Post by Kahlessa on Jan 24, 2008 23:19:45 GMT -5
Russia Must Find Its Own Democratic Path
January 2006
Once upon a time there was a young democracy under its second president. The national legislature, which was dominated by the president’s party, passed a law prohibiting criticism of the president or the government, on pain of imprisonment. The first to be convicted was an opposition party member of the national legislature. Four editors of opposition newspapers were also imprisoned under the law.
Russia under Vladimir Putin? No, the United States under John Adams. Republican congressman Matthew Lyon of Vermont was imprisoned under the Sedition Act of 1798 for writing a letter to the editor of the Vermont Journal criticizing the Adams administration. The imprisoned editors all published Republican newspapers. (The Supreme Court would not assert its power to declare laws unconstitutional until 1803.)
Since the fall of the Soviet Union, there has been much American criticism of Russia’s democracy. We should remember that America’s path to democracy and liberty has not always been a smooth one. American ideals of freedom and human rights have evolved over the course of our 230-year history and have been a struggle fought in the courts, in the streets, and in the ballot boxes. And yet we expect Russia, which had an absolute monarch less than a hundred years ago and a totalitarian government less than twenty years ago, to fit neatly into the Western mold. There is an assumption that Russia has an obligation to become the kind of democracy the United States thinks it should become. So we criticize Russia’s government when it fails to meet American expectations.
But outside criticism tends to make the country’s citizens rally around their leader. Sovereign nations don’t like to be told what to do. Outside criticisms and advice may come from not understanding the internal nuances of a country. Consequently, they are unlikely to be heeded, nor would they be effective if heeded. Criticisms of Russia often seem to be intended to rally and appease the home crowd in the US, rather than evoke any real change in Russia.
The only people who can make Russia more democratic are its citizens. President Putin’s 70 percent approval rating is twice as high as President Bush’s. The Russian people may have different priorities than ours, and Putin is most accountable to Russia’s citizens, not to foreign leaders. And there is evidence that Putin’s administration is responsive to public opinion.
In March 2005, after widespread protests, a regional court overturned the conviction of a railway worker for his part in an accident that killed a regional governor in August 2005. Oleg Shcherbinsky was preparing to turn left when the governor’s car, traveling at more than 95 mph, tried to pass on the left, grazed the car and flew off the road. The governor, his bodyguard and his driver died. In February, a court ruled that Shcherbinsky should have yielded to the governor's car and sentenced him to four years in a labor colony. A driver’s association organized protests across Russia, including one in Moscow involving 1,000 cars. Tens of thousands of citizens signed petitions to protest the conviction.
And in January 2005, after pensioners lost some benefits-- free public transport, free medicines and subsidized electricity and gas--they had received under the Soviet system, thousands of pensioners protested in cities all over Russia. The benefits had been replaced by cash payments that many pensioners found inadequate, as prices for energy and public transport went up on Jan. 1. The government quickly decided to increase pension amounts.
The Russian people have the power to change their country, and it is up to them to decide how they want to use it. As citizens both learn how to participate in the political process and discover that their participation is effective, the demand for greater opportunities to participate will naturally grow.
Criticisms of Russia’s internal affairs only serve to weaken U.S.-Russia relations, and demonstrate our impotence in directing Russia’s domestic policies. Nothing is to be gained by not showing Russia the respect due a sovereign nation. It’s time to come in from the cold war.
January 2006
Once upon a time there was a young democracy under its second president. The national legislature, which was dominated by the president’s party, passed a law prohibiting criticism of the president or the government, on pain of imprisonment. The first to be convicted was an opposition party member of the national legislature. Four editors of opposition newspapers were also imprisoned under the law.
Russia under Vladimir Putin? No, the United States under John Adams. Republican congressman Matthew Lyon of Vermont was imprisoned under the Sedition Act of 1798 for writing a letter to the editor of the Vermont Journal criticizing the Adams administration. The imprisoned editors all published Republican newspapers. (The Supreme Court would not assert its power to declare laws unconstitutional until 1803.)
Since the fall of the Soviet Union, there has been much American criticism of Russia’s democracy. We should remember that America’s path to democracy and liberty has not always been a smooth one. American ideals of freedom and human rights have evolved over the course of our 230-year history and have been a struggle fought in the courts, in the streets, and in the ballot boxes. And yet we expect Russia, which had an absolute monarch less than a hundred years ago and a totalitarian government less than twenty years ago, to fit neatly into the Western mold. There is an assumption that Russia has an obligation to become the kind of democracy the United States thinks it should become. So we criticize Russia’s government when it fails to meet American expectations.
But outside criticism tends to make the country’s citizens rally around their leader. Sovereign nations don’t like to be told what to do. Outside criticisms and advice may come from not understanding the internal nuances of a country. Consequently, they are unlikely to be heeded, nor would they be effective if heeded. Criticisms of Russia often seem to be intended to rally and appease the home crowd in the US, rather than evoke any real change in Russia.
The only people who can make Russia more democratic are its citizens. President Putin’s 70 percent approval rating is twice as high as President Bush’s. The Russian people may have different priorities than ours, and Putin is most accountable to Russia’s citizens, not to foreign leaders. And there is evidence that Putin’s administration is responsive to public opinion.
In March 2005, after widespread protests, a regional court overturned the conviction of a railway worker for his part in an accident that killed a regional governor in August 2005. Oleg Shcherbinsky was preparing to turn left when the governor’s car, traveling at more than 95 mph, tried to pass on the left, grazed the car and flew off the road. The governor, his bodyguard and his driver died. In February, a court ruled that Shcherbinsky should have yielded to the governor's car and sentenced him to four years in a labor colony. A driver’s association organized protests across Russia, including one in Moscow involving 1,000 cars. Tens of thousands of citizens signed petitions to protest the conviction.
And in January 2005, after pensioners lost some benefits-- free public transport, free medicines and subsidized electricity and gas--they had received under the Soviet system, thousands of pensioners protested in cities all over Russia. The benefits had been replaced by cash payments that many pensioners found inadequate, as prices for energy and public transport went up on Jan. 1. The government quickly decided to increase pension amounts.
The Russian people have the power to change their country, and it is up to them to decide how they want to use it. As citizens both learn how to participate in the political process and discover that their participation is effective, the demand for greater opportunities to participate will naturally grow.
Criticisms of Russia’s internal affairs only serve to weaken U.S.-Russia relations, and demonstrate our impotence in directing Russia’s domestic policies. Nothing is to be gained by not showing Russia the respect due a sovereign nation. It’s time to come in from the cold war.