What an enigma is Russia!
Despite a political history that appears to have been characterised by brutal
repression, corruption and militarism it has been – and still is – a breeding
ground of massive talents in the arts, literature, music, philosophy and
science. How can that be? And how is one supposed to come up with a popular characterisation
of your stereotypical Russian? Are they cultured sophisticates who have shaped
Western European arts and sciences? Are they vodka-swilling brutes, lost in a
sea of nostalgic yearning for the Soviet era? Are they oppressed victims of a
succession of callous political systems, inured to hardship, imbued with
cynicism and devoid of hope? The fact that stereotyping the people of a nation
is a lazy route to superficiality has never prevented us doing so, but with
Russians, it seems particularly tricky. I know only one Russian personally – a young
academic who has a winning smile, a sense of humour and a love of classical
music. She has lived and worked in England long enough to be comfortable with both
the language and the people – so much so that, when I told her she didn’t seem very
Russian, she replied in an accent chillingly reminiscent of that Cold War
character Olga, the nasty piece of work in From
Russia with Love, “I can do if you want.” Therefore, based on my sample of
one, I conclude that Russians are not easy to characterise.
Nevertheless, Putin’s
henchmen are doing quite a good job of reinforcing the “nasty” image just now, sending
heavies over here to bump off their surplus-to-requirements citizens, then
claiming it has nothing to do with them. (Their assertion that the British
Secret Service is to blame might just wash in a ‘spy-counter-spy’ scenario but
having just witnessed Putin’s pretence of a democratic election, it is more
likely that his regime blames the West in order to bolster its ‘strong
leadership’ credentials at home.) Whilst it may be beneficial to London’s
economy to have Russian oligarchs spending loads of money in the retail sector
and lining the pockets of British lawyers with their endless ownership
squabbles, we really must insist that they moderate their gangsterish
tendencies, at least while guests in our relatively law-abiding country.
The question is how can
we insist? Fighting talk of Britain “punching above its weight” is jingoistic,
nostalgic nonsense. We moved into the lightweight category soon after WWII,
where we have languished – resentfully – ever since. When faced with a powerful
adversary, it is useful to cultivate powerful allies – regardless of their
moral credentials – and it is with this pragmatic approach that British politics
proceeds. Of course, diplomacy is always to be preferred to conflict but in
this instance, diplomacy has hit a couple of obstacles. One is Russian
insistence that the West is out to do them down. The other is Boris Johnson.
Notwithstanding there has been a tit-for-tat expulsion of diplomats, this has
achieved nothing so it may be time to adopt subtler tactics such as, for
example, those employed in the latest spat between India and Pakistan.
The Indian deputy high
commissioner in Islamabad recently complained that he was awoken at 03.00 when
someone rang his doorbell and ran off. He insisted it was Pakistan security
agents. A few days later, the Pakistani deputy high commissioner in New Delhi
was awoken at 03.00 by an identical doorbell-ring-and-run incident. It was, he
claimed, an act of retaliation. Now, this kind of low-level tit-for-tat
diplomatic activity has its advantages. For one, it is a lot cheaper than
expulsions, though just as effective. For another, it is well within the
capabilities of Boris, a man well qualified to be leader of a
doorbell-ring-and-run gang: we may be confident that he has at least some
understanding of what the job entails. Furthermore, the Russians will be
extremely annoyed, as it is well known they have no sense of humour.
No comments:
Post a Comment