Russia's “Backslide” from Democracy
In an October 3, 2005 Washington Post Op/Ed piece entitled, “Silent on Putin's Slide,” columnist Fred Hiatt was highly critical of the Bush administration's failure to acknowledge the apparently growing deficit of democratic freedoms in Russia.
Hiatt asserts that the Bush administration's position on Russia's slide from democracy comes down to two words: “Ignore it.” Hiatt argues that Putin, through hard handed tactics, has been able to create a climate of fear in Russia that prevents dissenting voices from speaking out. Since the Bush administration has failed to acknowledge this, Hiatt is lead to the conclusion that there is a gap in the administration's policy of promoting democracy. In an attempt to rationalize why the Bush administration has chosen to ignore some of Putin's tactics, Hiatt cites a realist argument that cooperation with Russia to reign in nuclear materials, US access to energy resources, and Russian compliance in Iraq and Afghanistan might be more important than democracy promotion. However, Hiatt is not convinced ignoring the “slide from democracy” is worth it. He points out that the US “doesn't seem to be getting all that much out of the relationship, and the closing of political space in Russia does affect U.S. interests, particularly as Russia's foreign policy becomes more nationalistic and belligerent toward its neighbors.”
A different view was expressed in a September 30, 2005 Op/Ed piece by Dr. Andrei Piontkovsky in the Washington Times entitled “Obsequiousness towards Putin” suggests that realist ideas are behind Bush's deferential treatment of Russia. Arguing that the US is overextended in the world and could not afford Russian “military technical cooperation all over the world,” Piontkovsky cited an “American…expert” who proposed that the US “cannot permit…a confrontation with him. Anyone else in his place might end up being worse.”
In the past, many have called for the Community of Democracies to require that Russia participation be dependent on democratic reform and the explicit desire of Russia to pursue democratization. As far back as 2001, Human Rights Watch argued that Russia should not be allowed to participate without freer media. Without high standards for participation, the Community of Democracies would risk being rendered meaningless, Human Rights Watch warned. Ted Piccone, executive director of the Democracy Coalition Project argued that the convening group's decision to exclude Nepal from the Santiago conference was correct, adding that Russia should have been excluded as well. The Council for a Community of Democracies has also argued for the exclusion of Russia from participation in (even with observer status) the Community of Democracies. Before the Santiago conference, the Final Meeting of the Non-Governmental Process for the Community of Democracies, in which CCD was an active participant, released a statement saying, “We urge the Convening Group and the host country of the Ministerial Meeting to issue a special statement expressing their concern about democratic backslide in Russia." The statement specifically called for Russia not to be invited as a participant or an observer.
Sources:
“Silent on Putin's Slide” by Fred Hiatt, Oct. 3, 2005 in the Washington Post:
“Obsequiousness toward Putin” by Andrei Piontkovsky", September 30, 2005 in the Washington Times
“Democracies Must Support UN Human Rights Reform,” April 27, 2005 Freedom House Press Release
“Standards Urged for Community of Democracies,” Human Rights Watch in August 2001
