The Global Policy Forum in Yaroslavl, attended by the heads of Russia and South Korea, as well as the Italian prime minister, has managed, in quite a curious way, to reinforce the conclusions made a few days ago by several Valdai Discussion Club members who toured a number of Russian regions and met with Prime Minister Vladimir Putin. Incidentally, some of the Valdai participants also attended the public meetings in Yaroslavl and President Dmitry Medvedev's meeting with political analysts.
Not only did their assessments of the problems facing and prospects for Russia's modernization tally, but the questions they posed matched as well. Valdai participants also devoted the lion's share of their time to Russia's history and its repercussions (alas often negative) for ongoing developments. Now, President Medvedev, who met with political analysts "on the sidelines" of the Yaroslavl Forum, has again pointed out the "high level of inertia" in history, which to a large extent continues to determine the country's development. Russia had never been a democracy before the last two decades, RIA Novosti quoted him as saying. "We are a country with a thousand years of authoritarian history," he said, adding that Russia is an interesting example of how a democracy can develop against the backdrop of a powerful authoritarian past.
Yet, does the fact that never before has there been democracy in Russia automatically imply that Russians have no individual freedom and have never had it? Certainly not. Adam Michnik, the editor in chief of Warsaw's Gazeta Wyborcza, who has long described himself as "an anti-Soviet Russophile," was very convincing when he talked about this during the Valdai Forum. Europe has in fact long tended to distinguish between the Russian state and the Russian people. Although often fair, this practice also serves as a fig leaf for Russophobia. As people claim it's only the Russian government they dislike, not Russians in general, and their isolation of the whole nation is highly regrettable, but unavoidable.
Still, even the fiercest critics of Russia cannot claim that there is no individual freedom in the country. Other Valdai participants agreed, citing the famous 19th century historian Vasily Klyuchevsky, whose books are still relevant because they lack all political bias, and were entirely impartial, devoid of obsequious loyalty to the regime or opposition rhetoric.
First deputy head of the Kremlin staff Vladislav Surkov commented on this at the Yaroslavl Forum: "I don't know if I am a democrat. But I know that I am a free individual," he was quoted by Rossiiskaya Gazeta as saying.
This historic paradox - an authoritarian country full of free individuals - is reflected in the Valdai Index. The Valdai Index is a rating of Russia's development in the periods between Club meetings, based on the Valdai participants' impressions and assessments. The Russian president and prime minister studied the Valdai Index, although the document might have not been very pleasant reading for either man. The Valdai participants were especially critical of the "de facto status of Russia's political system."
This status in fact should have been significantly improved by the political reforms laid out in Dmitry Medvedev's article "Forward, Russia!", which was published exactly 12 months ago and which was one key focus of last year's political forum. However, 52% of those polled for this Valdai Index questionnaire said they had seen no discernable political improvement in the country, with many even describing recent developments as a significant regression. Well, the freedom to criticize is a start, at least.
Interestingly, Valdai participants were much more positive in their assessments of other aspects of contemporary Russia: 74% cited a revival of Russia's diplomatic activity, while 69% saw progress in Russia's role in global security. Just as with the criticism of political processes, these positive evaluations do reflect reality. Today's Russia is a non-aggressive and pragmatic country, not imposing its lifestyle or ideology on anyone.
The Valdai participants' evaluations of the "human dimension" of Russia's development might seem low: Only 38% said they saw progress while 12% mentioned deterioration, and 50% failed to notice any changes over the past year.
Well, Medvedev did say that democracy cannot develop faster than an individual in the broadest sense, including their personality, education and self-respect. It is this last point that has been a big problem in Russia lately. "Surprisingly, even today, in the twenty-first century, many Russians still like to say that they are not free, belittled, that things 'do not depend on them'. Such a position can be convenient: If you cannot do anything, neither are you responsible for anything, not responsible to the country or even your family. This is a very comfortable position but it is also a dangerous one," Medvedev said at the forum.
In his opinion, one of the key criteria of democracy is the extent to which people themselves believe that they live in a democratic state. This conviction should be as deeply held as possible, while traditionally it has been weak in Russia. This situation can be partly explained by objective reasons, but it is also a way of dodging responsibility. In any case, even objective difficulties are no excuse to become discouraged, as the American participants of the Valdai Club are particularly well aware.
Harvard Professor Timothy Colton said that Americans, whatever their failings, have faith in their country's democracy. Maybe that is naive, but this naive belief in their system keeps them safe from dictatorship. Americans believe in their institutions rather than in specific "good" politicians with absolute powers, he explained.
Maybe it was this naivety that prompted Colton to ask Prime Minister Vladimir Putin in Sochi how he was planning to boost the role of institutions rather than personalities in Russia. Russia has been searching in vain for an answer to this question for centuries, as is evident from Medvedev's speech in Yaroslavl. Finding an answer to this is crucial.
RIA Novosti commentator Dmitry Babich
The opinions expressed in this article are the author's and do not necessarily represent those of RIA Novosti.
