On Thursday Evening, when looking for the Russian President Dmitry Medvedev’s Annual Address to the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation, I found his previous Address which he made in 2008. After having read the two texts I was perplexed. In some parts of his message the President repeats what he said in 2008. Why does he do so? The point is his 2008 Address was followed by no actions or events. The President’s requests turned out to be no more effective than those of a private person. What is the most striking is the President does not think that over in his Addresses. Dmitry Medvedev does not speak about fulfillment of the tasks he set in 2008. He just repeats them again hoping that now he will be heard by his own subordinates.

Of course, repetition is the mother of learning, but here it is not the case.

Not only the repeated parts of the previous Address but also the new ideas of the 2009 Address are of interest. The two texts comparison is very significant: the 2009 Address can be called “getting away from politics”.

The President’s message is extremely far from politics. The key idea of the 2009 Address, if any, is that the technological progress will solve all our problems. Political and social institutions used to be taken care of, Russia’s domestic-policy development used to be linked to the foreign policy, and the economic crisis used to be regarded as a serious challenge, which should be responded to. But now, technical improvements, scientific discoveries and technological innovations are expected to become a universal panacea.

The idea that social and political problems can be solved through technical improvements appeared long ago. It had been popular as far back as the 19^th century and, later on, was a core of all the USSR authorities’ plans under Leonid Brezhnev. This conservative and opportunistic view of technological progress proved to be untenable every time, as the expected innovations were either blocked by the out-of-date system, or ineffective, or, on the contrary, caused many new problems still worsening the situation. Or rather, all those things are true for the innovations to some extent.

In short, social and political changes often encourage the technological progress, and the progress, in its turn, often leads to social changes and revolutions. But to think that with the unchanged social and political system we can achieve a qualitative breakthrough where it was not achieved before is an absolute nonsense. If modernization was possible with the current social system, it would have taken place long ago, and no presidential address would be needed. In addition, Dmitry Medvedev speaks about the private property and the market that are expected to sort the situation out by themselves.

By the way, here one can see another contradiction of this Address. On the one hand, Dmitry Medvedev works out a very detailed state modernization programme. On the other hand, he pins his hopes on the market and private business and calls for reducing the public sector (rather than makes this sector more effective). All the world, including the USA, decides to make the state participate in the economic development more actively, and only Russia does the opposite. It’s another matter that those calls are at odds with the practical actions. The reason is that the calls are inept and incompatible with the reality dictating its quite different rules and demands.

But even if to digress from general questions, it is unclear how the President is going to implement his programme of the state help to the technological progress and to simultaneously prevent the government from implementing the programmes. And what is still more unclear is where the money would be found to defray all those expenses. Incidentally, the privatization is the state’s giving up the profits that are made by its companies. Maybe, do the Russian authorities hope to get much money by selling shares of unprofitable enterprises? It is possible to hope for success here only if the companies’ unprofitability is organized deliberately and maintained artificially to facilitate the solution to the privatization issue. One can sell the goose that laid the golden egg, especially if one is ready to sell it on the cheap. But isn’t it better to reserve the goose for oneself?

The Russian authorities will have to choose between the mixed state-regulated economy and the free market.

Although, the Russian authorities have tested the both options over recent years, but neither of them has modernized the country. The reason is simple: the modernization is impossible without drastic change of the state’s political structure and of the society’s structure. This is an old truth but, for all that, the officials do not like it.

That’s why there was no response even to Dmitry Medvedev’s most moderate proposals in the sphere of democratization. The bureaucracy just blocks them showing weakness of the political leaders.

An acquaintance of mine, who was present at the Kremlin’s St. George Hall where the President addressed the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation, said that he had had a feeling of deja vu as if he attended the Plenum of the USSR Communist Party Central Committee during the last years of Leonid Brezhnev’s Stagnation Era or, at least, at the beginning of Mikhail Gorbachev’s Perestroika when the changes proposed boiled down to the necessity to establish the Bakery Ministry.

While the technological enthusiasm combines with the political conservatism, any bold initiatives come to nothing. If such a situation continues for a year or two, then at the end of Dmitry Medvedev’s presidential term his policy ineffectiveness can have consequences.

But I believe that the President will get some results. For example, President Medvedev’s initiative to cancel the day-light savings time was welcomed by the State Duma that had blocked the same proposal about a year ago. The political parties laws are not getting more democratic, the elections are not getting more free and honest, but on the other hand, the time course will be streamlined. As regards astronomy, here the Russian authorities are more competent than in the political issues. The day-light savings time will be abolished and millions of Russians will not have to get up early, which is especially poignant in September and in early October when, in spite of fewer daylight hours, people have to come to work and take their children to schools according to the day-light savings time.

It is necessary to put an end to those disgraceful practices!

I do hope that this will happen!

Boris Kagarlitsky is a Director of the Institute of Globalization and Social Movements

November 19, 2009 

Hot topics

• RUSSIA'S CURRENT POLITICS

Digest

Opinion