The Future of Russia

[ECOELT@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]

     On March 23, 1994, the Associated Press/Harriman Institute Conference
on "The Future of Russia" was held at Columbia University. In the first
panel, participants, including JackMatlock, former Ambassador to the USSR,
wrestled with the question of whether Yeltsin was a democrat and whether
Zhirinovsky was a threat. The consensus seemed to be that Yeltsin was a
"terribly confused man" who was fading as Chernomyrdin's star was rising.
Yeltsin's need for vacations was occurring more frequently, which created
concern for his health. Yeltsin was interested in democratic results, but
had little interest in democratic processes. Two-thirds of the new Duma
regretted the collapse of the former Soviet Union (FSU). The votes for
Zhirinovsky was a reflection of this regret but as a personality he was
not taken seriously by the experts. Rutskoi was described as being a
General with the brains of a sergeant.
	My own feeling is that the Zhirinovsky threat has been exaggerated
in the West and in Eastern Europe outside the FSU. He is clearly a racist,
but not necessarily a fascist. In fact, fascism is probably more unlikely in
the FSU than anywhere else in the world (because of their plundering by the Nazis during World War II).  At the same time, there is a backlash against the market all over Eastern Europe, as illustrated by the Wall Street Journal article
by Adi Ignatius (March 21, 1994, p. 1) reporting from Ulyanovsk. "The
Ulyanovsk miracle once was dismissed as a bizarre aberration in increasingly
market-oriented Russia.  But after two years of economic reforms that
produced few gains for most of the country, delegations from other Russian
provinces now are flocking to Ulyanovsk to see whether Russia's past is also
its future."
	The second panel dealt with the relations between Moscow and the
successor states and so-called "imperialistic tendencies" on the part of
Russia.  One of the more pessimistic discussants was Alexander Motyl,
Associate Director of the Institute. Motyl was of the opinion that even
Russia was subject to disintegration because of the minority nationality
problems within the Russian Federation. An active moderator was Marshall
Shulman, former Director of the Institute. Most of the participants felt
that there semed to be a revival of Russian imperialism. Even Marshall
Shulman's "friend," Alexander Kozyrev, was criticized for his recent
statements on Russian interest in the human rights of 25 million Russians
living in the "near abroad."
	My own feeling is that the participants have overlooked the fact
that all of the new states which were formerly partof the FSU have poorer
recent economic records than Russia.  This was to be expected because of
the former subsidization (primarily through cheap energy) by the Russian
Republic. Thus, the moves back to closer relations with Russian (such
as Belorus's return to the ruble bloc) are initiatives on the part of
the floundering former minority Republics of the FSU, rather than
manifestations of Russian imperialism.  The Georgians are great dancers
but they have failed political democracy with the result that they are
now begging for Russian assistance in restoring Georgian sovereignty
over the Abkasians. Russian peace-enforcing also seems to be working
in Moldavia, Azerbaijan, Armenia and Tadjikistan.
	In the afternoon Padma Desai commented favorably on the IMF
loan of $1.5 billion accounced today.  She is pro-Chernomyrdin and anti-
shock therapy. According to Desai, market socialism doesn't work,
as exemplified by Hungary's evolutionary approach after 1968.  Neela
Banerjee of the WSJ seemed to echo Jeffrey Sachs. "We pretend to give
them aid and they pretend to have reforms." She admitted that Russians
are severely steeped in nostalgia. Jenik Radon, a lawyer who has worked
with the Estonians, reflected a business-like approach to the transition
problems. He pictured Estonia as an example of shock therapy working
(despite a continued decline in industrial production). Their trade
with the CIS countries now accounts for only 25 percent of the total.
Their currency is tied to the Deutschemark and they take advise from
the Bundesbank.  They have close relations with Finland (which now
has the highest unemployment rate in Europe, outside Spain), have
rejected Swedish advice as "too socialist." He claims that Estonian
unemployment is somewhere between 2 percent and 8 percent, if you
include disguised unemployment.  Many of their leaders are now in
their 30s,with a 33-year old Prime Minister. Lynn Turgeon ECOELT@
VACB.Hofstra.edu