Putin's successful landing in Normandy
In the Program "Today in America" involved: David Kramer , head of the US human Organization Freedom House rights, Vladimir Shliapentokh , sociologist, Professor at the University of Michigan, Eric Shiryaev , Political Scientist, Professor at George Mason University in Virginia, and Gregory Grushko , Executive Director of the US Financial Firm HWA.
Today in America, the West and Putin's landing in Normandy
On Thursday, Russian President Vladimir Putin met in Paris at the Elysee Palace for dinner A working with French President Francois Hollande. A few hours before the Russian President Held Talks with British Prime MINISTER David Cameron on Friday, Vladimir Putin Meets with German Chancellor Angela Merkel and even Exchanged views on the Ukrainian Crisis with US President Barack Obama. Only two weeks ago About, Observers do not Rule out That Putin Will not BE Invited to the Celebrations of the Allied landings in Normandy, and Just Last week Reported That Western Leaders do not want to appear in public in the society of Vladimir Putin.
What happened?On Wednesday and Thursday from the mouth of the Western allies followed an ultimatum-sounding statement that only the recognition of the Kremlin the new Ukrainian government, withdrawal of support of the separatists in the east of Ukraine and facilitate their disarmament can prevent the imposition of new Sanctions in the coming weeks. HOWEVER, These statements do not even really Believe the American Media. In an Editorial in the newspaper The Washington Post concluded That "Vladimir Putin Looked Hero of the day": "Authorized Putin Strengthen ITS control over Luhansk and Donetsk regions. But Vladimir Putin has not only paid for the aggression, he was on his way to triumph in France, where he was to meet with the leaders of France, Germany and Britain, while President Obama spoke of "the importance of maintaining good relations with Russia " . The newspaper The New York Times on Thursday urged the West to know That Putin " ongoing Attempts to destabilize Ukraine or Russia's aggressively Expand Influence Will not go unanswered " . But it is clear that confidence in the fact that this thing and turn, no one. The day before, the newspaper quoted Foreign Carl Bildt MINISTER, WHO FEAR Vladimir Putin That Will Perceive Their contacts with Western Leaders as Evidence of Split A Major Western Countries. Can we Consider the Emergence of Vladimir Putin in France, His meeting at the Elysee Palace , Talks with Western Leaders in Normandy as the winning Round? My Companion - A longtime critic of the Russian President, Former DEPUTY secretary of State, now head of the human rights by Freedom House , David Kramer . David Kramer: In Putin's Actions, in my Opinion, one CAN Distinguish two seemingly conflicting Motives: the feeling of Weakness and at the Same time They Force. I think He WAS stunned by the Power demonstrated by the Maidan, the Fall Yanukovych, Scared by the Fact That such Sentiments CAN Spread to russia and He May not BE Able to hold back the Wave of Protests. On the Other Hand, it Seems, Thinks That He is Stronger Western Leaders in the sense That it Has A much greater margin of safety When it Comes to outside pressure. He Will BE Able to hold much more Under pressure than what is Able to Provide Western Leaders acting with an eye on Public Opinion and Economic Their own interests, the interests of the Domestic Business. And That we CAN Say Putin, by and large, He WAS right. Of course, the Sanctions have HAD Effects, But These Effects Could BE more pronounced if the West Went on to more serious Action. Moreover's,
Yuri Zhigalkin Professor Shiryaev, you also have the feeling that Putin is in retreat or maneuver is his?
Eric Shiryaev: Of course, of course, shows signs of retreat, tactical and strategic. This, apparently, the story will still be judged and rassuzhivat in the future. But obviously, that's right, according to the Russian press, the speeches of President Putin to tone it certainly has changed to some extent, of course. Is this related to was the fact that, according to the Washington, sanctions and threats of sanctions take effect? Not quite as likely. Russia quietly gives back up.
Yuri Zhigalkin: A substance has changed? Many analysts have pointed out, not only analysts about this, incidentally, recently told the commander of NATO and that in fact Russia continues to destabilize the situation in the Ukraine by applying irregular forces, including by the use of special forces. That is the tone of the conversation Putin may be changed, but the essence remains the same.
Vladimir Shliapentokh: Undoubtedly, strategically Putin intends to destabilize the situation in Ukraine as soon as possible, but that he had chosen the softer means. Just think, as noted by observers of Kiev, in early May, the people of Kiev were confident that by May 9, Kiev will be occupied by Russian troops. Yell about creating Novorossia heard throughout Russia. Russian activity in the south-east, certainly continues, and it probably will be a topic for some compromise, if possible, between Moscow and Kiev and the West.
Yuri Zhigalkin: Yesterday the newspaper The New York Times quoted Foreign Minister Carl Bildt, who warned that talks with Putin, leaders of the three major Western countries, ie Germany, France and the UK can give the wrong signal to Putin. His concern is that the Kremlin could again feel the disunity of Western capitals and try to take advantage of that unanimity Western capitals is key. You, Professor Shiryaev, no such feeling that the Kremlin might wrongly read the signs that the last two days emanate from Brussels, where it is said that we are ready to lead once again in talks with Russia?
Eric Shiryaev: Certainly, this bet. Schism of the West - is one of the objectives that the Kremlin is trying to achieve. The fact that the actions in Crimea and Ukraine, the Kremlin gave the West, North America and Western
Zhigalkin Yuri: But it's a gift, most likely in the future. Is not there a danger that easing pressure on Moscow could lead to another aggravation of the Ukrainian crisis in the near future?
Eric Shiryaev: Most likely, yes. Rather, we look at the Palestinian option in eastern Ukraine, unfortunately. That is, the low-intensity conflict, terrorist acts, strikes, new acts, notes protest, anger, instability and eventually talk about the independence of Eastern Ukraine. This is most likely low-intensity conflict, one of the options which, I think, the most real, from my point of view.
Yuri Zhigalkin: If the retreat of Vladimir Putin in Ukraine really, could be an effective argument to be sanctions, ridiculed by many representatives of the Kremlin? I asked them to review the preliminary results of Gregory Grushko, managing director of the US financial firm HWA.
Gregory Grushko: I have divided them into two groups. There are, for example, direct sanctions and there are indirect sanctions. The effect of these sanctions apply significantly beyond the selected object of the sanctions, and the echo is completely unpredictable consequences in the long process. It seems there is clearly a limited circle of people, sanctioned, and suddenly we hear statements - the business goes out of Russia. That's indirect sanctions. $ 63 billion left Russia in the first quarter of this year. Forecasts for the whole year is very conservative - 130 billion. I believe that this
Yuri Zhigalkin: And that, apparently, the most important, the most significant result for Russia?
Gregory Grushko: Yes, but out of it, this result implies the other results. For example, in early March, the Central Bank raised its key interest rate to 7 percent. April 25 the rate was increased by another half a percentage point, to 7.5 percent. This has had a direct effect on mortgage loans, that is, people who would like to take a VTB or "Bank of Moscow", would have to borrow money to half a percentage point higher. As a result, the rate of the market in general has become 12.5 percent.
Yuri Zhigalkin: It would seem that the increase is low.
Gregory Grushko: It is high enough to make the service of these loans is impossible for most people in Russia. That is, banks issue mortgage loans, provided that the sum of the monthly payments do not exceed 50 percent of the income of the borrower. At that rate increase has been estimated that the average monthly mortgage payment will constitute about 60 percent of the average wage.
Yuri Zhigalkin: In other words, the average Russian begins to feel the direct consequences of Russian actions in the Ukraine?
Gregory Grushko: This is not exactly the average, because the average Russian is unlikely to buy something using a mortgage loan. But the average Muscovite certainly feel it.
Yuri Zhigalkin: A to average Russian is reached?
Gregory Grushko: According to Rosstat, which came out, I think, yesterday or the day before, inflation in Russia in May, 7.6 percent, which compares with 7.3 percent in April. Expected peak of inflation in the year increased to nearly 8 percent. This is much more than what was expected and lays in some plans. What does rising inflation for the average Russian? The growth of output prices 9.5 percent in the last 12 months, medication also increased about 10 percent, passenger transport, travel to second-class compartment in Russian railways increased by 22 percent.
Yuri Zhigalkin: This function is weakening of the ruble?
Gregory Grushko: This function ruble devaluation and the resulting devaluation of inflation. Ruble, I would say it is a direct factor reflecting the Russian economy, in contrast to exchange figures, which show the speculative expectations, that is, it is short-term changes.
Yuri Zhigalkin: Gregory, your general feeling: how these financial, economic considerations are reflected in the cost estimates of Vladimir Putin?
Gregory Grushko: The day before yesterday, analysts at the Brookings Institution in Washington released a report on the effectiveness of sanctions against Russia. They concluded that the sanctions could lead to some change in the behavior of Russia towards Ukraine, but these changes will touch only tactics and timing only Russian plans, but not the overall strategic goal of Putin. To change the fundamental interests of the Putin regime, the sanctions have to be so dramatic, to discard the economic potential of Russia to its state in the 1990s.
Yuri Zhigalkin Professor Shliapentokh how you feel about the idea of the real effectiveness of US and European sanctions?
Vladimir Shliapentokh: I think we underestimate it. Sanctions, even at first glance, weak, had, from my point of view, a huge influence on Putin and his team. And now he really afraid of expansion of these sanctions. These sanctions have been very successful. Putin, unleashing the conflict in Ukraine is certainly not made a gift of his elite. It is unlikely that the members of its elite ready to compensate for the losses they have suffered even in these weak sanctions, the idea that our Crimea, which is a solid three-quarters of the total Russian population. This elite undoubtedly deeply hostile to the policy of Putin. She is silent, she is afraid of Putin as a fire, it must be considered with his position, but she came in first in the deep inner conflict with Putin. Curiously, huge article about this property Putin abroad, published in the newspaper the New York Times last month, did not comment completely in Russian. This article was bypassed. And it probably contained a very important signal for Putin himself. So, of course, the lack of unity of the West Putin helps very much, but at the same time, Putin believes that
Yuri Zhigalkin: You say that the tone of Putin's statement was much softer, but here I quote that yesterday in a speech in Moscow, said Foreign Minister Lavrov, in general, to be honest, characterized by picturesque strong statements: "In recent years it has become clear that was made (he was referring to the United States) the choice to strengthen action to push Russia so that she swallowed another portion of attacks on its interests. " And further: "There have been a gross interference in the internal affairs of Ukraine, taken anti-state and anti-constitutional coup". This is Russia's foreign minister said yesterday. Today met him foreign minister, Secretary of State of the United States Kerry, who said in a statement: "Given the opportunity for Russia, the US and all other countries to join forces in an attempt to make Ukraine a prosperous, democratic state, and so on." Professor Shiryaev, as summarized these strange, seemingly irreducible statements? Is it realistic to count on the cooperation with a country whose foreign minister allows himself to such statements?
Eric Shiryaev: As the old memory psychologist by education and by my first profession, I can say that is very interesting phenomena occur. It is quite possible, I think it was not planned, but the role of distributed, that the head of the Kremlin appears solid, calm and wise professor, king, a king who gives arguments provides stability. Second-person act like a dog chain, good cops - bad cops, they are bad cops, they are evil, they are straight. Interestingly, my graduate students doing research blitz in April and May, as the rhetoric has changed senior Russian politicians. A large number of sarcastic phrases appeared in relation to the West. Because sarcasm - a reaction of ordinary people who are powerless in the dispute in the arguments. Those of us who loses, we begin to use hurtful language, sarcasm. People who are strong and powerful state, they are more sustained in the statements, calmer, more balanced. Sarcasm was a birthmark in the Russian rhetoric, starting with the April-May. Perhaps, indeed sanctions act. When you feel that you are vulnerable, you begin to use the sarcastic arguments and accusations, labels that hung on his opponent. Indeed there is an interesting phenomenon.
Yuri Zhigalkin Professor Shliapentokh, but can not stand it there for a simple reflection of reality? Russia intends to continue to support the separatists, no matter what?
Vladimir Shliapentokh: I do not think so. Now ideological task Kremlin leadership somehow temper patriotic excitement in the country. Look: the children are evacuated from Donetsk and Lugansk, it is clear that people in horror of what is happening there. And look: Putin meets with Ella Pamfilova, who complains that the Russian government did not effectively help the refugees, meeting televised. Putin sits in silence, rather grimly, and said not a single word of sympathy for the separatist forces, the civilian population in the southeast. Russia publicly silent, Putin is silent. But Lavrov's statement - this complaint, the complaint to the West that the West does not respect them. Actually the entire foreign policy and ideological support of foreign policy is based on a formula that combines a superiority complex and an inferiority complex.
Yuri Zhigalkin Professor Shiryaev, but when you consider that Western leaders do not mention the Russian annexation of the Crimea, if they are willing to sit down again with Putin at the negotiating table, to give him a role in the negotiations on the future of Ukraine, does this mean that he won, guarantee a place in history as the "gatherer of Russian lands"?
Eric Shiryaev: win, lose - it all depends on where we left off timer, stopwatch in the game. It seems to have the impression that Russia is winning. Because emotionally, in terms of results, in terms of the unity of public opinion in Russia on this subject, liberals and conservatives, the amazing thing is how the same point of view, considering all of the West crazy just thinking himself right. But this is the first half. The first half has not yet played out, will be the second and third time.
Yuri Zhigalkin: And that these results are still talking about the position of the West, the determination of the West? There is this determination to resolve this or not? How do you explain these variations?
Eric Shiryaev: The determination is there, but there is no leadership. America is determined to not show, unfortunately. But even this is not necessary to expect from this president, because the US president is weak. Therefore, experts say that do not support his policies in general, it is necessary for two years
Yuri Zhigalkin Professor Shliapentokh that say?
Vladimir Shliapentokh: I want to say that Russia has failed at this point. I totally agree with Thomas Friedman's article in The New York Times, who ended her with these words: Russia has made tremendous gifts to the West, Russia revitalized NATO, which was at the stage of death, revived the Russian military presence, at least America, Eastern Europe, against that Russian foreign policy led constant struggle for many years. No matter how events developed in Ukraine, Ukraine now is the eternal enemy of Russia. Russia's prestige in the West fell sharply. Putin has created, as I mentioned, in Russia a large internal opposition within the ranks of the elite its foreign policy. The fact that the highest political class in Russia will be denied tranquil travel to the West, in the use of their property in the West since it is such a blow to material interests, who