Putin's Appeasers

Source: The Wall Street Journal Europe

11 November 2004 11:41

Under the direction of Mr. Putin, Russia is well into its transition into an authoritarian state.

This week Russia indefinitely postponed a summit with the European Union that had been scheduled for this week. While the stated reason for the postponement was the lack of a new European Commision, in reality the Kremlin is angling to limit any criticism the EU might make of Russia on human-rights and democracy issues. Even the little interest shown by the West is unacceptable to Vladimir Putin.

Under the direction of Mr. Putin, Russia is well into its transition into an authoritarian state. The costs of this change for the Russian people and the world are high and getting higher. Not only are there real costs in security terms, but by failing to stand up for democratic values in Russia, the Bush administration gravely weakens its moral authority opens itself up to charges of hypocrisy as it tries to make the case for building democracy in the Middle East.

George W. Bush appears to be sincere in trying to follow the ideals set forth by John F. Kennedy in his inaugural address: "Let every nation know, whether it
wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, in order to assure the survival and the success of liberty." But Mr. Bush's approach has been inconsistent and regional when it must be global to be effective.

Kristallnacht was the predictable manifestation of years of a hate-mongering legislative agenda in Germany. Many European leaders turned a blind eye to Hitler's belligerence, naively hoping that he was a new Bismark who wanted only to unite a Greater Germany. This attitude was exemplified by Neville Chamberlain's remark that he could "do business" with Hitler, a comment that became his epitaph.

In May, 1941 Franklin Roosevelt answered the appeasers' propaganda of accommodation in one of his fireside chats: "Those same words have been used before in other countries -- to scare them, to divide them, to soften them up. Invariably, those same words have formed the advance guard of physical attack." FDR recognized that what Hitler was doing was more important than what he was saying (a gap that was shrinking by the day). From World War II to Saddam Hussein's invasion of Kuwait and the ethnic cleansing of Slobodan Milosevic, history is full of examples of the West ignoring signs of impending explosion. Likewise, in Russia it will not have been a sudden coup but a steady march to dictatorship. Mr. Putin has authorized an endless illegal war in Chechnya, taken
over the airwaves, jailed a prominent businessman who resisted the Kremlin's intimidation, and presided over rampant electoral fraud.

With that track record it should not shock that Mr.Putin is now eliminating direct gubernatorial elections and giving himself the power to dissolve local parliaments. There is also a pending amendment that will allow the Kremlin to exercise direct control over the appointment of judges across the country. For several years Russia has been a democracy in name only; now it will cease to be even that.

And yet the G-7 still plans to meet in Moscow in 2006, which will mean Russia's full integration into this once-respected institution. Such an endorsement will be worse than having the Olympic Games in Berlin in 1936. The West will give the stamp of democratic legitimacy to Russia, a country whose attorney-general recently proposed to the parliament that state security forces take the families of suspected terrorists hostage.

Perhaps the leaders of the U.S. and Europe simply don't care as long as Mr. Putin plays ball on trade and terror. Who cares if Russia is a dictatorship as long as it's one you can do business with? This "Chamberlain method" should not require further discrediting. Dictators play by their own rules and care only for their own interests.

Some say that Mr. Putin doesn't care what the West says. This is both cynical and false. The money of Mr. Putin's elite backers is held almost exclusively outside of Russia, so he has vested interests in Russia's relations with the West on a national and personal level. That doesn't mean someone who takes such audacious measures will be swayed by newspaper editorials. Unless Mr. Putin hears strong, unequivocal words from George W. Bush and other Western leaders, he won't respond. Mr. Putin lives in a world where only the No. 1 man is relevant.

Instead, we have heard only innocuous remarks about checks and balances and weakening institutions. The man is abolishing elections! Mr. Bush should not be fooled by Mr. Putin's pre-emptive words of support. If the American president truly wants to flex his new mandate, there could be no better goal than protecting
democracy in Russia.

Even if the Western democratic powers are unwilling to stand up for democracy on moral grounds, there is a clear security concern. The escalating terror attacks
in Russia show that authoritarianism has not improved security inside our borders. Nor is the world safer with a Russian dictator in place.

The language used by the current Kremlin regime has not been heard in Russia since Stalin. Official talk of foreign meddlers and fifth columnists will send chills down the spine of a any student of history. If this familiar train continues to run on schedule we can expect violent repression and purges next.

Under Boris Yeltsin, Russia had a weak and unstable democracy. It now has a weak and unstable dictatorship under Vladimir Putin. Those Western leaders who want to keep good relations with the Kremlin for motives of future influence are under the delusion that Putin's authoritarian ways mean his control of Russia is
stable. The tighter his control, the more the pressure builds, like a pot ready to boil over.

Despite sky-high oil prices, the Russian economy showed no growth in the third quarter of 2004. This stagnation is a further sign of corruption and a collapsing economy. The obedience of the Russian business and political circles should not be mistaken for loyalty. They are not loyal, they are afraid, and fear is not a basis for stability. These opportunistic elites will abandon Mr. Putin as quickly as they threw away their Communist Party cards in 1991. The consequences of Russian instability could be tragic. If that sounds like hyperbole in this age of many global dangers, just look at the anatomy of the recent terrorist attacks in Russia. In almost every case, they were accomplished with the aid of bribes to the security forces. We cannot afford to stick our heads in the sand and hope that those who protect Russia's nuclear materials are immune to such enticements. Mr. Putin is unwilling to accept the results of proper elections and is currently doing his best to spread this totalitarian virus to neighboring Ukraine. If there is a democratic transition of power in Ukraine it would serve as a model for Russia, the last thing Mr. Putin wants. Meanwhile, the U.S. is protesting the blatantly fraudulent elections in Belarus but is quiet about the same things happening in Russia.

Mr. Putin has become so brazen in the face of Western apathy that he has done away with covering his tracks or disguising his plans. It is now clear that he will
not step down voluntarily. When his regime ends it will end in bloodshed. Western leaders are hoping that their successors will be stuck with the bill. How much
are we willing to pay?