With the dispatch of Russian troops to Syria, Vladimir Putin has
opened ‘a second front’ against the West, one that is very different in its
methods and intentions than the first one in Ukraine that he continues to
pursue, according to Russian-American historian Yury Felshtinsky.
Ukraine, Putin has pursued “a ‘hybrid’ battle only in the sense that he has
been pursuing a double goals: first, to seize Ukraine and start the restoration
of ‘a Soviet Union’ or ‘a Russian Empire’ … and second, to show the entire
world that Russia has the right to territorial conquests … beyond the current
Russian borders).”
Russia’s actions are not “’hybrid’” in any sense. Rather, they are “a
continuation of the old Soviet policy which on the whole never changed” and
that may be better described as “schizophrenic,” that is, one that involved as
in the case of Israel supporting one country and then selling arms to that
country’s enemies.
in Syria … serve [those] same goals,” he argues. “It is important to Putin to
show Europe and the US that Russia has the right to use its forces far beyond
its borders if the interests of the state require this.” Putin thus considers
that he is “acting ‘exactly the same’ as the US has in Iraq.
sending troops to Syria, “Putin wants to show the world” that Russia has
“parity” relations with the US. At his upcoming speech at the United Nations,
Felshtinsky suggests, the Russian leader’s central message is thus going to be
that “Russia is permitted to do what the US is permitted to do.”
that speech, the Russian-American analyst says, “Putin will declare to the
entire world that the rules of the game have changed and that Russia must be
taken into account because it has an army and nuclear weapon and intends to use
in the resolution of its foreign policy tasks both the first and the second.”
Russian army, “the first foreign policy instrument,” has been used for some
time: in Chechnya, in Transdnistria, in Georgia, in Ukraine and now in Syria.
The second, nuclear weapons, “remains in reserve.” Putin and his entourage will
constantly remind the world of what could happen “if they push a rat into a
corner.’”
All this means, the analyst
says, that “the entire world now is concerned with yet another delicate mission:
how to get the rat out of the corner in which he has gone of his own volition
and does not want to leave although all the doors are open.”
“The optimists hope that
Putin will publicly declare at the UN about his coming out of the corner,”
Felshtinsky says, adding that he personally is not one of them and does not
expect anything good.”
The reason is simple:
“there are already consequences from the conduct of the military campaign in
Syria, and they are very serious” because “the entire world considers these
consequences catastrophic but Putin views them as positive.”
In the course of a very
brief time, “Russia has been transformed from a peaceful partner into a
militant opponent,” whose economy is no longer linked to the work market system
but is suffering because of the falling prices for oil.
“Putin,” Felshtinsky
argues, “consider this as the price for a new policy of Russia. Having devalued
the ruble, he has made all the citizens of the Russian Federation into fellow
participants of his foreign policy operations,” even though they have little or
no influence on his decisions and aren’t about going into the square to “demand
the overthrow of the Putin regime.”
— Paul Goble
Most of
those leaving Russia to live permanently abroad are scholars or entrepreneurs,
but among this flow now are some Russians typically view as committed to the
regime’s new patriotism. Their reasons constitute a searing indictment of both
the Kremlin and the Moscow Patriarchate.
most Russians and others unexpected phenomenon, the Lenta.ru news agency
publishes interviews by Vasily Chernov with three Russian Orthodox priests who
decided they could no longer live under the conditions of Vladimir Putin’s
Russia or of Patriarch Kirill’s church.
Father Andrey Markov, who became an Orthodox priest in 1992 but who
subsequently emigrated to the United States where he now lives. The two main
reasons were his disappointment in what had appeared the spiritual
possibilities of the early 1990s and the unwillingness of the clerical
hierarchy or his parish to help him with his son who suffers from Down’s
syndrome.
Andrey says, that “the Russian Orthodox Church did not need me as I am. What it
needed were triumphalists or people who invented triumphs. I wanted to save [my son], and I was told
that in the US there are effective programs for helping people with Down’s syndrome.
When I came to the US, I became convinced that this is the truth.”
Father Pavel Adelgeym organized in his church a home for children with mental
problems,” but when the church hierarchy took this congregation away from
Father Pavel because of his public condemnation of social problems, the
hierarchy immediately closed it down.
fact that all his close friends now are in America, he dreams of “living to
that moment when in our church something will change and [he] will be able to
return to Russia in order to serve God and people at home.” That will require a sea change in attitudes
within the church and within Russian society.
his hopes: “one cannot deceive either the people or oneself forever.”
Father Grigory Ryazanov, a Moscow State University graduate who has made a good
career in a regional center and even headed the missionary department of a
Russian Orthodox bishopric. But despite
that, he has filed his documents to emigrate.
was promoted by the previous bishop and does not get along with the new one,
retaining his status only because he is a Moscow State graduate who was willing
to come back to the provinces to work in the church rather than in private
business.
priests are thinking about leaving because that is “the only way to arrange life
for themselves and their children, not just in the material sense but in the
spiritual or church sense as well.” For anyone, there is a need for
independence and a good milieu: as a priest in Russia now, both are hard to
find.
order to make mistakes, take responsibility and correct them. But no less
important is the milieu in which one lives. “It is said that whatever a priest
is like, so too will be the congregation, but the reverse is true as well. If
you for years serve among people who need nothing except rituals, you yourself
begin to live that way.”
with regard to both of these, but the worst for priests is the lack of
independence, Father Grigory says. Faced with a situation in which everything
is decided for him, a priest may simply try to figure out how to form “a
financial parachute” that will allow him a soft landing if the hierarchs
change.
risk of going in that direction, something that would threaten his position as
a Christian and his status as a human being. “I understood,” Father Grigory tells
Chernov, “that sooner or later, I too would begin to degrade, and I did not
want that fate for myself.”
experience there are many Russian Orthodox priests who would like to emigrate
if they had the chance. Such people are usually supportive of those who do, but
other priests treat such actions as “treasonous” because they believe that the highest
virtue is to bow down to those above one in the chain of command.
continue to work as a priest. “The emigration which I plan,” he says, “is an
emigration not from holiness but in the name of holiness. I want to have the
chance to fulfill my calling as a priest to the best of my ability. This is the
main cause,” and a comfortable life abroad without it would be for him “nothing.”
Father Nikolay Karpenko who has emigrated but continues to serve in a church
belonging to the Moscow Patriarchate in Germany. Father Nikolay at first didn’t want to talk
with the Lenta.ru journalist, but he finally agreed and told the story of his
complicated life.
Nikolay became a priest in the early 1990s and felt the call to “serve God.” He trained as a priest and then was sent to a
rural parish, one without any money and one in which he had a great deal of
difficulty making ends meet for his wife and five children.
have time to think. There was too much to do, “but when the parents of [his]
wife, an ethnic German left for Germany, this thought came to [him] on its own.
It was something entirely natural” because he wanted to maintain ties between
his wife and children and her relatives.
Patriarchate had no interest in helping him maintain these connections. They
told him that his lot was to serve “’Holy Rus.’” But it was obvious that if he
did so, neither he nor his children would have any prospects for the
future. Father Nikolay finally walked
away from the church and fled to Germany.
boring, but after he came to Germany, he gained the opportunity to “serve
without any monetary concerns, from the soul and from the heart. What a joy!”
He says he has helped other Russian
Orthodox priests to resettle abroad and now sees his and their future only
there. His children are Germans, and as for himself, he “remains a Russian
priest, one of the many Russian priests who has no future in Russia.”
— Paul Goble