While the latest VTsIOM numbers demonstrate the continued collapse of Russian liberal parties, it seems that their not the only ones with a “dark cloud” hovering over their heads. Political winds appear to be pushing Vladimir Zhirinovsky’s Liberal Democratic Party into the rocks. As the Moscow Times summarizes:
One of its billionaire benefactors has jumped ship, while a second has disappeared and is wanted by the Prosecutor General’s Office, analysts say. In addition, Zhirinovsky’s right-hand man has left, and Alexei Mitrofanov, the party’s second most prominent member, announced last week that he was moving to A Just Russia, a pro-Kremlin party.
Still, Zhiri’s fervent nationalistic banter is expected to garner enough votes with among its mostly under 35 male demographic to slip into the State Duma. Plus even without billionaire backing, the LDPR has enough cash to last through the election cycle. This might prolong the LDPR’s collapse a little while longer. Plus ever a political showman, Zhirinovsky will certainly not disappoint when backed against the wall. While his party may soon be on its last electoral leg, I’m sure Zhiri will be around a long time hocking his brand of political buffoonery.
Even worse for the LDPR, the loss of Mitrofanov means the loss of TaTu!
Wait a second… isn’t the LDPR a pro-Kremlin party anyway? They vote with the Kremlin 9 times out of 9.1.
(Also, I wish people would quit lumping Yabloko in with SPS as “liberal” parties. SPS is hard “neoliberal,” and Yabloko would be called the Socialist Party if it existed anywhere in Western Europe. At least a few years ago when I was more or less watching such things, Yabloko voted with the KPRF more than it did with SPS.)
In addition to getting Mitrofanov from the LDPR, Just Russia has Narochnitskaya from the former Rodina. Add Rogozin to JR and that party’s star rises even more.
BTW, it’s generally understood by those in the know that Rogo is less extreme than Zhirik. Yet, as Rodina head, Rogo’s voting record wasn’t as close to UR when compared to Zhirik’s.
On a distant matter, Global Voices seems to do a good deal of propping for Paul Goble. He recently suggested different nations in Russia, while claiming that Ukraine is more of a cohesive national unit. Now, he bashes the ROC by citing what some in that church say about intermarriage. Meantime, you can easily find rabbis and Catholic priests who aren’t happy when their respective congregants marry out of faith as well. Leave it to Goble to spin a certain line, as the opposing view is comparatively muted.
Not helping the situation are some of the court appointed Russia friendlys. As long as they get theirs. **** a better product.
Zhirinovski is like Lukashenko. Yes, in general they are allies of the Kremlin, but they’re just maverick enough to cause problems now and then. During the process of consolidation of power, it was necessary to have such allies. Now that the process is more or less complete, better to do away with such people in favor of more reliable lackeys.
Positing the SPS against Yabloko makes sense from a traditional Western understanding of the Left/Right divide, but that divide isn’t valid in Russia. In the West there is a fundamental agreement across the political spectrum about the free market and Human Rights. There is no such agreement in Russia. SPS and Ya are lumped together precisely because of these values.
I don’t agree on the latter bit. All political parties in Russia of any significance have human rights and a market economy on their platform. The KPRF’s documents go on about support to small business and so on.
“Zhirinovski is like Lukashenko. Yes, in general they are allies of the Kremlin, but they’re just maverick enough to cause problems now and then. During the process of consolidation of power, it was necessary to have such allies. Now that the process is more or less complete, better to do away with such people in favor of more reliable lackeys.”
****
A major and obvious difference being that Lukashenko is a head of state with a significant enough of a popularity in Belarus, regardless of what one might think of his overall governance.
How does Russia “do away” with him without being accused of meddling? Is that task so simple?
Yeah, it is kind of funny how the population of Belarus gets elided from these discussions.
I’ve distant relations there and know a Blue thinking Uke from Kharkov and another from Kiev.
Besides thdm, there’s a great former Soviet consensus that Belarus scores relatively well in a number of quality of life factors when compared to other CIS members including Russia and Ukraine.
Belarus doesn’t have the potential of the last mentioned two. It certainly has nothing resembling Moscow. On the whole, it’s not doing so bad.
It’s simplistic to say that it’s because of Russian aid. Aid still has to be managed. As a case in point: the post Soviet Kravchuk years in Ukraine saw an influx of Russian and western aid to a Ukraine that remained impoverished.
This leads to why post Soviet Russia has been a tame player on the international stage.
No Grenada 1983 type invasions or overthrow of Noriega like actions in its near abroad.
Instead, Russia gets castigated for using its economy as a political weapon.
Meantime, it’s okay for the EU to essentially tell Serbia that Kosovo must become independent if Belgrade is to achiecve membership in that org. Not much Western opposition when Orange Ukraine and Moldova put a squeaze on Pridnestrovie. There’s also the ongoing American embargo on Cuba.
I think a lot of the hostility toward Lukashenko (and by extension, giving his popularity, to the Belorusian people) is becaue people in the West, at least the chattering classes, are personally offended because he (and the majority of the Belorusian people) have rejected the chattering classes’ worldview. Given that they have managed to rework “liberal values” into something of a religion and themselves as it collective Pope, this smacks of heresy.
Regarding Belarus, some sites offering a different view from what’s typically found in Eng. lang. mass media (I’m not saying to accept everything at these sites):
http://www.rusjournal.com
http://www.bhhrg.org
http://www.belarusembassy.org/
As I noted in a recent segment of a “spam” project:
Aired in the US on Saturday morning (New York time), Aug. 25, the BBC had a feature on Belarusians visiting Lithuania. As uncritically stated in the BBC segment, Lithuania has an official policy of allowing Belarusians to visit their Baltic republic for the purpose of “promoting democracy” in Belarus. Due to European Union guidelines, Lithuania might have to significantly increase the transfer fee which upsets the Lithuanian government and those Belarusians seeking to visit Lithuania.
Is “promoting democracy” the primary motivating factor? As per the BBC segment, no mention was made of the Belarusian government restricting such travel and-or Belarusians declaring political asylum once in Lithuania. Those aspects apparently don’t exist.
In reality, this story has more to do with Belarusians traveling to Lithuania to buy goods not available in their country. It’s also about Lithuania enhancing its commerce with such purchases. How fundamentally different is this from people of less wealthier American neighborhoods visiting more wealthier ones, for the purpose of purchasing any number of items unavailable in their own towns? Points that seem to be somewhat downplayed in the BBC segment.
Undoubtedly, there’re fundamental human rights issues in Belarus. Just how great are they? Among former Soviets (Russian and non-Russian alike), one gets word of Belarus having such claimed positives as better all around living conditions than other CIS member states and a Belarusian armed forces that’s comparatively not as prone to hazing issues.
A more direct link to one of the mentioned sites:
http://www.bhhrg.org/CountryReport.asp?CountryID=4
Once again, I’m not saying to buy everything at those sites and I’m sure as shit ready to tangle with anyone saying that any or all of those venues should be dismissed outright.
Not when La Russophobe and Limonov (among some others) are considered worthy for JRL posting.
Limonov is a famous writer. He’s always suitable for posting.
Always? If so and regardless, there’re others as well.
Especially when compared to some (stress some) of the regulars.
Like the fellow who absurdly portrayed Russia Profile as a slanted rubber stamp for the Russian government.
Or the anti-Tiraspol Times posted gibberish that has no legitimacy whatsoever.
Let’s see the “navigator” away from a softball Moscow News like interview environment.
Is the Navigator still out in space doing battle with aliens? He must be in his 30s by now.
Seriously, how is anybody “promoting” Limonov in the English-speaking world? He hasn’t had a book translated that was written after around 1980 (Дневник неудачника being the last one I think). And he writes a lot of books. I have at least five. Pelevin has more exposure.
Wait, upon reflection, John Dolan did translate part of A Young Scoundrel. OK, but that’s part of one book published by an obscure university press.
As a matter of fact, I would say that Western publications with anti-Russia agendas such as the Washington Post try to call as little attention to Limonov as possible.
Well, others would say that Limonov isn’t so pro-Russian given his not so friendly views of Putin (Russia’s popular president), support for Orange forces in Ukraine, willingness to politically embrace the likes of Kasparov and rather unappreciative attitude towards Russia prior to the USSR.
How about Ivashov? Granted, Eng. lang. translations like his most recent at http://fondsk.ru are somewhat problematical. Keep in mind Limonov’s own use of the Eng. lang. There’re others as well (personal foibles aside: Roy).
The latter’s (in parenthesis) Eng. is perfectly acceptable enough despite instances like his writing “Straus’s” as opposed to “Straus’”.
I should hope so. He was a professional translator. Translated Pasternak in fact.
He’s no doubt a better translator than editor.