Выбрать главу

THE NASHI MANIFESTO AND “MEGAPROJECT RUSSIA”

One of the Nashi movement’s objectives was, indeed, the transmission of the ideology of the ruling elite to the younger generation. Therefore, the Nashi manifesto” deserves a closer look. It is one of the rare Kremlin-inspired texts that gives a deeper insight into the ideology of the regime. The manifesto starts with inviting young Russians to participate in the “megaproject of our generation, the megaproject Russia.” And the text continues: “The development of the world involves competition between peoples.” In this competition “it is our goal to make Russia a global leader of the twenty-first century.” This leadership is possible, the manifesto continues, because, as one should not forget, “the twentieth century had been Russia’s century.” This was due to three events. The first event is the Russian Revolution, which was “an effort to modernize” the country (no mention is made of Stalinist mass murders and repression). The second event is the victory of Russia in the Second World War, which saved the world from “a global hegemony by another country” and which accelerated “the disintegration of the colonial empires.” (Here nothing is said about the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, nor about the new colonization that took place after the war inside the Soviet bloc.) The third event that is mentioned is the end of communism at the end of the twentieth century. It is stressed that this process was “autonomous.”

The manifesto explains why Russia is destined to become a global leader. The text refers to the “Eurasian heartland” theory of Halford J. MacKinder, without, however, mentioning MacKinder’s name.[19] “Russia,” it states, “is the central military-strategic space of the Eurasian continent. Control over it is important for those who want to dominate Eurasia and the whole world. It was precisely for this reason that Napoleon and Hitler dreamed of conquering it. Today, it is the United States on the other hand that is trying to control Eurasia and the whole world, and international terrorism on the other.” Against these threats, the text continues, “a strong, independent Russian government” is necessary, which is based on the sound foundation of sovereign democracy. This sovereign democracy is threatened by two internal enemies: the liberals “who are ready to give up the country’s independence in the name of the freedom of the individual” and the communists and fascists who give up personal freedom in the name of a stronger government. There follows a severe criticism of the weak governments of the 1990s, and the next paragraph, entitled “Our Revolution,” praises Putin, who, “after having strengthened the government, was the first to really challenge the regime of oligarchic capitalism.” Because Putin brought the stability the country needed so badly for its modernization, Putin is the natural leader for the Nashi movement. The Nashi is Putin’s avant-garde, because “our task… is to be at the head of the modernization of the country.” This modernization is not the only task for the members of Nashi. Other tasks include “the defense of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Russia,” and to counter the “geopolitical games” of the West in the post-Soviet space, with their explicit goal of vydavlivanie: pushing Russia out of world politics. Further, the Nashi should fight “extremist organizations of fascist and liberal nature.” To accomplish these important tasks for the fatherland Nashi members should have special character profiles and competences. They are expected to be patriotic and optimistic, think strategically, have social responsibility, be constructive and open to new developments, and have leadership capabilities and great professionalism.

HARASSING DIPLOMATS AND INTERNAL FOES

This was the manifesto, but what was the practice? In practice Nashi’s activities were concerned less with the modernization of Russian society than with the persecution and harassment of imagined internal and external foes. The first case that gained media attention was that of Anthony Brenton, British ambassador in Moscow. After Brenton had spoken at a conference held by the opposition movement “The Other Russia” in August 2006, he was systematically harassed by Nashi militants. They picketed the British embassy and followed the ambassador for six months with a banner demanding that he apologize. According to The Sunday Times, “They shouted abuse as he shopped for cat food, obstructed his car, advertised his movements on the internet and disrupted him when he spoke publicly.”[20] The harassment only stopped temporarily when the British government officially protested, but was resumed after the Duma elections of December 2007, when fifty Nashi members again picketed the embassy with a portrait of the ambassador with the text “Loser” (referring to Kasparov’s political party, which had not managed to get a seat in the new Duma). The demonstrators handed a letter to the embassy guard destined for the British queen, demanding that she recall the ambassador.[21]

Another high-placed victim was the ambassador of Estonia, Marina Kaljurand. She was attacked when the Estonian government removed a Soviet-era war monument, the Bronze Soldier, from the center of Tallinn. Starting April 30, 2007, members of Nashi picketed the Estonian embassy in Moscow. They blocked the street on both sides, making it impossible for the embassy’s staff to leave. Rocks and paint were thrown at the embassy building and slogans painted on the walls, such as “We reached Berlin, we will reach Tallinn too.” Day and night Nashi members played loud music in front of the building. The embassy personnel noted that “the young people were equipped with everything necessary to maintain round the clock presence, including portable toilets, a field kitchen and electricity supply.”[22] Tents had even been erected in front of the embassy in which the protesters were taking turns to sleep. On May 1, 2007, the Estonian flag was torn down from the embassy and shredded into pieces. On May 2, the ambassador had to break through a Nashi cordon to give a press conference at the offices of the magazine Argumenty i Fakty. On her arrival, there were attempts to attack her physically in the press room and gas had to be used by the guards to set her free. On the street outside rioting youths attacked the ambassador’s car and tore off the Estonian flag. These attacks on the embassy were preceded by organized riots in the center of the Estonian capital Tallinn on April 26 and 27 by Estonian Russophones, led by Russian Nashi activists who had come over specially from Russia.[23]

вернуться

19

Halford J. MacKinder, an English geopolitician, developed the theory of a Eurasian heartland for the first time in a paper “The Geographical Pivot of History” (1904). According to him the power that dominated this heartland would dominate the world, a theory that became very popular in Russia. (Cf. Halford J. MacKinder, “The Geographical Pivot of History,” in Democratic Ideals and Reality, ed. Halford J. MacKinder (Washington, DC: National Defense University Press, 1996), 175–193.)

вернуться

20

Mark Franchetti, “Putin’s Fanatical Youth Brigade Targets Britain,” The Sunday Times (September 2, 2007).

вернуться

21

“Vashe Velichestvo, pishet Vam kollektiv russkikh druzey” (Your Majesty, A Collective of Russian Friends Writes to You), Kommersant (December 6, 2007). When, on March 28, 2008, the Foreign Office announced that Brenton would be replaced by Anne Pringle, former ambassador to the Czech Republic, there was speculation on the website of Robert Amsterdam, Khodorkovsky’s lawyer, that this was done under pressure from the British energy giant BP that had billions of dollars invested in projects in Russia. http://www.robertamsterdam.com/2008/03/the_departure_of_uk_ambassador.htm.

However, the Foreign Office “rejected speculation the change was due to worsening ties between the two countries” (Cf. “Update 1: Britain names Russian envoy, hopes for better ties,” Reuters (March 28, 2008).)

вернуться

22

Estonian Review 17, no. 16–17 (April 18–May 2, 2007), 3.

вернуться

23

Even during these Russian attacks the Estonian government had the diplomatic correctness to receive, on April 30, a delegation from the Russian State Duma to discuss the events around the removal of the war memorial. This delegation was headed by the former FSB director Nikolay Kovalyov, who, on his arrival in Tallinn, bluntly called for the immediate resignation of the Estonian government—a more than ill-mannered intervention in the internal affairs of a neighboring state that awoke memories of a not so distant past. (Cf. Victor Yasmann, “Monument Dispute with Estonia Gets Dirty,” RFE/RL (May 8, 2007). http://www.rferl.org/articleprintview/1347550.html.