|
Russian forest fires point toward EU In October 2008, Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi said Russian membership of the European Union is a "vision" he has held for several years. "I consider Russia to be a Western country and my plan is for the Russian Federation to be able to become a member of the European Union in the coming years" Berlusconi told reporters in Brussels. Russia is the main source of Europe's oil and gas, and Russia is a major and fast-growing market for the continent's exporters, so Russian membership would be a big economic boost to the EU. If Russia also became a member of the Eurozone, Greece's sovereign debt crisis would pale into insignificance, and the Euro would probably replace the dollar as the world’s reserve currency. Of course Russia's huge size would raise issues with migrant labour and Council of Europe votes, but all in all it is definitely in the EU's interest to have Russia as a member. What about the other way around, why would Russia want to join the EU? In February 2010 the Institute of Contemporary Development (INSOR), a think tank headed by Russian President Dmitry Medvedev, published an essay called “21st-Century Russia: Reflections on an Attractive Tomorrow” which, amongst other things, argued that Russia should join the EU in order to stimulate Russia’s modernization. Medvedev has made much of his modernization agenda for Russia, promising to build an advanced innovation economy, yet evidence of his success is thin on the ground. Just 20 years ago, on the eve of the Soviet Union's disintegration, Russia was a scientific superpower, carrying out more research than China, India and Brazil combined. Since then, according to an analysis carried out for the FT by Thomson Reuters which indexes papers from 10,500 research journals worldwide, it has been left behind not only by the world-beating growth of Chinese science but also by India and Brazil. As well as a decline in scientific achievement and crumbling infrastructure, the country suffers from debilitating levels of corruption in the Judiciary and Police. Many believe the Russian forest fires, ominously burning on the 10th anniversary of the Kursk submarine disaster, have not only once again exposed the fragility of Russian infrastructure, they have once again demonstrated the failings of Russia’s “power vertical” political structure. Singapore is less democratic than Russia, but in Singapore leaders are just figure heads representing a collective hive of policy experts with PhD's in mathematics, physics and engineering. What is the difference between the hive and the herd? In the hive individuals are as self-less and as dedicated as computers and petrol engines, consequently power can be perfectly devolved in accordance with the capability of the individual. In the herd individuals deviate from collective optimality by psychological/emotional noise. Consequently the herd needs discipline and guidance imposed on it, and as the individuals within the herd become increasingly sub-optimal, it needs increasingly tyrannical leadership. Hives are perfect machines, herds are chaotic and corrupt. The government in Singapore is a hive rated by Transparency International as the 3rd least corrupt in the world, Russian government is a herd rated 146th. Nevertheless, critics of Vladimir Putin, Russia's Prime Minister and architect of her current political system, sometimes fail to appreciate how difficult it is to build enlightened government, and wrongly imagine democracy to be a magic wand. In Singapore the bright young things of scientific academia, the future masters of the universe, aspire to climb the ivory tower and join the policymaking elite. In Russia, more likely, the bright young things aspire to climb the golden ladder and join Goldman Sachs. In other words, Russia’s problems do not reflect a lack of political leadership, or a lack of political vision, but rather the scale of the task confronting the leadership has simply overwhelmed their limited attention span, the vertical power structure has a limited ability to multitask. For the last few years Putin has been focused on repairing the damage done by Borris Yeltsin’s disastrous privatizations, and he has only recently begun to reach a resolution. Now the forest fires appear to be yet another example of the dangers of rolling back of state authority - Putin eliminated the national fire service in 2007, transferring responsibility to land owners who subsequently focused on quick profits instead of safety. Yet EU accession offers the leadership the expertise needed to inject new life into the now snail paced modernization. Instead of micro-managing government or improving its culture, just bypass it, simply outsource policymaking to the EU. Greece is an example of a country currently undergoing rapid reforms under EU direction. When government incompetence and corruption brought Greece to her knees, she turned to the EU for help. The Greek Prime Minister has called the new model "trusteeship", now EU technocrats call the shots, and they are implementing radical reforms to Greek spending, taxation, working practices and market regulations. Turkey is an example of a country that successfully put in place dramatic economic reforms in a bid for EU membership. Now Turkey is an economic powerhouse currently growing at 11 per cent. Throughout its reform period, Turkey enjoyed a strong government able to pursue an aggressive EU reform agenda. Today, Turkish government is weaker, to an extent that is a consequence of the political reforms the EU have imposed, and the long term consequences are a little worrying.
In conclusion, Russia should enter into EU accession negotiations and
rapidly push through the recommended economic reforms by leveraging its
quasi-authoritarian political system. Russia should resist political
reforms as long as possible, down the line the EU may even have
something to learn from Russia about strong government.
|