When in the middle and at the end of 1990-ies I worked in the Moscow Bureau chief of the now defunct WorldWide Television News (owned by and sold by network ABC New every week due to “business differences” have killed at least one “foreign” businessman. This is not always been a European and American businessmen often such a fate befalls entrepreneurs of the newly independent former Soviet republics. One of the victims was my friend and colleague Tamaz Georgian by nationality, who was shot dead in the stairwell of his home in Moscow after just a few days after he signed a contract with the Western company against the wishes of their Russian partners.
It became a symbol of the disintegration of the once tightly controlled society is in chaos after the collapse of the Central government. Boris Yeltsin, who at that time held the post of President, was a brave man, a champion of freedom of speech and freedom of the press, a fierce opponent of communism. But he was an extremely poor leader. The situation was further complicated by his rapidly deteriorating health, which did not inspire the Russians have no confidence in the future. Critics at the time argued that Russia is “on my knees”.
The rapid rise to power
At this moment appeared Vladimir Putin, a favorite of Yeltsin’s, an unknown KGB officer, who arrived from St. Petersburg and Yeltsin appointed first Deputy head of the presidential administration (1997), Prime Minister (1999), and then acting President when the New year’s eve, Boris Yeltsin, went into early retirement. In March 2000 Putin was elected President, winning a decisive victory over their rivals.
One of the first steps of Putin after taking office as President in 2000 was the limitation of the freedom of action of the Russian oligarchs. The most famous examples are Mikhail Khodorkovsky and the late Boris Berezovsky. Meanwhile, the number of murders related to the business, plummeted. Western analysts and media to explain the subsequent increase in the number of political assassinations — at least partly — with the Kremlin’s policy: a member of the party “Liberal Russia” Sergey Yushenkov (2003), chief editor of the Russian edition of Forbes, Paul Klebnikov (2004), the journalist Anna Politkovskaya (2006), former intelligence officer Alexander Litvinenko (2006)…
“Putin is a Soviet person. He’s tough, undemocratic, but it is not > even close to it”, — said Vladimir Posner, an influential journalist, author and presenter of a weekly program on the Russian “channel 1”, which he describes as “a mix of Charlie rose and the program Hard Talk on the BBC”.
But the track record Posner is not so limited. He’s “the insider”, a kind of chronicler of the history of Russia from the cold war to the present day. When I worked in Moscow, and our journey with him crossed a few times in the 1980s and early 1990s. He even gave me an interview via Skype.
Posner is the son of a Frenchwoman and a Russian Jew, suspected of espionage by the us government — who is now 82 years old, remembers that his career began in 1958, after graduating from Moscow state University and in the position of “so-called journalist” in the Department of disinformation of the KGB. Then he changed ideologically painted several editorial positions and was in the wording of the radio broadcasting in the United States and England on radio station “Voice of Moscow”. In 1979, long before Gorbachev and glasnost, Pozner regularly appeared on American TV channels such as KABC in Los Angeles and the DIA. From 1991 to 1996, Pozner lived in the United States, received a us passport (which so far he has) and even hosted a talk show on TV with Phil Donahue (Phil Donahue), which was broadcast in the evenings on CNBC. (“Roger Ailes (Roger Ailes) closed it”, — says Posner.) For contribution to the development of television in the United States, Posner was awarded three awards “Emmy”.
The authority and the position of Posner as browser may have changed in modern-Soviet Russia — it is sometimes called Pro-Western and anti-Putin liberal, but he is among the authorities, and he often meets with the President of Russia.
So, what can we say about Putin, about his power, about how he got it and keeps.
“Putin — the representative of a Messianic type leader,” says Posner. — He is a patriot, he cares about Russia as it sees fit. He believes that he cares more about Russia than all the rest”. Putin’s approval rating of 80% indicates that the Russians also think so. Despite the sanctions and the decline in living standards, Putin gave his followers the fact that, from their point of view, much more important. “He appeals to their sense of pride,” explains Posner. He was restored to Russia, again, has made her an influential force in the international arena. Now he wants Russia were considered — especially the United States.”
Consolidation of power
15 years of Putin’s rule was a period of consolidation of power, culminating in “retirement” longtime friend and — since 2011 — head of the presidential administration Sergei Ivanov, which took place this summer. Ivanov was also a KGB officer, where he occupied a higher post than Putin, ” says Posner. — I think that the relationship between them is now quite similar to what it was before. It is now clear that Ivanov will not become the Prime Minister or the next President of Russia”. His successor, former aide to Ivanov, 44-year-old diplomat Anton Vaino — much less experienced and, apparently, much more accommodating, as evidenced by Posner and many in the media.
The impression is that today Putin exists in a kind of bubble of harmony and unanimity. “His closest associates are either people with whom he worked in Leningrad, or those who are not ready to confront him. He makes clear that he does not intend to share power,” continued Posner. Meanwhile, this situation hampers the diversification of the economy — it is no secret that Putin himself supports it. But financial power is a bridge for the transition in political power. Meanwhile, although Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and annexation of Crimea can be seen as an example of sabre-rattling from Russia (“Russia considers the likelihood of NATO troops from Ukraine and the us Navy in the Crimea as an existential threat, which the United States believed the Soviet missiles in Cuba,” he says), Posner believes that Putin is not planning to seize power in one of the Baltic States. “This makes no sense at all. It will be an attack on a NATO member — why would he do that?”
However, this line of thought was not convinced by NATO to abandon plans to deploy the deterrent forces of the Russian borders — Russian leaders were convinced that they should not be expected. In January, Putin himself said in an interview with German newspaper Bild, that in 1990 the then NATO Secretary General Manfred Werner (Manfred Woerner) assured Russia that the Alliance would not expand eastward after the fall of the Berlin wall, because it will split Europe and isolate Russia. According to Putin, Russia was too busy with its internal problems resulting from the collapse of the Soviet Union to defend their interests in disputes with NATO.
According to Posner, the same internal problems prevented the country to ask the US for financial assistance in the early 1990-ies when she was going through a particularly difficult period. “The United States might launch a sort of Marshall plan that was proposed at the end of the Second world war,” he says. They could provide financial assistance, while controlling the process of spending this money and to speed up the democratic development of Russia. In this case, today Russia would be a completely different country. Instead, Washington said, “You threatened us for 40 years, and now you have to pay for it, so just shut up and accept the accession of new members to NATO”.
Meanwhile, the agreement between the United States and Russia on truce in Syria, concluded in mid-September, despite the objections of Washington while working. However, if it helps the Russian leader to get a place at the table world leaders, remains unclear. Perhaps this will require much more time and change of generations. “Today Russia is a new country ruled by the old generation from another world entirely. People who will bring real change until the last 20 years,” notes Posner.
Elections and relations with foreign States
In September, Russia held parliamentary elections, but no major changes are expected, according to the consulting firm Teneo Intelligence, whose analyst Thant Otilia (Otilia Dhand) wrote recently: “most Likely, in Parliament will be a few new faces, but the dominant position in the Duma will retain the Pro-Kremlin party. Moreover, significant changes in higher economic leadership is also unlikely. Although this situation contributes to the continuity of policy after the election, no improvement in the predictions of structural reforms is not expected. This analysis, however, did not prevent the Standard & Poor’s to raise its forecast for Russia in 2017 from “negative” to “stable”. “Sanctions,” says Posner, is likely to simply fade away”.
In part, the future role of Putin in the international arena will depend on who wins the elections in the USA. Putin himself has not commented on the issue, but analysts such as Alexander Baunov of the Carnegie Moscow center, believe that Hillary Clinton — thanks to her vast experience in politics — will be the right partner to Putin, who is expected to run for another six-year term. According to widespread in Moscow opinion, these two leaders are with each other with extreme wariness. “I am afraid, — says Posner, that there is no trust nor from the US nor from Russia. We will have to return to the principle in 1988, which guided Ronald Reagan and Mikhail Gorbachev: trust, but verify”.
