Rossiyskaya Gazeta 6 February 2002 [translation for personal use only] Article by Mikhail Delyagin, director of the Institute for Globalization Problems: "They Can Allow Themselves Everything. U.S. Leader George Bush's Message to Americans Contains Quite a Lot That Is Instructive for Russians as Well"
The visit by Russian Government head Mikhail Kasyanov that has just ended has opened a new chapter in Russian-U.S. relations. The influence of the "American factor" on events in Russia, which was always quite significant, could become stronger in the future.
After 11 September the United States began the struggle against international terrorism, that is to say, for the first time since the times of the Cold War and the confrontation with the USSR, it has embarked once more on a "crusade" against a new "empire of evil," and it will now reap the rewards of mobilizing the economy and society, which is connected with this.
It is obvious today that the terrorist acts have not simply created a justification for the structural crisis in the U.S. economy but have also made it possible to overcome it: The halt in U.S. economic growth did not last long (only two quarters) and, according to preliminary figures, it was replaced by a growth of 0.2 percent as early as in the fourth quarter, that is to say immediately after the terrorist acts.
It can be assumed that U.S. strategic analysts took into account Russia's experience of the mobilizing effect of terrorist acts on society. It is now our turn to learn from the United States.
George Bush's message defines a new reality. By attracting capital for accelerated development as a result of the "export of instability," the United States is not simply isolating itself from this instability by means of the [National] Missile Defense system but is beginning to destroy everything that, in its opinion, does not correspond to its interests, without bothering about the consequences of its actions for other countries and peoples.
This is precisely why George Bush's message is aggressive in an unprecedented way. No compromise -- only the designation of countries as "bad." No negotiations -- only war. No looking for and eradicating motives -- only combating the consequences, terror. "Who is not with us is a terrorist."
Combating terror is becoming the same instrument for ensuring U.S. supremacy as combating Communism was before.
It is comforting that the United States understands force. Otherwise, it is difficult to explain for what other reason praise was given to India, which is balancing on the brink of a nuclear war, and China, against which the United States is expanding its military infrastructure in Kyrgyzstan. Bush correctly understands Russia's situation, ranking it on a par with China and India. We must not forget about them on account of the United States; they are our natural partners in global rivalry, which is no longer tied to geography.
Russia has to learn to live in this reality -- to gradually become stronger without losing its independence (1998 showed that the other way leads to catastrophe) and without attracting attention until we become sufficiently strong.
Bush proclaimed that the United States has three aims: its own security, victory over terrorism on a world scale (read: world supremacy), and the improvement of the economy.
Russia's aims are similar: its own security, the maximum expansion of its influence (political influence, if used sensibly, brings economic rewards, simply not immediately), and the improvement of the economy.
The recipe for improvement "according to Bush" is as follows: Reducing taxes and creating new jobs, reducing dependence on imports (by increasing its production of energy sources), additional powers for the president in the foreign trade sphere, social policy (extending the period for paying unemployment benefit and increasing expenditure on education).
Bush is showing an awareness of the key role played by active state regulation in improving even such a developed economy as that of the United States. We have to learn from the United States the effectiveness of state control, the firm pursuance of clearly understandable national interests, and vigorous state regulation in order to stimulate economic growth.