25 May 2017

The New Yorker: Putin's Shadow Cabinet and the Bridge to Crimea

The bridge would be a demanding and technically complex project, however, and at first there were doubts about who would be willing to undertake it. Then, in January, 2015, the Russian government announced that Arkady Rotenberg, a sixty-three-year-old magnate with interests in construction, banking, transportation, and energy, would direct the project. In retrospect, the choice was obvious, almost inevitable. Rotenberg’s personal wealth is estimated at more than two and a half billion dollars, and the bulk of his income derives from state contracts, mostly to build thousands of miles of roads and natural-gas pipelines and other infrastructure projects. Last year, the Russian edition of Forbes dubbed Rotenberg “the king of state orders” for winning nine billion dollars’ worth of government contracts in 2015 alone, more than any other Russian businessman. But perhaps the most salient detail in Rotenberg’s biography dates from childhood: in 1963, at the age of twelve, he joined the same judo club as Putin. The two became sparring partners and friends, and have remained close ever since. [...]

When Gazprom built pipelines inside Russia during the next decade, they were two to three times more expensive than equivalent projects in Europe, even when they were in temperate, accessible areas in southern Russia. Perhaps the most striking example of inefficiency occurred in 2013, when Gazprom announced that the cost of a pipeline that Rotenberg was building in Krasnodar—a warm, flat region near the Black Sea—had risen by forty-five per cent. No explanation was given; wages were relatively stable, as was the price of steel. That stretch of pipeline was meant to feed into a larger pipeline going through Bulgaria. After the Russian government suspended construction on the Bulgarian pipeline, Rotenberg’s project miraculously went on for another year. Mikhail Korchemkin, the head of East European Gas Analysis, said that it became clear that Gazprom had “switched from a principle of maximizing shareholder profits to one of maximizing contractor profits.” The company’s projects, he said, presented a “way of minting new billionaires in Russia: overpay for services and make them rich.” [...]

A source close to the Kremlin insisted that the rise of Rotenberg and similar Putin-era nouveau oligarchs was not the result of a purposeful plan: “It wasn’t Putin’s strategy to create these people. That’s a fantasy. He may have agreed to help them, and at a certain point, once they became large and successful, he realized that they might be useful, that it’s not so bad to have a caste of very wealthy people who are obligated to you.” In effect, Putin’s oligarchs form a shadow cabinet. Evgeny Minchenko, a political scientist in Moscow, told me, “These are trusted people, who will stick with Putin until the end, to whom he can assign certain tasks, who won’t get frightened by external pressure.” They can take on projects the Kremlin doesn’t want to fund or manage, such as sports teams, media programs, and political initiatives. [...]

Blinkin told me that the bridge wasn’t strictly necessary; Crimea could accommodate travellers to and from the peninsula by simply increasing the number of ferries between the city of Kerch and the Russian mainland. He noted that far more passengers travel between Helsinki and Stockholm, for example, exclusively by ferry. But an expansion in ferry service is not as grand as a bridge, and doesn’t send a message about Russia’s status as a world power. “Is that worth such gigantic expense?” Blinkin asked. “In a strict economic sense, no. But, if you factor in the political component, then yes.”

Haaretz: A Simplistic, Power-driven Religious Zionism Marches Away From Jewish Values

In a novel reading of the Jewish tradition, Soloveitchik identifies what he calls an ‘anarchistic tendency’ in the Jewish sages – for them, wielding power is reprehensible under all circumstances. The ‘desire for power in all its manifestations’ whether it be ‘political, economic, judicial or even spiritual’ undermines the intrinsic dignity of man. That holds true both for the one who suffers conquest, but also –and perhaps just as much - the one who conquers. A corrupt political reality, informed by the desire for power, negatively affects each individual. Man compromises his divine image when he exploits his powers to have mastery over others.

Soloveitchik wrote about the dangers of political dominion in 1951, just three years after the Jewish state’s founding, in many ways hedging against the possibility of a Zionism gone too far, anticipating the theological and political excesses of today. [...]

Complexity is not for weak minds, but perhaps, on this Jerusalem Day, there is a way to celebrate with the self-consciousness Soloveitchik urges: Honoring genuine Jewish values: gratitude and love, rather than conquest, and the incessant drive for power and dominion over others.

read the article

Haaretz: Trump Exposed the Fantasy of Netanyahu's 'Undivided Jerusalem'

The timing of Trump’s visit coincides with the commemoration of 50 years of Israeli rule over East Jerusalem, and the dissonance between Israel and the almost all of the rest of the world has been deafening. While official Israel is celebrating 50 years of “reunification”, even Israel’s closest allies see the event as another benchmark in the 50 years of occupation – the longest occupation in modern history. [...]

There are two national collectives in Jerusalem, one endowed with political rights and the other permanently disenfranchised and disempowered. In 1967, Israel annexed the land, but not the population. Palestinian East Jerusalemites are not citizens of Israel, nor may they vote in national elections. You will be told they were offered citizenship, or entitled to receive it. False. They may apply, and we may say no. They don’t apply – and we generally say no. [...]

And this is not the only spat that Israel has elected to initiate with its friends over Jerusalem. On May 3, UNESCO approved yet another Jerusalem resolution. While the text resolution remains an inflammatory and polemical manifesto, Israel went on the attack over things that simply did not appear in the resolution. “It denies the Jewish ties to Jerusalem” – no, it does not. On the two occasions when religious ties were cited, those of Jews, Christians and Muslims were mentioned. “It denies Israeli sovereignty, and Jerusalem is the capital of Israel” – the issue of sovereignty and the status of capital simply doesn’t appear in the text. “It calls East Jerusalem ‘occupied’” – true, but Israeli is virtually the only one that doesn’t.

Feigning rage over things attributed to the resolution (but that don’t appear in it), Israel conducted a well-choreographed campaign. Culture Minister Miri Regev called to close the UNESCO offices in Jerusalem – even though no such offices exist. Israel castigated Germany for its behind the scenes role in the framing of the resolution (instead of thanking them for having  promoted the  removal of its most toxic elements). The Swedish Ambassador was summoned for a reprimand for voting in favor of the resolution (so did Russia and China, who were not reprimanded – authoritarian regimes apparently get a pass).

Vox: China's panda diplomacy, explained (Mar 22, 2017)




Atlas Obscura: The Hunt for Ukraine’s Toppled Lenin Statues

The toppling of the Bessarabska Lenin led to a phenomenon that has become known as Leninopad, or “Leninfall”—the removal of Lenin statues from around Ukraine. Of course, it wasn’t the first time Soviet monuments had been brought low, as statues had been destroyed as early as 1990. But in the following months the intensity increased—so much so that in February 2014 alone, a total of 376 statues were torn down.

Ukrainians had a lot of statues to work with, but their efforts were diligent and comprehensive. In 1990, when Ukraine declared its independence from the Soviet Union, there were 5,500 Lenin statues around the country, more than in any other former Soviet republic. With the country’s 2015 decommunization laws, which outlawed communist symbols including statues, flags, and Soviet-era place names, there was a mandate to remove the last of the Lenin monuments. Today, none still stand. But they haven’t disappeared. [...]

The afterlife of these statues is the subject of the new photobook from Fuel Publishing, Looking for Lenin. Photographer Niels Ackermann and journalist Sébastien Gobert started the project by searching for the remains of the Bessarabska Square Lenin, and they ended up photographing toppled Lenins across the country. Their goal was not just to see where the physical embodiments of the Soviet past had ended up, but also to discover how Ukrainians felt about the ongoing process of decommunization.