RUSSIA DOESN’T NEED TO BE LOVED BY ITS NEIGHBORS
Translated by Elena Leonova
Source: Novaya Gazeta, No. 59, August 7-9, 2006, p. 7
Agency WPS
What the Papers Say Part A (Russia)
August 8, 2006 Tuesday
Kremlin Official Talks About Relations With Neighboring Countries
An interview with presidential administration official Modest Kolerov;
The Kremlin official in charge of relations with CIS countries and
other former Soviet states is Modest Kolerov – head of the presidential
administration’s directorate for inter-regional and cultural contacts
with foreign countries.
The Kremlin official in charge of relations with CIS countries and
other former Soviet states is Modest Alekseevich Kolerov – head of
the presidential administration’s directorate for inter-regional and
cultural contacts with foreign countries. He isn’t averse to some
theatricality. During this interview, we saw a kaleidescope of masks:
from the self-confident etatist and chilly Russian patriot to an
accuser boiling with righteous rage.
Question: In the wake of the recent CIS heads of state summit in
Moscow, there’s an impression that these summits are becoming more
and more of a purely social event, like the races at Ascot. Who needs
the CIS in this form?
Modest Kolerov: Many technical parameters for cooperation in
industry, communications, rail transport, or aviation are confirmed or
established within the CIS framework. Anyone who risks pulling out of
that also risks being left by the wayside. For good reason, the rail
transport councils established with the center in Russia are drawing
interest not only from CIS countries, but also the Baltic states,
Finland, Austria – everyone in the European space. The CIS is not an
organization from which any country can withdraw at no cost to itself.
Question: But some heads of state have been declining to attend
CIS summits.
Modest Kolerov: Not turning up doesn’t mean declining to attend –
it means demonstrating something. We need the CIS in order to retain
a field for realizing our national interests more conveniently. Our
interests include the fact that up to 15 million illegal migrants
who are present on Russian territory each year come from adjacent
countries. After all, we see how refugees are being evacuated from
Lebanon based on two principles: Russian citizens and citizens of
CIS countries. This may seem irrelevant to you, but it’s probably
the most important factor for individuals. This is the burden of
responsibility we bear. The flow of transit migrants and Russia’s
technically central nature in the former Soviet Union are the factors
determining our contacts with the CIS.
Question: The “elder brother” concept?
Modest Kolerov: No. I don’t know what it’s called, but in my own field,
the area of practical horizontal contacts… You just try telling the
Armenians, Azeris, or Ukrainians that the CIS is nonsense. They’ll
tell you: what about being allowed to stay in Russia for 90 days
without registration? What about visa-free travel?
What about the ability to get a work permit, despite strict immigration
rules – is that nonsense? An elder brother claims a leadership role. Do
you have any evidence of Russia claiming such a role?
Question: What about the elections of 2004?
Modest Kolerov: Oh, really? Why are you ignoring the participation
of thousands of Western consultants in some of our neighbor-states,
while making a big thing of the participation of five or six Russian
consultants, most of whom were working for the Orange opposition? Who
is the elder brother of whom?
Question: One political analyst has said that after the 2004 election,
President Putin set Gleb Pavlovsky the task of reintegrating the
post-Soviet space. Did that happen?
Modest Kolerov: I don’t know anything about that. I don’t think
it’s true.
Question: All the same, Russia’s active interference in Ukraine’s
presidential election shows that there must have been some sort of
social demand.
Modest Kolerov: I wasn’t working here [the presidential administration
at the time. I have my own point of view on these things: we weren’t
interfering, we were being drawn in.
Question: Are we so small that we can be drawn into the political
games of other countries?
Modest Kolerov: We’re very large! You don’t understand! Look at the
revolutionary impact of Russia’s decision to start basing relations
with its neighbors on free-market principles: “How can this happen?
We’re used to getting something for nothing!” Analyze the internal
psychology of that reaction! It’s an insulting reaction!
Question: How does “being drawn in” prove that we are large?
Modest Kolerov: We’re large, but we haven’t been very good at
calculating profitability. So now that we’ve started doing the
calculations, this has led to suffering of the peoples – or rather,
those who are accustomed to making money from suffering.
Question: And how were we “drawn in”?
Modest Kolerov: By appeals to our sense of responsibility for the
former Soviet Union!
Question: So there was some social demand for integration?
Modest Kolerov: In contrast to Russia, the elites in many other
post-Soviet states haven’t changed – they remain national-communist.
It’s genetic. Analyze it! The ability of some red directors to split
up other red directors using integration rhetoric is still accepted
in those countries as an effective method. It’s been a long time
since that worked in Russia!
Question: Could you sum up the main direction of Russia’s policy on
other CIS countries?
Modest Kolerov: To know as much as possible about them, to communicate
with all forces (lawful political forces), and to maintain dialogue
that can ensure the realization of our interests.
Question: So why do our media portray Russia as being surrounded
by enemies?
Modest Kolerov: No, they don’t. Germany is our strategic ally, and
then there’s France, Italy, Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan – a lovely country,
and Belarus…
Question: But why are Russians suddenly taking a negative view
of Georgia? According to a February poll done by the All-Russian
Public Opinion Research Center (VTsIOM), there was a 12% increase
between 2003 and 2006 in the proportion of respondents who describe
Russian-Georgian relations as hostile. What do these 18% of Russian
citizens see in Georgia?
Modest Kolerov: What Russian citizens see in Georgia are the actions
of the Georgian autorities: at the highest level – I repeat, at
the highest official level – they compare Russians to conquerors
exterminating the Georgian people. They permit themselves to direct
personal insults at our country’s senior leaders, and repeat this
periodically. They set themselves the task of teaching us about
democracy, and they have been insulting Russia and the Russian people
incessantly for the past two years. According to Georgian Defense
Minister Okruashvili, Russians “drink fecal matter” (the Georgian
president has instructed Okruashvili to resolve the wine crisis). The
causes should be sought in Georgia, not Russia.
Question: But is it proper for a great power to take notice of the
words used by a few individual members of another country’s ruling
elite? Aren’t Foreign Ministry notes sufficient?
Modest Kolerov: I repeat: we’re talking about senior state officials.
Their statements are devolving. Not only in Georgia, but also in
Ukraine. If they really want to make themselves second-rank, let them
say so openly – and we’ll treat them differently. But until then,
as long as they’re sovereign states, their words will be given the
same weight as the words of our country.
Question: We’ve banned wine imports from Georgia, and now the Georgians
are blocking our path into the World Trade Organization. Is this a
fair price for the conflict?
Modest Kolerov: This isn’t my field, but our accession to the WTO
was already being questioned, even without that.
Question: In 2003, you headed the project aimed at stopping oil
deliveries via the pipeline to the Ventspils Port in Latvia. Those
lobbying efforts were crowned with success – but then the European
Union gave that city a development program, and now the residents of
Ventspils are glad that they’re no longer hooked on oil. Isn’t Russia
abusing its leverage?
Modest Kolerov: Russia is not abusing its leverage. Russia is
protecting its national interests. If special transit relations
provide money that pays for the rise of economic and political forces
that subsidize Russophobes, Russia is bound to question the need
for these relations. I should add that the person who managed that
transit route in Latvia is now facing criminal charges – initiated
by the Latvian authorities with support from American investigators.
Question: You have said that there is no pro-Russian position in the
CIS countries. So who are you working with?
Modest Kolerov: With national elites who are protecting their national
interests. If you think we should only work with those who kiss and
embrace us, you’re wrong.
Question: What about the pro-American position?
Modest Kolerov: It’s brief. I’ve forgotten the person’s name, but
one of the US assistant secretaries of state said recently that
the Americans see Georgia as a field for experiments. If I were the
Georgian Foreign Ministry, I would have protested at that. But they
kept silent.