We should talk more about the Future rather than the Past

Angela Stent, participant of the upcoming meeting of the Valdai Discussion club, Director of the Center for Eurasian, Russian and East European Studies in the Georgetown School of Foreign Service, dwells on the influence of history on Russian future development in an interview for RIA Novosti.

Angela Stent, participant of the  upcoming  meeting of the Valdai Discussion club, Director of the Center for Eurasian, Russian and East European Studies in the Georgetown School of Foreign Service, dwells on the influence of history on Russian  future development in an interview for RIA Novosti.

What is the influence of history on Russia`s way of development?
 
Historians of Russia–both Russian and foreign–have for centuries argued amongst themselves about the persistent factors that have shaped Russia's evolution–those that appear to have predestined the Russian empire and its Soviet successor state toward centralized, authoritarian rule punctuated by brief periods of revolution followed again by long periods of authoritarian restoration.

There is a well-known historical canon: the Russian empire lacked natural frontiers, was vulnerable to invasion from all directions, and reacted to these geographic realities by expanding its rule in all directions. It was a multi-ethnic empire that could only deal with its unruly population by ruling with an iron fist from the center; it was a state that never experienced the Renaissance, the Reformation or the Enlightenment; it was an economically backward country with an inhospitable climate that could never catch up with its Western neighbors; it created a system where the ruling elite was divorced from society.

As with all historical orthodoxies, there is some truth to this characterization. But the narrative also oversimplifies Russian history and presents a caricature of a far more complex reality. Moreover, it seduces its readers into the myth of historical determinism. Russia, like all other countries, has evolved over time. It has undergone dramatic changes since 1991 and, in the globalized twenty-first century, is likely to experience more fundamental change. History and geography are not destiny.

Do you think that the nature of external threats to Russia is changed in the twenty-first century?

The traditional external threats that Russia faced for centuries are largely gone. Russia's western border is its most peaceful. Germany today is Russia's largest trade partner and one of its closest political partners. NATO does not threaten Russia and does not regard Russia as an antagonist. Indeed, it is constantly searching for ways in which to make the NATO-Russia Council more productive. NATO itself faces challenges in Afghanistan, and in trying to define its twenty-first century role. NATO enlargement is off the table for the foreseeable future.

As for Russia's Eastern border, Chinese-Russian relations are better today than they have ever been. While few can predict how China may evolve in the next decades, the way in which it uses its growing economic might will, to some extent, be determined by how its partners frame its future international role.

The major external threat to Russia today comes from the south, and it is the same threat that the United States and Europe face—international terrorism emanating from radical fundamentalist Islam. Indeed, Prime Minister Putin warned the West before 9/11 that it did not take this threat seriously enough. The threat has already had serious domestic consequences for Russia in the North Caucasus.  Russia and its foreign partners need to focus on greater international cooperation to combat terrorism and the resources that fuel it, including WMD proliferation and narcotics trafficking.

 
In your opinion, what is the difference today between the present state of Russia and the traditional Western concept of the country?

Today's Russia has evolved a long way from the traditional Russian state.  It is a major international economic player which is integrated into the global economy, as the leadership discovered when Russia was badly hit by the global financial crisis.  Russia is the only country that is both a member of the G-8 and a BRIC . Nevertheless, it faces major challenges because it remains a primary products exporter highly dependent on energy revenues for its economic growth. When the price of oil was $140 a barrel, Russian GDP growth rates were robust. If oil prices were to fall for a sustained period below $60, the situation will deteriorate. In order to address successfully the challenge of modernization, Russia needs a sustained policy of economic diversification, buttressed by the development of the rule of law, sound property rights and a rejection of the patterns of the traditional patrimonial state. In order for this to occur, the leadership will have to achieve a consensus that Russia must move beyond the prevailing system of political and economic patronage.

Public opinion polls in Russia suggest that the majority of the population would like to have a government that is more accountable to its people and less corrupt that they perceive their current officials to be. The word democracy means different things to different groups of people. Many Russians associate the 1990s, when they suffered from severe economic deprivation, with democracy and the rise of the oligarchs. However, one should beware of making any generalizations about whether "the Russian people" want democracy or whether they are
not interested in it. As can be seen with recent political activism in Russia, the rising middle class is interested in their property rights and combating corruption on all levels. This middle class may not demand Western-style democracy, but it will ultimately push for Russia to develop better governance along the lines of President Medvedev's proposals.

Why is the participation in Valdai Club discussions important for you?

The annual Valdai discussions in the past six years have provided a unique and invaluable window on Russia for foreign participants. Quite simply, no other government that I know of provides a similar opportunity for foreign experts to travel, interact with professional colleagues and spend hours with the top leadership. The discussions have often been frank and constructive.  The first part of the program, which involves travelling to different areas of the Russian Federation, has been highly educational, from Novgorod Velikii to Yakutia. Our discussions with Russian colleagues on these journeys have always been instructive. Meetings with top political and economic officials are very informative, sometimes spellbinding.

This year's theme– the roots of the concentration of power in Russia – is an important topic. However, I hope that the focus will be on the future, not on the past. It is too easy to focus on what appears to be historical determinism than to talk about how Russia has changed and will and could change. Over the years, our discussions have been enriched when diverse views on difficult topics are expressed. I hope this tradition will continue.