FSU Politics/Current Events V

Gotta work with what you got. We're talking about one of the world's largest and most diverse nations here, switching to a democratic and capitalistic system after centuries of oppression and tyranny was never going to be easy.

 

Big post here but do take the time to read.

From my observations, although support for Putin stuttered during the financial crisis the majority of people are behind the current government. Mainly because of the stats I provided earlier.

Ofcourse my personal circumstances are better then the ordinary Russian,I came to Russia 5 years ago because 40% of expats in Russia earn no less than 250,000 USD a year. The opportunity to earn a lot more money then I could in Australia at that age was too good to turn down, plus I wanted to see where my family was from. I consider myself Australian (Although born in Ukraine) and being Australian I always called the English the biggest whingers until I came to Russia and saw how much the average Russian whinges about anything, it is actually remarkable. But I came with a very negative view on the country which I now love. I think the biggest indicator that Russia is on the correct path is support for the Kremlin and disillusionment with the West runs highest amongst young, university educated Muscovite men, the very segment of the Russian population that is most exposed to the West through the the Internet and foreign travel,The Internet is no more censored in Russia than in the West.

As I also said sure there are many problems here but they are most of the time exaggerated or just lies. Actually just recently Julian Evans for Wall Street Journal and Simon Shuster for TIME stated that there was “growing wave” of emigration from Putin’s Russia? They misquoted a government official whose department had nothing to do with migration stating that 1.25 million Russians moved to live overseas in the past three years whereas the official actually said the entire post soviet period. In reality it was just over 50,000 in the past three years. Can read all about it here http://inosmi.ru/politic/20110726/172527210.html Anyway back on topic.

The main problem is Corruption and law enforcement it needs to be fixed but that will take time to be rooted out. Russian people still have continued low trust in most institutions, unsatisfactory access to healthcare and education and a very corrupt bureaucracy. Likewise, despite improvements, Russia’s demographic situation remains unsatisfactory. Russians see a government that, though it might be incompetent, corrupt, and infested with oligarchic bureaucrats is at least standing up for their interests abroad, paying respect to traditional Russian culture, and doing more for the social welfare of ordinary citizens than any previous Russian or Soviet regime.

What has been done in Russia in the past ten years deserves credit you can't go from a bankrupt nation to a 1st world country in ten years but in these ten years Russia has experienced very rapid progress, Russia receives very little credit for this probably because it is Russia. Natural resources or not, I highly doubt Russian life would have improved this dramatically when looking at the other potential leaders since the fall of the USSR. In 1991, 30% of Russians spent “almost all” their family income to obtain the bare essentials for life. Throughout the 1990′s, the period of anarchic stasis, this figure fluctuated in the 45-65% range. But after 1999, it began to plummet. It fell to 14% by 2007-09, remained unaffected by the economic crisis, and reached just 10% last year.


With regards to Ukraine, it is the worst post-Soviet performer amongst the industrialized nations, it never managed to retain its Soviet-era level of per capita output,unlike Russia, Ukraine did not have the burden of structural militarization when the USSR collapsed it also did not have to retain the expensive military forces and 'superpower' ambitions. Ukraine was in a similair position to Belarus however Belarus was shunned by the west yet still managed to do better post collapse in comparison to Ukraine. Ukraine lagged well behind Russia, not to even mention the Baltics, in its economic liberalization, and its politicians remain representatives of oligarchic clans, not their puppet-masters as in Russia. Ukraine seems very far away from improving from the sad state it is in. A shame really.

 

This is very true. And it is sad, because back in the Soviet times, it was Ukraine who were given the best chance to advance in case of USSR's demise...

It suffers as much (if not more) corruption as Russia, and it has no natural resources to support its flailing economy. There was a glimmer of hope in 2005-2007 when Ukraine's economy was actually growing at rates faster than that of Russia (which is not hard when you start from almost 0). Unfortunately, worldwide economic crisis did wipe all those gains out. Again, if Ukraine could go back to a strong natural resource base they would be able to weather the crisis.

 

Thanks mate

Under Putin 17 journalists were murded of which 5 can be definitively linked to their professional work. Under Yeltsin 30 were murdered. With regards to Internet it is not difficult to access many anti government websites in Russia, I regularly read them, I always look to find middle ground. Still the fact remains that the younger educated technology savvy generation is generally supportive of the Kremlin. No country is open and free in terms of information and I know you understand that.

Transparency International's GCB reported that 17% of Russians paid a bribe to obtain a service in 2007 which placed them in the same margin as Bulgaria, Turkey and the Czech Republic. Corruption is a serious problem but it is not as severe as reported by Transparency International which relies on foreign perceptions of corruption in Russia(Has it equal with Zimbabwe) although even they admit transparency has improved under Putin. Also According to the World Bank control of corruption was 16.5 in 2000; 24.3 in 2006; 29 in 2010. So it appears action is being taken, just not as great and effective as everyone wants it to be. Low level corruption is prevalent in Russia I see it with my own eyes, mainly due to low wages in the sectors they frequent(Education, Law enforcement) but high level corruption is no different than in the United States. Much of what would count as corruption in Russia and European countries in general goes as a matter of course in the US. Much of what would pass as lobbying in the US would invite criminal investigations in Europe.

Incomes rose dramatically, poverty more then halved, Russia became stable three things that were desperately needed. As I said before you can't simply get results immediately especially in Russia where there are some deep rooted problems that can not be fixed in 5-10 years. The majority of the population seem to believe there is a positive future. Less and less people are leaving to live abroad, I showed you the figures it is actually quite small. I see improvements being made I also see areas which need improvement getting little attention. But I don't see areas getting worse. The middle class is still growing at a good rate. I am not a defender of the Kremlin it may come across like that in a way but they deserve credit in many areas but are at fault in others. I completley disagree with some of the decisions they make but in the grand scheme of things they have done more good for the Russian people. But one thing is certain a clean out of the idiots near the top will never happen some people are more powerful then VV.

I am comparing it to the end of the USSR. Belarus is more productive then it was in 1989. Ukraine is not. Belarus suffered less of the catobolic collapse which was seen in Russia and Ukraine in the 90's and strong growth resumed earlier. This also included growth in manufacturing. They even developed a competitive micro-electronics industry. It is not bad for ordinary workers and pensioners but the talented have little chance of developing and oppression is high. All i was stating is Belarus has been a more productive economy then Ukraine when compared to the end of the USSR, nothing to do with quality of life. I think the GDP Per Capita for Belarus is double that in Ukraine though..

 

I think the answer is in alternative energy. Yes, I know it is not that simple and I am not trying to simplify it. We have huge open spaces (not like Russia, mind you, who have taiga and tundra in the waste expanses). Solar and wind power plants would scarcely find a better environment. That would be the first step for recovery, weening Ukraine off the Russian gas and oil (partially, of course). And, I do harbor an opinion often unbecoming of the liberal I am - NUCLEAR POWER must be a part of the solution when done safe.

Second step should be figuring out the most successful political formula to governing the country. No, I do not suggest changing the system. I suggest finding stable political movements that are not based on ethnic or regional loyalties. For example, here, in the states, we know what Democrats stand for and what Republicans stand for. And the formula hasn't changed in 40 years. I still don't know what Timoshenko stands for.

 

Very interesting things written, I am packing and will have to review in the next few days.

I wrote some papers recently on Russian legal and political evolution from the fall of Soviet Union and with Putin in charge.

A key thing to remember though, is Putin is not different from the leaders Russia has had since it began. An informal political and legal system of connections cannot be reversed by a Constitution (especially one that gave a ton of power to the President. The President can dissolve the Duma if it rejects its Prime Ministerial candidate 3 times).

A system can't change overnight, and the challenges Russia faces as a result of its history and physical size cannot be quelled instantly.

 

Wow brutal for Belarus. I really had no idea about their situation. I somehow, definitely ignorantly, equated their geographical position - between Poland and Russia - to mean they were somewhere in that ballpark. Did not know the reality.

 

Thanks for the kind welcomes Zenit

Another long post from me but I disagree/agree with different aspects of your post. Most of what you said about Belarus hits the nail on the head. But I feel Ukraine just lags behind in many indicators which is sad because it should not Although GDP Per Capita is not a great indicator you can see how far behind Ukraine has fallen compared to its "Less free" neighbors.

GDP Per Capita (PPP) ($US)
1999
Belarus-5,300
Russia-4,200
Ukraine-2,200
2010
Belarus-13,600
Russia-16,200
Ukraine-6,700

About corruption it is fairly established that TI's CPI index is flawed. These experts lack attention to statistics and opinion polls, they come with their own sets of biases and tropes even non appreciation of the fact that "legalized corruption" is still corruption(what passes for lobbying in the US is corruption in European countries). I see that one of TI’s sources is the Economist Intelligence Unit, which “uses its panel of experts’ assessment on the incidence of corruption. So the EIU doesn’t interview businessmen, it uses its own experts instead. OK. The Economist magazine’s political stances are well known. I would describe them as libertarian and neoconservative. Fans of Putin they’re not.

Now it could well be true that Russia(2.1) has corruption at the same level as the failed states of Zimbabwe(2.4) or DR Congo(2.0), or that Italy(3.9) is more corrupt than Saudi Arabia(4.7) a country that is a feudalistic monarchy where corruption is institutionalized in the flow of huge oil rents to privileged members of the House of Saud. Venezuela (1.9) is the same as Equatorial Guinea (1.8), and worse than Nigeria (2.5). Now I don’t doubt that Venezuelan bureaucrats pilfer a lot, but the Venezuelan state (neocon propaganda to the contrary) does provide middle income country type social services and has greatly expanded them in the last ten years (i.e. the majority of money is not stolen). In contrast, Equatorial Guinea is almost the definition of oil kleptocracy.

Basically you see my point, I would put Russia's corruption index around the 4-5 region with the likes of Greece, Mexico, Turkey and this is supported by most data too. Still poor but not in the horrific state indicated. Secondly corruption did not get worse rather it stayed the same/ slightly improved(Which you have said and I agree with from what I have seen). It is one of the areas Putin did not combat correctly during his leadership, could give him the benefit of the doubt because many aspects in Russian life improved although he did seem disinterested in combating it at the time. However, the never ending “war on corruption” seems to be no longer talk as we saw under Putin. It is fast producing results. Regional governors, especially the most entrenched (and corrupt) ones are being fired and replaced by younger technocrats associated with Medvedev’s “civiliki” group, with Luzhkov being just the latest example. There are plans to cut 20% of bureaucrats, replacing them with government e-services. The fast growth in the average bribe size is a positive sign: it indicates that the risk premium for giving and taking bribes is growing. So positive signs are present, we will have to see in the end exactly if these measures are beneficial, I have said many times, where Russia is now compared to 10 years ago deserves huge applause, now it is time to root the country of problems that are stopping it from having the standard of living seen in the west. I think the government understands the people will get restless the longer they take combating corruption

Back on the subject of Ukraine

To be fair I think Ukraine needs a stable government they need stability. What good is having two parties when both are useless. What Good is a the right to vote with no one to vote for in an election. At least the current government here in Russia has made great strides in the past decade, in some sectors they failed in many others they succeeded. Ukraine on the other hand turned into a basket case on a comedy on wheels. The population living below the poverty line in Ukraine is 35% as of 2009. It has steadily gotten worse since 2001 where it was at its lowest level of 29%. Compare this to Russia in 2000 being on 40% and today at 13%. I think the Ukrainian people deserve a government who can cut down on poverty and grow the small middle class. It might be wrong comparing Ukraine to Russia, but they should be compared as their is no reason why Ukrainians should live worse than Russians. The fact that the countries economy grew the slowest of all the developing FSU countries since the fall of the Soviet Union is atrocious. Considering it was one of the strongest during the Soviet Union.

 

No point going any further, we both agree Russia has corruption in its society which needs stamping out, my point is that some organizations have bias against Russia when reporting on it. I just believe that Putin is not as bad as you label him based on my life and experiences living in Russia and the transformation Russia has undergone in the past decade.

I think it is safe to say Russia is still going in a positive direction which is the main thing, not everything happens overnight. While there’s no denying Russia is plagued by corruption, to suggest it is endemic like in a failed state is ludicrous and would frankly be obvious to anyone who has visited the countries on that list. The problem with the the corruption perceptions index is that it’s a survey of outsider businesspeople and their subjective perception of the situation. As another example, Cameroon (2.4) is above Russia (2.3) in the CPI – however, some 79% of Cameroonians had to pay for a service in 2007, compared with 17% of Russians.

With regards to the Economist, many times they have been picked apart by various websites online and exposed, I still read it though

 

A situation entirely possible in, say, 50 years.

 

Disagree, although Russia's political system is corrupt, I would say Ukraine's is very incompetent compared to Russia. Russia has put in some good reforms which is another reason it made such enormous strides, I highly doubt the current parties in Ukraine would know what to do with the resources Russia has as witnessed by Ukraine falling behind Belarus in economic development when it should be the other way around.

In Russia natural resources contribution to real economic growth is minimal (especially with Russian oil production now largely stagnant). The main importance lies with natural resources’ contribution to the budget, which allows taxes to be held relatively low while still leaving a lot over for investment into infrastructure and the national economy.

That is the main thing many people fail to grasp.

Anyway lets move away from this as I feel we are all just recycling our previous posts and maybe discuss the coming Financial crisis around the world

Speaking of the current approaching crisis, it seems safe to say that practically all the developed world will get hammered. It also appears safe to say that China will power on (its financial system is largely independent of the global one, and collapsing foreign demand for its products can be compensated by massive government stimulus and monetary loosening). Russia is more of an either-or play. If 2008 withdrawal of credits repeats, so do the events of 2008. If instead investors flood into it away from the collapsing markets of the developed world, then it will perform relatively well. I am confident that Russia will be able to get through a crisis better then most countries since it is in better shape than most economies. Also the influx of “hot money” before 2008 though making the growth rate higher was causing inflation and damaging exports. That thankfully has stopped and is a plus compared to the situation then. But it has the potential to be hit hard in the immediate future.


The concern is that whilst oil and gas do not have a preponderant role in the whole economy oil and gas receipts account for a disproportionate share of the income the Russian government receives. When the Russian authorities talk about reducing dependence on oil and gas what they mean is that they want to diversify their tax base. The government does not want to increase taxes on the rest of the population or economy for fear of stifling growth but neither does it want to cut spending particularly on social programmes . At the same time for many good reasons the government does not want to run large deficits that it would have to cover by foreign borrowing, which because of Russia’s absurdly poor credit rating would anyway be extremely expensive. The Russian government has always intended to diversify its tax base by increasing the size of the rest of the economy so that it can carry the weight of more taxes. This was true when Putin was President and it is true now. The economic crisis of 2008/2009 has not changed this priority.