A Donald Trump Moment Is Developing In Vladimir Putin's Russia

Last weekend, Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin expressed mutual admiration for each other. But their similarities go deeper. Donald Trump’s lead in the race for the Republican nomination reflects the widespread disenchantment of America’s blue collar families with “politics as usual.” Trump’s followers believe that the professional political class has given us crony capitalism, a captive media, unsustainable debt, foreign Main Street; we should remove them and get America moving again. Russia could be on its way to a Donald Trump moment.


go to Forbes.com

Russia Worries About Shock Economic Scenarios

The September 2016 elections will take place in a time of scarce budget resources and dwindling reserve funds. Putin’s opposition will be his core supporters — blue-collar workers and pensioners — who have been hardest hit by economic stagnation. Putin’s media can scarcely accuse them of being CIA agents or traitors.



go to National Review online

Truckers Halt Moscow Traffic As Putin Shifts The Blame

Ukraine’s almost three-month Maidan revolution went through ebbs and flows. There were times when the protest action nearly fizzled out only to be revived by some new event. Its ultimate success was assured only when the state lost its nerve and used excessive force. Russia’s truckers’ protest will not go away. It may go through the same ebbs and flows as Maidan. It may fizzle. Whatever the case, the truckers’ protest is the most serious challenge to Putin’s kleptocracy since the mass protests of November 2011 to March 2012.

go to Forbes.com

Why Putin Makes a Bad Ally Against ISIS

At first blush, the idea that Russia is a natural ally against Islamist terrorists seems to make sense. The country has suffered horrific terrorist attacks by Islamist extremists, including the bombing in November of a plane above the Sinai Peninsula, which killed 224 passengers and crew, nearly all of them Russian. Around 20 million Muslims, most of them Sunni, live within the Russian Federation, and the country’s security officials report that some 7,000 fighters from the former Soviet republics and Russia have joined the Islamic State.

On deeper examination, however, it becomes clear that an anti-terror alliance with Russia is wishful thinking. Putin has not gone into Syria to defeat the Islamic State. He has intervened to save the regime of Russia’s client, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. Putin may sometimes give the appearance that he is ready to abandon Assad, but ultimately he will defend him. Leaving Assad to his fate would be a sign of weakness – and thus anathema to Putin.

Read more at https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/why-putin-makes-a-bad-ally-by-paul-r--gregory-2015-12#EWTz8A2H8ML8iEKd.99


go to Project Syndicate

Has Putin Met His Match In Russia's Truck Drivers?

Russia’s long-haul truck drivers have disrupted the country’s federal highways for more than two weeks to protest a new road tax (platon in Russian) collected (with a 20% commission) by the Putin-associated Rotenberg oligarchs. The protesters threatened a full blockade of Moscow today unless their demands for a radical restructuring of the government are met. Russia’s riot and traffic police have not been able to halt the convoys, and the Russian government has refused good-faith talks. Putin’s propaganda machine cannot brand three million ordinary citizens as traitors and CIA agents. It can only saturate the news with the “outrage” of Turkey shooting down its fighter jet. The Kremlin is threatened with its own version of a nationwide Maidan.

go to forbes.com

Kremlin Accuses Me of Lying About Syria

Sputnik International is a news agency that is owned by the Russian government and can be relied on to follow the Kremlin’s propaganda line. In its Forbes (that’s me) caught lying about average Russians' support for Syrian campaign, Sputnik brands as lies my characterization (Putin's Syria Narrative Must Win Russian Public Opinion--But It'll Be A Hard Sell) of a Levada Center poll on Russian attitudes towards Syria.

Being singled out by an official agency of Kremlin propaganda is flattering in a perverse way. It shows that they worrry about the effect I might have on public opinion. But it is not flattering to be called a liar; so let's look into what I actually said.

Sputnik complains about my “selective use” of two of three Levada Center questions on Syria. It seems my “lie” was to not emphasize Levada’s finding on its first question of strong Russian support for an air campaign in Syria. To quote their complaint:

“Gregory appears to have selectively used only Levada's figures from the second question, which asked whether Russians "support the Federation Council's decision to allow the use of Russian troops abroad." The wording of the question, and particularly the word 'troops', helps explain respondents' hesitation in supporting intervention. It also helps explain fears about involvement turning "into a 'new' Afghanistan situation for Russia," (with 45% suggesting it is a 'possibility or a 'certainty', and 38% that it is 'unlikely' or 'impossible'), again, presumably only if Russian ground troops were introduced.”

Sputnik must pardon my confusion. I do not see any “lie.” They just don’t like my citation of public opinion that suggests the Russian people question involvement in a conflict in the Middle East that reminds them of the Afghanistan quagmire. The poll expresses the natural concern that Russian soldiers will eventually get involved.

Reading further into the Sputnik complaint, my “lie” also consists of not anticipating that Levada would conduct another poll after I finished my piece: “With the Russian air campaign now entering its second month, and Russian ground troops nowhere in sight, Levada found, in polling conducted last week, that the numbers of Russians who believe the Syrian campaign could turn into 'a new Afghanistan' is steadily dropping, with only 35% now believing that it is possible or likely, and a full 50% confident that it will not happen.”

Excuse me Sputnik. I would not emphasize that 35 percent of the Russian people are in disagreement with a Kremlin policy. Under Putin, more than a third opposition is a huge number. Who knows what the real number would if the poll were carried out under less repressive circumstances.

So here we go again. Throughout the Ukraine war, Putin claimed there were absolutely no regular Russian troops in the Donbas. There were also no Russian special forces in Crimea until Putin declared there were. The Kremlin will now insist that there are no ground troops in Syria, although they are being interviewed by foreign media and posting selfies on social media. With no ground troops in Syria, there can be no combat deaths, the Kremlin will insist. In fact, the first combat death in Syria has been labeled a suicide to the dismay of his parents. 

Sputnik should be circumspect in its accusations of lying. I presume it has forgotten the defense ministry’s official briefing that proved conclusively that MH17 was downed by a Ukrainian fighter – a result covered by both Sputnik and its sister organization RT.

We owe a debt of gratitude to Sputnik. Their strong reaction to my piece tells us that the Kremlin has deep concerns about the Russian people’s support for the Syria operation – support that can turn on a dime if body bags start flooding in from Syria.