In search of global dominance (again)
The Russian Bear is stirring after a long winter's nap
By Jeff Emanuel Posted in Featured Stories | National Security — Comments (12) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
The "Russian administration [has] started formulating its geopolitical interests," according to an article in today's Pravda, and are looking toward Africa for new ground into which to expand their sphere of influence.
Interestingly (and all-too-predictably) titled "Russia’s interest in Africa is another step to end USA’s global domination," political scientist Vladimir Anokhin, V.P. of Russia's Academy for Geopolitical Problems, defends (and encourages) his country's plan to jump into African economics and politics with both feet in the near future (beginning with South Africa), and posits that, as Russia's past "restrict[ion of] relations with Africa on the whole and with South Africa in particular [was] an obvious strategic failure for a superpower," such expansion of inflence and power is not only positive, but necessary.
The concluding theory --which, in large part, mirrors the title -- is the most telling public portrayal of the rationale behind the impending resurgence of the Russian Bear's imperialist tendencies:
Read on...
Russia’s current interest in Africa already starts raising concerns with foreign competitors. China will most likely be the first country to do something in response. The Chinese administration will try to minimize Russia’s current efforts in Africa. It is not ruled out that China will offer Russia an attractive investment program in the near future. Europe will intensify competition in high-tech field, whereas the USA will do its best to detract Russia’s attention from South Africa. Washington will obviously take account of its past mistakes, when it concentrated on Europe, the CIS, Russia and the Middle East and lost its influence in several Latin American countries.
As was pointed out while discussing this with my esteemed fellow RedState editors, Russia, though even recently a powerful country with a fairly large circle of domination, no longer possesses in significant quanitities the ingredients necessary to have -- let alone expand -- an effective sphere of influence: people (namely, a younger generation), money, and nationalism.
Russian national pride (or "swagger," as it has been called by some, not incorrectly) is one thing which is sorely lacking, and which must necessarily be regained for Russia to have a successful future, domestically or internationally. The proposed expansion into Africa is aimed, I believe, at partially achieving this; likewise, access to the African markets (what little of them there are) will be somewhat of an economic boost -- although access to the Dark Continent's natural resources could be a much bigger one.
In order to foster a greater sense of pride in its people than simply expanding economic opportunities can present on its own, the Russians -- as is the wont of any entity attempting to make itself look bigger, better, more virtuous, etc. -- are setting themselves up in an adversarial role, opposite the Evil Empires of Red China and the United States -- and, of course, emphasizing the fact that they are the only nation with the power, the will, and the virtue to face down such terrible influences upon humanity. The paper's end even has a cold war-era feel to it, as the author asserts that America's response to Russia's anticipated expansion of power will be, in essence, to invade Latin America, and to co-opt it into the "greater American Empire."
At times, and in circumstances, such as these, it is often difficult to separate what the author perceives as truth from propaganda offered to foster national pride and to justify imperialist intentions. I see this as a bit of both, but with the ultimate message being that, for better or for worse, for good reasons or for questionable ones, Mother Russia believes that she can and should be a player on the international stage once again, and, regardless of the disarray in her own house -- let alone in her own backyard -- the Bear is planning a return to the international influence game...and this time, they hope to win an entire continent, while once again becoming a force to rival America on the global geopolitical scene.
« Republican Moderates May Walk Away From Veto Threat — Comments (17) | Dropped like a hot rock — Comments (7) »
In search of global dominance (again) 12 Comments (0 topical, 12 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »
the older Russian people. I doubt if younger Russians have much confidence in an expanded Russian political influence and I would guess that they understand free market competition, that there is room for more than one economic power in every part of the world market.
and probably better than the average American. They have had to acquire much of their needs and wants through barter and/or the black market for decades. Less than an ideal economy, to be sure, but quite educational.
State outlets offered lower prices on everything, of course; but when the shelf is empty, price is meaningless.
There is, assuredly, room for unlimited numbers of "economic powers in every part of the world market," and the more which emerge, the more efficient that market will become. If the Russians were merely seeking increased bilateral trade with various nations, there would be no justifiable concern.
It is the geopolitical mischief they intend that we should attempt to anticipate and counter.
This only illustrates their impotance. The only place they can possibly have influence is on the hind end of the world (i.e., Africa)? Let them get involved in this sinkhole, which no one cares about, and which has no value.
There are a lot of people and resources on that continent that only need some law and order to be tapped effectively.
This is the kind of longshot that could give Russia just what it wants.
--
If you're seeing shades of gray, it's because you're not looking close enough to see the black and white dots.
Like that tiny little dustbowl of a region that is currently the source for over half the world's petroleum?
"Always be honest with yourself even if you are honest with no one else...
...It helps you keep track of your lies..."
--Myself
If you're President Putin, Russian demographics aren't just bad, they're positively depressing. There is almost nothing they can do to prevent shrinking as soon as the end of this decade.
Meanwhile, what passes for national prosperity, and positive international trade balances, is the one-trick pony of oil/gas exportation. As big a petro-player as Russia is, they don't unilaterally control the world oil market. A number of feasible scenarios could cause world oil prices to decline, thereby tarnishing of Russia's perceived economic resurgence.
I believe Putin's inexorable rebuilding of centralized political and economic power (more reminiscent of tsarist history than communist) is a major disincentive to both foreign and domestic economic investment. Contracts are marginally enforceable and property rights aren't reliable, both of which are significant deterrents to business formation. Consider the Yukos case, for example.
Corruption, on a Russian scale, breeds cynicism, distrust and fatalism into popular culture -- not very fertile ground for nationalism. We have only to view our own electorate's decreased interest and participation in politics (among other symptoms) to appreciate the alienating sequelae of institutional corruption.
In sum, I don't see Russia's long-term geopolitical GPA beyond a "B," although they might ace the occasional individual course.
Bellinghamster
the shrinking population and, worse, in Putin's perspective, there are thousands of women seeking western marriage, each of whom will likely have two or more children that will be citizens of a western state and not Russia.
Come to think of it, this isn't very different from our own colonial roots, when many of the brighter people decided to vote with their feet and relocate.
of Communismn vs capitalism there is no necessary conflict between Russia and the USA. We are not economic rivals certainly (their economy is still a big mess, and is trending toward a resource-extraction economy) and we occupy rather different portions of the globe so it ought be possible to work out "no-trespassing" zones which each nation respects for the sake of the other. Yes, Russia can be a pain in the neck, but with some shrewd diplomacy we can let them be someone else's pain in the neck-- maybe China's or the EU's or even the Islamofascists.
that sponsor terrorists that are at war with America and the west, like Iran. Peace thru strength.
"If they attack us, it means we're winning." - Rush Limbaugh
"Blood in the water"?
The Russians think they smell it and that they can move into an area that we haven't yet dug into while we're not looking.
Yet another downside of having a significant and loud portion of our nation actively hostile toward said nation.
"Always be honest with yourself even if you are honest with no one else...
...It helps you keep track of your lies..."
--Myself
It goes back to the Czars, and has been repeatedly used to keep the populace united in the face of the chronic economic and political failure of the regimes.
They keep using it because it keeps working.
That it continues to be necessary - since Russia is still failing to deliver prosperity to her people - is in part the fault of the United States. Upon the fall of the Soviet Empire, we allowed our sense of elation and relief to bring on an era of immediate "peace dividends" by diverting money from our international defense efforts to domestic social spending.
The first Bush Adminstration and the Clinton Administration were both guilty of failing to aggressively pursue and assist the reformation of Russia. In a lesson we keep being taught, but never seem to learn, "democracy" alone is no cure-all.
In order for democracy to succeed, there are several conditions which must be present. First, there must be the rule of law, not of men. No official, elected or not, can be permitted to overrule the law of the land.
Secondly, the rights of property, including the right to private contract, must be secured. No society can sustain democratic government without a strong and vibrant private sector, and private property rights are essential to the establishment of such a sector.
Finally, there must be an independent judiciary whose rulings upon the law are binding even upon the government. Judges must be held safe from reprisal for decisions the regime doesn't like. Without this institution, the rule of law itself is illusory.
We could have used our wealth and experience to positively influence the development of these institutions in Russia, as well as the secondary institutions which keep them alive. The Yeltsin years were our golden opportunity, but they slipped through our fingers almost unnoticed.
Russia is not capable of presenting the global threat they did at the zenith of international communism. But, as western powers have known for centuries, they are fully capable of becoming a major pain in the ass.