Few believed in the success of a civic resistance anymore. Investing in
a revolution to establish freedom and prosperity? That was a façade, a utopia.
The Arab revolts led to the conclusion that sympathizing with rebellions would
produce misery, instability and even civil war. And paradoxically, the
revolutions disguised atrocities by the ruling regimes in exchange for
stability. The most tragic example is Bashar Al-Assad in Syria. The hideous
facts in Syria assured advocates of the revolution that tolerating the tyrant
is the lesser evil for the time being. Because there is ‘no bigger evil than
the anarchy’, the activists reminded each other of the words of Sophocles.
From pessimism to optimism
However the developments of the revolution in Ukraine capsized that
pessimism. The persistent protests in the capital Kyiv ended in the collapse of
the corrupted regime and in hope for a liberal democracy. Exactly this course
of events stuck in Vladimir Putin’s throat.
He dreams of being the ambitious
leader of the alternative for the Western world order.
After all, Putin
competes with the United States of America on almost all fronts. The success of
liberal democracy in general and of American supremacy in particular frustrates
him. Russia wants to be the leader of the alternative world order: via Syria,
with Iran and now through Ukraine.
But the explicit protest dispatched out of
Kyiv formed the greatest threat for Putin’s leadership. “Our struggle will
prevail,” shouted the Ukrainian people. Optimism and cries of hope for
democracy through anti-governmental actions were answered when the Ukrainian parliament dismissed the venal and pro-Russian president and announced free
elections.
Kremlin’s reaction
How could Putin react to these developments? By a semi-military
invasion he created new facts on three fronts: Russia introduced a new
narrative about international law and justice.
Putin showed leadership by standing for ‘humanitarian support’ to
Russian-speakers and The Kremlin diverted, successfully, the attention of
the sensation driven (social) media in its own direction. It is all about
Russia now and not about the Euromaiden Revolution.
The optimism about this pro-European uprising quickly reversed to
pessimism about the ‘biggest crisis in Europe in the 21st century’,
as British Foreign Minister told us.
The international shock reaction devalued the Russian currency dramatically,
but the reward was greater: the Kremlin is bargaining with Europa and America about its interests in Ukraine. So Putin legitimized his narrative as the
alternative for the Western world order. Since then, all news items revolve
around the strengths of Russia: its military in Crimea and not around its most
sensitive weakness: Ukraine as a source of inspiration for pro-Western
revolutions in the region.
Velvet revolutions
Revolutions have always encouraged each other. That was the case after
the Velvet Revolution in Czechoslovakia (1989) to Georgia (2003) and Ukraine
(2004). Thus, Russia could be the next. Such speculated the papers in Moscow in
2004, ‘an Orange Revolution’ could break out in Russia. Therefore, a chain of relatively nonviolent upheavals to change oligarchy to
democracy must be disrupted by Putin. In fact the Russian Federation did that
by inducting satellite states in parts of Georgia and Ukraine that submitted to
the Kremlin. However, the brave demonstrators in Kyiv changed that in the
recent months by choosing for the pro-European side. The notion that Ukrainians
could inspire the Russian people terrifies Putin, deeply.
Putin’s greatest fear No. 1 – internal opposition
It is
therefore no coincidence that exactly one day before the Russian invasion in
Ukraine, Putin’s popular opposition figure, Alexei Navalny, was placed under
house arrest. There should be no replica of the Orange Revolution in Russia,
was the message to the opposition. In the Western media, little notice was
given to Putin’s response to his internal weakness: suppression of the
opposition. Surprisingly, the weakness of the Kremlin attracts the least
attention in the West. The human rights’ violations, house arrests of the
opposition and repression of independent media in Russia were rarely cited the
past three weeks. And the victory of the Ukrainian revolution? Even less so.
‘Putin shouldn’t feel isolated by us’, seems to be the mantra.
Putin’s greatest fear No. 2: Ukrainian success story
The Kremlin
has a strong negotiating position. After the U.S. and China, Russia is the
largest market for Europe. It is also Europe’s oil and gas supplier. Meanwhile, the trade relations
between Washington and Moscow amount to hardly anything. The limited diplomatic
and sanction measures by Europe and the U.S. can only succeed if there is
serious investment in the flaw of the Russian government: the success of the
Ukrainian revolution. But instead, the analysis goes along with live-updates
from the Kremlin and every millimetre of military movement in and around
Crimea. Putin claims the upper hand and keeps yo-yoing us up and down. In the
European streets, people largely lack every form of public sympathy for their
eastern neighbours in Ukraine. No expression of support, let alone anti-war
demonstrations in Europe. Last weekend we saw a bit of that brought about by
Russians taking to the streets.
On the other hand, the
provocation by Russia can be an opportunity for Ukraine. Foreign invasion
consolidates the domestic post-revolutionary government. This could have many
advantages for the interim government in Kyiv, which is obligated to hold free
elections in May 2014. National and international polls, such as by Gallup, show people’s preference for “democratic
values.” After all, three out of four find democracy ‘important’ for more
‘development’ of the country. But will the interim-government be able to
sustain such pro-European tendencies? That is uncertain. The disputable entry
of Crimea into Russian Federation via a referendum proves to be just a middle
stage. In the long run the Kremlin wants to engross the public opinion in
Ukraine, gradually. Until then, the allies of Moscow in the region but also in
Peking, Damascus and Tehran will consider to promote his narrative little by
little. The latter
reinforces their own power assets vis-à-vis the West. Russia, as the leader of
the alternative world order has the initiative. While Europe and America
operate reactionary and ambiguously in their support for Ukraine.
By more
or less conceding to Putin’s future initiatives, Europe sustains
stability and growth in the short term. But sympathizing with the civil
revolution of the Ukrainian people will pay off in the long term. The choice is
ours. The fact is that the bravery of the Ukrainians has re-energized freedom
lovers and democracy seekers the world over. It
brought many people hope and optimism about the impact of civil disobedience,
from the Black Sea, through the Caucasus to Iran.
Damon Golriz is a political
commentator. He is a lecture at The Hague University of applied sciences and a
fellow of the research group International Peace, Justice and Security.
