Stats
-
-
May
28
Blackening the White Paper
May 28, 2008 |
My new eXile article, Nemtsov’s White Paper: Bombshell or Dud?, is now online. Here is an excerpt:
Lilia Shevtsova, a fellow at Moscow’s Carnegie Center, called it a “bomb, which anywhere but in Russia would cause the country to collapse.” Writing in the New York Review of Books, Amy Knight called it “a devastating picture of Putin’s eight years in the Kremlin.” In the Daily Mail, Jonathan Dimbleby declared that if such information was released about Britain, it “would certainly have provoked mass outrage, urgent official inquiries and a major police investigation - if not the downfall of the government.”
What, pray tell, is this devastating toppler of governments? Why, it’s Boris Nemtsov and Vladimir Milov’s Putin -The Results: An Independent Expert Report (2008).
Russia watchers might have already heard about the liberal dynamic duo’s breakdown of Russia after eight years of Putin. If you’ve never heard of them, Boris Nemtsov is the one-time “young reformer” deputy prime minister who used to make Western journalists and IMF officials swoon, while Milov is a former deputy oil and gas minister during Putin’s first term; both Nemtsov and Milov served Putin early on, and both eventually fell out of favor.
Their book’s back story involved political infighting, intrigue, and apparently produced a “hysterical reaction” in the Kremlin. Nemtsov and Milov’s account was said to be such a political bomb that Nemtsov was compelled to suspend his membership in the liberal Union of Right Forces party. “I didn’t want people who are in our party to suffer in any way from what is written in it,” Nemtsov recently told Ivanovo Novosti. The authors even claim that we are lucky that Putin – The Results ever saw the light. “Strong pressure from the Kremlin” made finding a distributor difficult and dashed their hopes to shower the masses with 100,000 copies. When all was said and done, only 5,000 were printed and the only place willing to sell it was the publisher, Novaya Gazeta, at its kiosk in Moscow. (Thanks to the internet a copy can be downloaded at nemtsov.ru and a rather rushed and poorly edited English translation is available on the anti-Putin windbag blog La Russophobe.)
With all the radiant praise, political intrigue, and apparent efforts to squash its publication, I was really expecting this book to blow me away. I was prepared for a complete conversion to Nemtsovism. After all, here are two Russian political insiders who probably have enough dirt to really tar and feather Putin for good. Indeed, Putin – the Results tries to be that kind of brutal screed, but sadly, it falls way short. Though Nemtsov and Milov promise that the information they divulge is shocking, what you get instead is just a well-worn flip-flop of the official Putin line. All of the information they provide is an inversion of the Russian state’s propaganda.
Popularity: 4% [?]
Comments
52 Comments so far
-
Subscribe
RIA Novosti- Global Voices: Russia
-
-
I don’t remember Nemtsov was serving Putin.
Poor guys were hoping to get some easy money (from 100.000 copies)? This just another proof that they are losers - all they got is only 5.000
The question is “How?”
May I? Suggest? One more question?
WHERE to?
Good article. And about turning shit into gold - just brilliant!
“He has no omnipotent power; in fact the power he does posses is on virtual loan from the political elites that prop him up.”
So Putin is the court-appointed political elite-propped Russian prime minister?
Off-top.
But might be interesting for all
Golodomor FAQ
http://lj.streamclub.ru/history/faq.html
I think it’s very interesting to compare the latest Nemtsov’s book about Putin presidency with just released McClellan’s book about Bush presidency.
There are many interesting similarities, but also quite a few telling differences, such as McClellan’s book is already #1 on Amazon.
Bush has the lowest approval rating of any US president in decades upon decades, whereas Medvedev and Putin are very popular. Hence, there is a broad market for anti-Bush books, and not one for anti-Medvedev and/or -Putin books.
The idea just occurred to me that the source of a lot of Russian politicians’ cluelessness as to public opinion and their blundering attempts to appeal to it, as well as contempt for the population (as exhibited by Nemtsov, at least as reported by Sean) is that they do not owe their political careers to appealing to public opinion, but rather to systems of clan patronage. I think this is particularly true for liberals, who as opposed to United Russia or the Communists do not have, and have never had, the pleasure of popular support.
Well, maybe Nemtsov did in Nizhni. That was before my time.
Great article Sean. Shevtsova’s Lost in Transition evoked a similar reaction from me. There’s simply a lack of any concrete political agenda, though I think her analysis is probably better than Nemtsov et al. Ultimately, my guess is that this pamphlet is not actually for domestic consumption.
“Ultimately, my guess is that this pamphlet is not actually for domestic consumption.”
Like I said:
“they do not owe their political careers to appealing to public opinion, but rather to systems of clan patronage.”
Thanks for the compliments. I wouldn’t expect a concrete agenda from Shevtsova and I thought he analysis in LiT was good too. Better than most. But Nemtsov’s text is supposed to be a political manifesto of sorts, but instead it is just the same old, same old. In my view, Russian liberals or oppositionists have a similar problem that the American left does. Lots of criticism but little by way of concrete solutions.
Whether the report was for domestic consumption or not is hard to say. I don’t think so just because it was produced in Russian (LR did the translation, which makes me wonder about its connections in all this) and Nemtsov and Milov are doing a bit of a book tour. Last report I read they were in Ekaterinburg giving a talk.
UR and Putin have the benefit of having both public opinion and clans and patronage. The former gives legitimacy, the latter gives power to effect the system. The only thing I’m not sure about is which one is the more vital form of consent. I tend to think the latter.
they do not owe their political careers to appealing to public opinion, but rather to systems of clan patronage.
Right words, wrong context.
Unlike Putin or Medvedev, Nemtsov has once or twice won proper competitive elections.
“Unlike Putin or Medvedev, Nemtsov has once or twice won proper competitive elections.”
Has he? Are you an expert on local politics in Nizhni Novgorod?
“In my view, Russian liberals or oppositionists have a similar problem that the American left does. Lots of criticism but little by way of concrete solutions.”
Unlike the American left, however, the Russian liberals have actually been in power. And failed.
“UR and Putin have the benefit of having both public opinion and clans and patronage. The former gives legitimacy, the latter gives power to effect the system. The only thing I’m not sure about is which one is the more vital form of consent. I tend to think the latter.”
“Vital” in what sense?
It was easy time for fools/crooks and liberals to win, db. Who promised the most and looks as “reformer” - usually got the chair.
But that times long gone. People finally recognized that this didn’t always work well. Like allowing patients of psychiatric clinic to vote for Chief Doctor
“Vital” in what sense?
Vital in the sense that can say Putin or Medvedev be in a position of power without patronage from elites? I might be setting up a false dichotomy here between consent from popular support and consent from patronage. In some cases the former and the latter could be identical. Yet I tend to think even without popular support, a Putin or even a Medevdev could rule with just the patronage from elites.
Basically I’m interested in how far one can say that Medvedev’s or Putin’s power is at the pleasure of elites rather than the other way around.
“Yet I tend to think even without popular support, a Putin or even a Medevdev could rule with just the patronage from elites.”
I doubt it. That’s what Yeltsin had, and look what happened to him.
Less flippantly, I think you would be hard-pressed to find many examples of governments in power for any length of time that did not enjoy popular support. All governments care about public opinion. That Yeltsin’s was so contemptuous of it is one of its unusual characteristics, and even they had to take it into consideration.
It kind of says something when your country’s self-declared democrats care less about what the demos thinks than does the government of China.
Has he? Are you an expert on local politics in Nizhni Novgorod?
Yes he has. Yes, I was kind of involved in politics at that time.
It was easy time for fools/crooks and liberals to win, db.
You’re shifting the subject, as usual.
Db, do you have any links to info on Nemtsov’s time as mayor? I’m curious.
http://www.anticompromat.org/nemtsov/nemtsbio.html
I just saw on Irish tv there’s been an earthquake in Iceland. Hope ivanov is alright!
”Unlike the American left, however, the Russian liberals have actually been in power. And failed.”
They did, because they had no money and the country was in tatters. When your main export product increases in value by almost 600% in the space of ten years, the coffers fill up very quickly. Conveniently, Putin and the boys were in power when the cash started rolling in. I’m pretty sure had Yeltsin that good fortune he wouldnt be nearly as reviled as he is. I’m not saying Putin’s success is exclusively hydrocarbon based, but its fair to say he would be in the same shit Yelstin was in had the price of oil not shot through the roof. Putin is no superman; in fact, by western standards he’d be seen through because of oil, and couldnt even attempt the control of media he has exercised in Russia over here. For a man so reknowned for his strength of resolve, his skin is paper-thin. When I think of genuinely tough leaders, like Helen Clarke in New Zealand, who are continuously hammered in the press and on tv yet speak with dignity it makes me laugh when I hear ‘tough Putin’ talking about killing people in toilets. Talk is cheap. Thankfully for Putin, oil isnt.
”Yeltsin’s was so contemptuous of it is one of its unusual characteristics,”
I think he had too much on his plate to give a shit about public opinion, and knew every decision he had to make was going to be painful, whether he got them right or wrong. Not only that he put up with Kukli ripping the shit out of him for years, something Putin had shut down very quickly. Funny, I thought he was tough!:-)
”Has he? Are you an expert on local politics in Nizhni Novgorod?”
I’m not, but by all accounts Nemtsov was one of the few leaders to do a decent job in the 90’s, brought tons of investment to Novgorod and ran a relatively clean administration. Maybe thats why he was so popular.
I just saw on Irish tv there’s been an earthquake in Iceland. Hope ivanov is alright!
Ne dozhdetes!
This was most terrible part
http://mbl.is/mm/frettir/sjonvarp/playlist.asx?media_id=17632
“Has he? Are you an expert on local politics in Nizhni Novgorod?”
Yes he has. Yes, I was kind of involved in politics at that time.
“It was easy time for fools/crooks and liberals to win, db.”
You’re shifting the subject, as usual.
No, I’m not.
I was in politics as well. Far enough to stay out of shit. But close to smell it well…
The transaction of power from the Soviet First Secretary of Kommunist party to the first non-party “governor” (Nemtsov “reformer” style fool)… and now back to the so called “red director” who looks and feels like the First Secretary (and stays in his chair for 15 years already). And in same building of course. On Lenin square…
And THIS was the BIGGEST problem for Putin he couldn’t solve. And IS for medvedev.
No, I’m not.
ivanov,
the subject at hand is, roughly speaking, whether Putin and Medvedev enjoy genuine popularity, or it’s just oil. What exactly have your shit smelling memories got to do with that?
“Conveniently, Putin and the boys were in power when the cash started rolling in. I’m pretty sure had Yeltsin that good fortune he wouldnt be nearly as reviled as he is. I’m not saying Putin’s success is exclusively hydrocarbon based, but its fair to say he would be in the same shit Yelstin was in had the price of oil not shot through the roof.”
But the thing is — and not to deny the importance of oil as a factor — that the Putin government spent the entirety of his first term pushing through the very same economic forms that Yeltsin had been advised to do but could not, because the Communists controlled the Duma. That was what the rubber-stamp Duma was rubber-stamping. All the newspaper articles at the time were in the vein of “Putin pushes through broad economic reforms — will they be enough?”
“the subject at hand is, roughly speaking, whether Putin and Medvedev enjoy genuine popularity, or it’s just oil.”
This is a false dichotomy.
db on May 30, 2008 2:01 am
ivanov,
the subject at hand is, roughly speaking, whether Putin and Medvedev enjoy genuine popularity, or it’s just oil. What exactly have your shit smelling memories got to do with that?
Just answering to your answer, db.
“Are you an expert on local politics in Nizhni Novgorod?”
Yes, I was kind of involved in politics at that time.
The subject at hands is whether Nemtsov “work” is a piece of shit or a piece of gold. From the first days when his star started to shine in Kremlin I was smelling shit. Sorry but it was clear from the beginning.
As to popularity - there is nothing to discuss. Just compare Tony bLair/Brown and Putin/Medvedev. Old good rich Britain and poor barbaric Russia.
Oil can help but not to all as you know.
This is a false dichotomy.
Yes, hence the disclaimer “roughly speaking”.
Putin government spent the entirety of his first term pushing through the very same economic forms that Yeltsin had been advised to do…
This is interesting, because as regards oil and gas, he’s been busy pushing reforms which he has been advised not to do. I give it between five and ten years before Putin is remembered as the man who hobbled the Russian oil industry as Russians - for the umpteenth time - wonder what happened to the potential and what might have been.
Well, you’re the oil guy, so I’m not going to argue with you any more than I would argue wirh Ger about chemistry, but that is how he was being portrayed. Anders Aslund was a giant fan.
”Well, you’re the oil guy, so I’m not going to argue with you any more than I would argue wirh Ger about chemistry…”
Chris, fear not, you’d be well able to have an argument with me about chemistry:-) I’m as think as two short planks! Ask my students! I get especially confused at the board doing calculations. I’ve often been corrected by nerds sitting at the front:-)
Aslund as I recall is one of MAA’s big foes. Mike gets very bad over him! I dunno much about him, but clearly he has a vastly different view of Russia in the 1990s than 100% of Russian citizens who lived through it. Maybe he’s unhappy he didnt get a job in this administration.
Aslund was practically creaming himself over the flat tax. So was Nemtsov actually. Putin was a “strong leader pushing through necessary reforms.” Then Khodorkovsky was arrested and Aslund’s opinion changed 180 degrees overnight, Putin becoming a “strong leader who was an enemy of democracy.” It is perhaps not coincidental that one of the major contributors to Aslund’s employer was Khodorkovsky’s bank.
“Chris, fear not, you’d be well able to have an argument with me about chemistry:-)”
OK, I’ll bite. Phlogisthon is real.
”Aslund was practically creaming himself over the flat tax. So was Nemtsov actually. Putin was a “strong leader pushing through necessary reforms.” Then Khodorkovsky was arrested and Aslund’s opinion changed 180 degrees overnight, Putin becoming a “strong leader who was an enemy of democracy.” It is perhaps not coincidental that one of the major contributors to Aslund’s employer was Khodorkovsky’s bank.”
The whole thing stinks. Its hardly suprising that he was upset when someone who was essentially an employer of his was locked up.
”OK, I’ll bite. Phlogisthon is real.”
Phlogiston theory undoubtedly filled a knowledge gap at the time, and Becker(?) was onto something, though he didnt know what it was - it was oxygen, heat of combustion (and bond energy). The theory ignored weight and mass change. If the theory was correct, then combusted materials would weigh less after combustion than they did before. But was we know, they dont, oxides are formed, and in some cases, such as alkali metals, weight is gained. But to give credit, Becker was onto bond energy, which is the basis of western industrial civilisation (when bonds are broken (conbusted) in hydrocarbons, the energy of those bonds is released). He just didnt know it.
So I win the argument, basically? Woot!
”So I win the argument, basically? Woot!”
Well…yes, i would give u the call:-) He was onto bond energies and entropy, but he didnt know it…but he was the first person to recognize a quantity of flammable compounds that lends itself to reaction. Funny enough it was an Irishman, Robert Boyle, who first disproved his theory with his combustion-in-jars experiments.
Sometimes it is the talented amateur who puts the not so phlogisthon friendly Chemistry PhD in his place. They should invite me to speak at the World Chemistry Forum.
”Sometimes it is the talented amateur who puts the not so phlogisthon friendly Chemistry PhD in his place. They should invite me to speak at the World Chemistry Forum.”
Not finishing my PhD is my greatest regret. I’m a lowly ABD.
The anti-phlogisthon bias in the Western media must be combatted at all costs. I’m going to write an article about it for Counterpunch.
”Not finishing my PhD is my greatest regret. I’m a lowly ABD.”
My main regret is having done science at all sometimes. Most of the time its a vocation, not a bloody profession, especially when you’re a nobody like me. I wish I’d studied something cool like history.
”The anti-phlogisthon bias in the Western media must be combatted at all costs. I’m going to write an article about it for Counterpunch.”
The western media bias is full of trolls trolling for the existing inadequacies of entropy and cheerleaders for kilogram calorific values:-)
OK, I just noticed this:
‘Lilia Shevtsova, a fellow at Moscow’s Carnegie Center, called it a “bomb, which anywhere but in Russia would cause the country to collapse.”’
Exactly how many examples in history do we have of the publication of a document causing a country to collapse? Like, zero? Maybe “country” translates “gosudarstvo,” which makes more sense, but not much more…
I think this is part of the magical thinking liberals engage in. “If we just attract people’s attention, then things will change overnight!” “If Putin/Medvedev are out of office, then everything will be wonderful!”
Has anyone else seen todays Moscow Times? Looks like the eXile maight be having a bit of bother.
Putin will go to jail!!!!
I’m dead serious
http://www.golosbeslana.ru/zayav040608.htm
I can’t access the MT. What’s it say?
Is it just me, or is the eXile getting kind of boring? (Except for Sean’s stuff of course.)
Just got the MT site to open.
I say: Meh. The eXile has been claiming its imminent shutdown by various dark forces (including the Moscow Times) for as long as I can remember.
”Is it just me, or is the eXile getting kind of boring?”
No its not just you, the eXile hasnt been funny for quite some time. The Dimitri Babooshka column isnt half as funny as the Denis Solnikov skit, and the letters page, once hilarious, is now just repetitive. I like Yasha Levine though. Although I wouldnt rush out to get it, its funny, I would miss it if I couldnt have it - its a weird attitude I know. Quite why the Russian government would have any interest in the eXile is beyond me. A lot of expats dont even read it, never mind Russians.
I will say that Vlad the Gloater is friggin’ hilarious. I laughed till I cried.
“The anti-phlogisthon bias in the Western media must be combatted at all costs. I’m going to write an article about it for Counterpunch.”
****
Sure beats Scraps of Moscow.
”Sure beats Scraps of Moscow.”
And certainly hammers Lying About Russia too:-)
Does Scraps of Moscow have an opinion on phlogisthon? That would be pretty cool.
San Diego, California USA:
Will Russia prevail? Is it good for so many of Russia’s women are leaving the country when the government wants the birthrate to increase to save Russia? Just asking? How to stop all the harding drinking and smoking of the Russian men as they die early.