The Kremlin and the Ukrainian question

The decision of the American edition Forbes to call the Russian President Vladimir Putin the world’s most influential person aroused indignation in several countries. In particular, the British newspaper The Guardian published an article called “Putin is rather a mediocrity than a macho.” According to The Guardian, Forbes is destined to promote free individual entrepreneurship and not to admire Putin because the latter, as the edition wrote, “solidified his control over Russia.” If the power is considered as authoritarianism, then Kim Jong-un should be number one in this list, they mocked. At the same time it is surprising that Hillary Clinton, the State Secretary of the US, who is very likely to become the next American president, was not included into the list.

It should be noted that Forbes immediately reacted to this criticism. The owner of the edition wrote an article in which he explained that “the criticism of Forbes dropping Barack Obama to the number two spot behind Vladimir Putin as the most powerful man in the world misses two big points.”

“One is confusing the power of the US with the power of our president. The US is many times larger economically and militarily than Russia. There’s no disputing that. Our survey was a ranking of people, not countries or companies. The second and far bigger point is that Barack Obama is weak internationally by choice. At home he’s amassing immense, unprecedented powers over the economy. If Congress won’t pass one of his desired pieces of legislation, he’ll try to achieve his ends through decrees, a.k.a. executive orders, or unprecedented and sweeping regulatory rulings.”

The Day addressed the leading scientist of Carnegie Center in Moscow Lilia SHEVTSOVA asking her to comment on the decision of Forbes and how this assessment might influence the actions of the Russian president.

“PERSONAL INFLUENCE ASSESSMENT SYSTEM AND EVENTS INFLUENCE ASSESSMENT SYSTEM IS BEING DISTORTED”

“Certainly, calling Putin the most influential politician of the world is taken as a joke made by the people without any sense of humor. Probably, this way Forbes tried to make a joke. However, if the edition and Steve Forbes took it seriously, we can acknowledge quite an obvious tendency: the complete devaluation of the criteria system for assessing the influence of the world politicians. This devaluation or degradation of the criteria system and assessment criteria in general displayed not only in Forbes rating, but even in the activity of such important international institutions as the Nobel Prize Committee. Say, when the Committee gave Obama the Peace Prize it was taken as a certain advance, but the world was stunned: why was Obama given the prize? When the Nobel Prize Committee gave the award to the European Union it also provoked certain bewilderment as well as the case when the Nobel Prize was awarded to a completely unknown organization fighting against chemical weapons. Actually, the whole system of personality influence assessment and events assessment is being distorted which is the evidence of the world political quarters being disoriented. Tellingly, this is happening when the world and liberal democracies are in crisis. That is why when the most developed society is in crisis, the assessment system, the world view, the assessment of what is important and what is not, what is influential and what is not is becoming absolutely unclear or starts seeming absurd. Forbes’ assessment of Putin’s influence and his role reflects this global paradox when the world lost its ability to soberly and adequately look at people and events which is a quality of crisis thinking. That is why when we say that Putin is the most influential person, the question is: compared to whom? Compared to Obama? Even if, according to Forbes, Obama is not an efficient leader, his inefficiency does not mean that Putin is efficient and influential.

“What does Putin influence? He cannot influence the development of his own country that is in stagnation and even degradation in some spheres. If Putin cannot efficiently govern Russia, how can he be the world’s most influential politician? Only because Putin pulled Obama and western leaders through the unpleasant situation with Syria? However, the fact that he saved Obama’s reputation does not make him the most influential or influential at all. In this case there is an inadequate, absurd and even provocative assessment which might be the result of Forbes’ political preferences: let’s put Putin at the first place and maybe we will give Obama a thick ear. Maybe, this is the Republicans’ attempt to humiliate President Obama they hate and have been fighting with for so many years.

“The inadequate assessment of such personality as Putin might generate his inadequate self-assessment or inadequate actions. The exaggeration of Putin’s influence might provoke him and the Kremlin to pursue inadequate policy in Russia and beyond its borders.”

THE EXAGGERATION OF PUTIN’S INFLUENCE MIGHT PROVOKE HIS INADEQUATE POLICY

So, how might the most influential person of 2013 demonstrate his influence?

“He might do it with the Russian society by neglecting its interests and requests. He might demonstrate it by deciding other countries’ destiny. Here is a test for the degree of Putin’s influence: will he impede Ukraine’s movement to Europe or he won’t. This is the most direct test for Putin’s influence. If he is so influential or even superinfluential in the world, to what extent will he try to influence Ukraine? It is rhetorical question.”

It is well-known that just before the summit in Bucharest of 2008 Putin went to Berlin and persuaded Merkel not to give MAP to Ukraine. Will he be able to do it now?

“I think the Ukrainian question will be influenced by three factors. Firstly, the split of the West and the absence of interest to anything except its own problems. Secondly, the absence of America’s mobilizing lobby role played by George Bush Junior during the Bucharest Summit that Obama is not going to play in interests of Europe or Ukraine. Thirdly, the behavior of the Ukrainian elite and Yanukovych regarding Tymoshenko question. These factors are the key ones. However, as we know, over the past several months, starting with the trade war between Russia and Ukraine, the Russian authorities have been doing their best to support Yanukovych in his desire not to become Ukrainian Lukashenko. I leave open the possibility that the recent actions of the Russian authorities who stop trucks at the border and demand pre-payment for the gas might help Yanukovych to decide that it is better to be on the European orbit than another Lukashenko under the rule of Vladimir the Tsar.”