005-04-26 2:31:17 PM |
| #19 Change the ratios slightly and add the second world poverty category and you'd be describing Saudi Arabia, Chavezland, etc etc etc.. |
| Posted by: Tkat 2005-04-26 2:23:55 PM |
| #18 "Maybe 25-30% of the population is now living in third-world poverty" -- and another 60-70% is living in first-world poverty. Putin's Russia is a basket case held together by $55/bbl oil. |
| Posted by: thibaud (aka lex) 2005-04-26 2:20:04 PM |
| #17 The dissolution of the Soviet Union was bad for Russian prestige, but it wasn't a disaster for individual Russians When the USSR collapsed, the CPSU as the only marginally competent or effective government authority collapsed as well. Russia's government today does not govern: it doesn't pay pensions fully or on time, doesn't pass laws or enforce existing ones, doesn't protect the borders, doesn't contain or prevent the spread of communicable diseases. For any Russian who depends critically on the government's performance of these and other core duties, life has indeed been disastrous in the post-Soviet period. Not that it wasn't shitty during the soviet period, but the halt, lame, and the elderly have been utterly crushed during the last ten years. Maybe 25-30% of the population is now living in third-world poverty. Only 5-10% of the population could be said to have anything like a middle-class, ie reasonably secure and comfortable, existence, and 90% of them are in Moscow. Get outside of Moscow and St Pete, and you're back in the filthy, miserable, desperately poor Russia of Herzen's time. |
| Posted by: thibaud (aka lex) 2005-04-26 2:17:24 PM |
| #16 I think PUtin is just thinking how great those old Kremlin fellows had it and what a sorry nation he has to deal with now. Comments like this sure make NATO expansion easier to rationalize which I'm not sure is something Putin really wants. |
| Posted by: rjschwarz 2005-04-26 2:13:04 PM |
| #15 AlanC - Chinese businessmen are invading by osmosis in the border regions of the Russian Far East by osmosis. Other than that, there is next to nothing outside of Moscow that is worth settling: the weather is ferocious, with fierce, short, mosquito-ridden summers and extremely cold winters. The infrastructure is sorely lacking and would require 100's of billions to develop. The population is shrinking and racked with communicable diseases, and the environment is heavily damaged from 70 years of heedless soviet mismanagement. Only a poor Chinese peasant or a less-poor Chinese entrepreneur would find ex-Moscow Russia inviting. Russia's economy is tied entirely to oil and gas and the administration of that oil and gas economy, done mainly in Moscow. The country's industrial base is a shambles; Russia exports nothing but weapons. Beyond Moscow Babylon, the oil and gas reserves, and a few thousand brilliant scientists and mathematicians scattered around the country, there's nothing of significant value to be found in today's Russia. The best outcome for such a nation is for it to become much smaller and therefore much more governable. |
| Posted by: thibaud (aka lex) 2005-04-26 2:11:55 PM |
| #14 JM's a lingual impressionist, a Renoir of wordmithery. |
| Posted by: Shipman 2005-04-26 2:04:57 PM |
| #13 I've always wondered what Russia would look like if it implemented true private property laws in the same way that the American west was settled. Given the relatively low population and the huge unpopulated area it seems to me that a "Siberian Land Rush" might prove interesting. Especially if immigrants were allowed to participate. What do you think? Would this be the spur to growth that I think it might be? |
| Posted by: AlanC 2005-04-26 1:55:02 PM |
| #12 My take from this is that Putin is a megalomaniac. The dissolution of the Soviet Union was bad for Russian prestige, but it wasn't a disaster for individual Russians. And Russia is still the largest country in the world by a huge margin. |
| Posted by: Zhang Fei 2005-04-26 10:52:48 AM |
| #11 I kinda like Joe M's stream of conciousness stuff. Its like the Crossfire Gazette or Juche, you have to read it few of them to get it. |
| Posted by: phil_b 2005-04-26 10:48:30 AM |
| #10 What I find curious is Putin's idea that the Soviet Union could have been held together. Russia can't suppress the rebellion in Chechnya. How would it have dealt with the rebellion of the various republics? In the old Soviet Union, Russians were perhaps 40% of the population. |
| Posted by: Zhang Fei 2005-04-26 10:24:20 AM |
| #9 Article: Russian President Vladimir Putin told the nation today that the collapse of the Soviet empire "was the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the century" and had fostered separatist movements inside Russia. I guess WWI and WWII don't count. Stalin's and Mao's famines, which killed tens of millions, don't count, either. |
| Posted by: Zhang Fei 2005-04-26 10:22:18 AM |
| #8 I dunno. |
| Posted by: Tkat 2005-04-26 9:26:13 AM |
| #7 Which one is SGT SCHULTZ? |
| Posted by: Tom 2005-04-26 8:40:41 AM |
| #6 The old USSR regulated, militarized, and centralized itself unto self-oblivion - they were the ones who first claimed that Communism and Socialism didn't need either trade or co-existence with the West, nor any form of Western libertarianism to prove their self-obvious, self-proclaimed "superiority". Thanx to Nixon, Reagan, Bush's 1 & II, and gasp,even Bill Clinton, they are all but being forced to acknowledge the superiority of America, Rightism and Capitalism - Bill Maher and espec Boxer, Pelosi, and Heinz-Kerry are almost absolutely Date-worthy and quietly mature/respectable these last few weeks. ENJOY THE LULL WHILE YOU CAN, BOYZ, CUZ THE LEFT HAS IRAN AND NORTH KOREA-TAIWAN NEXT UP AGAINST AMERICA THIS YEAR - HOPE TO GOD YOU'VE BEEN BUYING THOSE GUNS AND WAR GEARS!? The Iranians and Norkies will prob wait until Mother Nature's natural elements can offset US SPAWAR, ala Iranian Summer and Norkie Winter - the Dems have already PC prepositioned Dean, Kerry, Gore and POTUS Hillary in case of a WMD attack that they hope will take out Dubya and the bulk of the leadership of the GOP-Right and the US Congress in general. Its still "SGT SCHULTZ" and "BETTY CROCKER" in the meantime - they and the Commie Clintons PC know nothing, see nothing, and did nothing! |
| Posted by: JosephMendiola 2005-04-26 5:15:22 AM |
| #5 For some reason I read this as 'Russia collapse a 'geopolitical catastrophe' i.e. a reference to what would happen if Russia fell apart. An assessment I would have agreed with. In fact he's refering to the collapse of the Soviet union in 91. Hankering after the old SU is a troubling development. |
| Posted by: phil_b 2005-04-26 2:26:22 AM |
| #4 You laugh in weird ways... ;-) |
| Posted by: Sobiesky 2005-04-26 1:56:23 AM |
| #3 I know about BMN, thx. I'll just laugh at the headline. |
| Posted by: .com 2005-04-26 1:30:39 AM |
| #2 bugmenot? |
| Posted by: Sobiesky 2005-04-26 1:26:33 AM |
| #1 BaltSun - Reg Req'd. |
| Posted by: .com 2005-04-26 1:20:59 AM |