One year Medvedev

This May is the anniversary of Medvedev’s first year presidency. A moment for political analysts to evaluate his actions. Maria Ordzhonikidze, Secretary General of the EU-Russia centre, presented “Expectations of Russian President Dmitry Medvedev” on the 6th of May in Brussels. An interview about how far he has realized his presidential campaign promises, his policy towards the EU and how he copes with the changed economic climate.
The EU-Russia Centre is an independent information and expertise resource. It seeks to promote closer ties between the EU and Russia, to develop ideas about the future of the relationship, and to ensure that both sides adhere to international standards concerning the key elements of a civil society such as democracy, civil liberties and an independent judiciary. Maria Ordzhonikidze is one of its founders.
 
One of the main campaign promises of Medvedev was the fight against corruption. Did he succeed in it after one year of his presidency? And what are the visible results of his efforts? 
So far there has been a few positive, but very minor steps. One of them is that the chief justice Lyudmila Maikova of the Moscow District Arbitration Court has been dismissed following corruption investigation.. The investigation started far before Medvedev came to power, but he made the decision to fire Ms. Maikova. On the other hand, a person who took her place is Vareria Adamova, who studied together with Mr. Medvedev in St. Petersburg University. 
In Russia any systematic fight with corruption is a very challenging and complicated initiative. The unfortunate truth is that currently in our country corruption is the only social institution that functions. Therefore, many Russians are forced to turn to corruption when they need to resolve any kind of issue involving state bureaucracy. In Russia state official is a king – the European concept of “public servant” is very alien to the Russians. Almost every decision that one expects a state officer to make that would result in some kind of material benefit to the applicant (like putting one’s child at state-owned nursery, gathering paperwork for property ownership, dealing with numerous state controllers, or many others) can be made arbitrarily, and there is no remedy against it in the form of independent judiciary system. Therefore, if you want to fight against corruption, you have to present and introduce a solid alternative to it. Reanimation of social institutions and independent judiciaryis necessary to make sure that people regain trust in them and they become sustainable . So far there has been no systematic approach. But even minor steps are still better than nothing. 
Russian media cover many suppositions about the Putin-Medvedev tandem. Reschedule elections that should result in a comeback of Putin. Unite Belarus with Russia and put Putin in power. What is a likely scenario according to you?
As there are already many speculations in Russian media, we do not have to repeat them. The problem with trying to analyze Russian politics is that there is no such thing in Russia as public politics. And that is something that distinguishes Russia from other European countries. There is no political analyst who would know what to expect at any given moment. Experts can speculate on the basis of some developments that are already happening, rather than on the basis of public discussions in the media, conferences, parliament, etc. For the majority of experts, there is not enough information to make an educated guess about what is going to happen. Many compare the way politics is being conducted now in Russian to a KGB special operation, i.e. completely closed from the outside world and mainly unexpected by it. There probably is a very small group of people who know what the plans are for the nearest future, however, even if there are one or many different scenarios, they are all completely not transparent for the outside world. Many political analysts in Russia to whom I talk do not expect any major dramatic change happening unless there is an economic challenge. I would say Russia is too tired of all those changes. The way the system works right now seems quite sustainable to me. 
Some political scientists approve the actions of Medvedev during the Georgian-Ossetian conflict. But considering the international resonance, do you think his actions were justified?
I should mention from the beginning that it is not a subject that EU-Russia Centre deals with, so I am not an expert in this matter at all. It seems to many that Mr. Medvedev acted according to a plan, which was designed with or without his participation, because he was quite new in office at that time. The Georgian situation is not something that just happened in August 2008. It has been developing for some time, since the collapse of the Soviet Union. A lot of contradictions have surrounded the way the territories were distributed, and there was an ongoing criticism within Russia in regard to the fact that Abkhazia and South Ossetia had become part of Georgia then. Russia had been preparing to tackle this issue when the time was right, so it finally did. 
My general comment is that I am against any war, especially in the 21st century. I think it could have been resolved without victims and without military intervention. The information from both Georgia and Russia has been very charged, both parties have been emotional about the issue, so they could not find any compromise. In this respect, interference of the EU and the fact that military actions were stopped, is undeniably positive.
In the context of its foreign policy, especially in the Georgian conflict, what should Russia do to improve its image in the European media?
The question of image is more complicated then just working on improving the image. Image is a projection of your essence. To project a better image one has to work on one’s essence as well. The Russian challenge would be to look objectively at the perception problem and analyze what the most problematic areas are from the perspective of the international media and experts. The number of issues that constantly spark international criticism and thus continue to damage Russia’s image overall, is not huge. In fact, vast majority of them is reflected in our recent expert survey http://www.eu-russiacentre.org/survey_results/
So if the Russian government is willing and able to employ a non-emotional, constructive approach, they are well positioned to devise a strategy of introducing consistent and systematic improvement in these areas and communicating this positive change externally.  
During the week of summits in Europe Medvedev came up with pretty brave initiatives, such as the creation of a new security system that would cover the whole Eurasian territory and a new reserve currency. How far do those statements match with the international policy of Putin as ex-president?
Recently, Russian approach to foreign policy is seen by many as an attempt to distinguish itself from other actors and present alternative solutions to those that seem to have recently lost their effectiveness. I tend to think this is a positive thing, as Russia tries to engage within the international community rather then to follow the Soviet example of contradicting everything that exists. According to international experts, some proposals of Medvedev were not treated seriously by the EU-counterparts mainly because they were not perceived to be realistic. So while it is generally positive when Russia tries to engage with other international actors, at the same time the Russian Foreign Office has to be more substantial and more systematic in preparing those proposals. It should try to make them more appealing for the international community. 
Summarizing Maria Ordzhonikidze’s words, it seems too early to make any conclusion about whether President Medvedev has his own political vision for Russias future, partly because the decision making process in this area is still not transparent for the general public. Centuries before Medvedev, before Tsar Peter the Great, Russians celebrated their new year in autumn, when they got their harvest and could enjoy the results of their hard labor. Coming autumn will be a sort of old fashion new year for Russians when economic challenges will bring it’s “harvest”. Maybe that will be a more appropriate time to measure the capacities of the president and to analyze the Kremlins’ policy in figured by Medvedev.  

Maak MO* mee mogelijk.

Word proMO* net als 2790   andere lezers en maak MO* mee mogelijk. Zo blijven al onze verhalen gratis online beschikbaar voor iédereen.

Ik word proMO*    Ik doe liever een gift

Met de steun van

 2790  

Onze leden

11.11.1111.11.11 Search <em>for</em> Common GroundSearch for Common Ground Broederlijk delenBroederlijk Delen Rikolto (Vredeseilanden)Rikolto ZebrastraatZebrastraat Fair Trade BelgiumFairtrade Belgium 
MemisaMemisa Plan BelgiePlan WSM (Wereldsolidariteit)WSM Oxfam BelgiëOxfam België  Handicap InternationalHandicap International Artsen Zonder VakantieArtsen Zonder Vakantie FosFOS
 UnicefUnicef  Dokters van de WereldDokters van de wereld Caritas VlaanderenCaritas Vlaanderen

© Wereldmediahuis vzw — 2024.

De Vlaamse overheid is niet verantwoordelijk voor de inhoud van deze website.