PERSPEKTIV PERSPEKTIV | Page 8

8 teen-nineties as a period of unremitting chaos, in which Western partners tried to force their advan- tages, demanding that Russia swallow everything from the eastward expansion of nato to the inva- sion of its Slavic allies in the former Yugoslavia. This is a common narrative, but it ignores some stubborn facts. The West welcomed Russia into the G-8 economic alliance. The violence in the Balkans was the worst in Europe since the end of the Second World War and without intervention would likely have dragged on. And Russian secu- rity concerns were hardly the only issue at stake with respect to the expansion of nato; Poland, Czechoslovakia, and other countries in the region were now sovereign and wanted protection. “It just felt to me grotesquely unfair, if that word can be used in geopolitics, that yet again the Cen- tral Europeans were going to be screwed,” Strobe Talbott, Bill Clinton’s leading adviser on Russia and the region, said. “To tell them they had to live in a security limbo because the Russians would have hurt feelings and be frightened just didn’t hold wa- ter.” Nevertheless, American politicians did worry about how reordering the economic and securi- ty arrangements of Europe would affect a fallen power and would-be partner. Clinton and his ad- visers were aware that reactionary political forces in Russia—the so-called “red-brown coalition” of diehard Communists and resurgent nationalists— viewed the United States as exploitative and tri- umphalist and hoped to gain control of the state. In 1996, during a summit meeting in Moscow, Clinton went for an early-morning run with Talbott in the Sparrow Hills, near Moscow State Universi- ty. Clinton had known Talbott since they were stu- dents at Oxford, and confided his anxiety. He did not regret the expansion of nato or the decision, at last, to battle Serbian forces in Bosnia. But he knew that he was making Yeltsin’s political life ex- cruciatingly difficult. “We keep telling ol’ Boris, ‘O.K., now, here’s what you’ve got to do next—here’s some more shit for your face,’ ” Clinton told Talbott as they ran. “And that makes it real hard for him, given what he’s up against and who he’s dealing with.” Earlier that year, Yeltsin had summoned Talbott. “I don’t like it when the U.S. flaunts its superiority,” he told him. “Russia’s difficulties are only tempo- rary, and not only because we have nuclear weap- ons but also because of our economy, our culture, our spiritual strength. All that amounts to a legiti- mate, undeniable basis for equal treatment. Rus- sia will rise again! I repeat: Russia will rise again.” When the 1996 election season began, Yeltsin was polling in the single digits. Much of the country held him responsible for economic measures that seemed to help only those close to Kremlin power. For millions, reform—including the “shock thera- py” pushed by Western advisers and politicians— meant a collapse in basic services, hyperinflation, corruption, kleptocratic privatization, and an eco- nomic downturn as severe as the Great Depres- sion. Most Russians blamed not the corrosion of the old system but, rather, the corruptions of the new. Demokratiya (democracy) was popularly re- ferred to as dermokratiya (shit-ocracy). Yeltsin, benefitting from the support of both the oligarchs and the International Monetary Fund, managed to eke out a victory against his Communist oppo- nent, but he continued to drink heavily, despite a history of heart attacks, and, in his final years in power, was often a sorry, inebriated spectacle. On New Year’s Eve, 1999, Yeltsin appeared on national television sitting in front of a Christmas tree. Looking blocky and moribund, he said that he was resigning. “I am sorry that many of our dreams failed to come true,” he said. “I am sorry that I did not live up to the hopes of people who believed that we could, with a single effort, a single strong push, jump out of the gray, stagnant, totalitarian past and into a bright, wealthy, civilized future. I used to believe that myself.” A man who had resisted a coup eight years earlier no longer had the endurance for office or the political imagination to advance the cause. “I have done all I could,” he said. “A new generation is coming.” With that, he appointed as his succes- sor Vladimir Putin, a relatively obscure intelligence agent who had been accelerated through the ranks because he had proved himself disciplined, shrewd, and, above all, loyal to his bosses. One of Putin’s first decrees was to protect Yeltsin from future prosecution. One of Putin’s first decrees was to protect Yeltsin from future prosecution. Then he set out to stabilize the country and put it on a course of traditional Russian autocracy. “As Yeltsin started to withdraw, the old system reconsolidated, and Putin finalized this regression,” Andrei Kozyrev, the foreign minister between 1990 and 1996, said. “The fundamental problem was an inability to complete the economic and political reforms, and so we slipped back into confrontation with the West and nato.” Putins World Putin’s resentment of the West, and his corre- sponding ambition to establish an anti-Western conservatism, is rooted in his experience of de- cline and fall—not of Communist ideology, which was never a central concern of his generation, but, rather, of Russian power and pride. Putin, who was born in 1952, grew up in Leningrad, where, during the Second World War, Nazi troops imposed a nine-hundred-day siege that starved the city. His father was badly wounded in the war. Putin joined the K.G.B. in 1975, when he was twenty-three, and was eventually sent to East Germany. Posted in one of the grayest of the Soviet satel- lites, Putin entirely missed the sense of awakening and opportunity that accompanied perestroika, and experienced only the state’s growing feck- lessness. At the very moment the Berlin Wall was breached, in November, 1989, he was in the base- ment of a Soviet diplomatic compound in Dresden feeding top-secret documents into a furnace. As crowds of Germans threatened to break into the building, officers called Moscow for assistance, but, in Putin’s words, “Moscow was silent.” Putin returned to Russia, where the sense of post-imperial decline persisted. The West no longer feared Soviet power; Eastern and Central Europe were beyond Moscow’s control; and the fifteen republics of the Soviet Union were all going their own way. An empire shaped by Catherine the Great and Joseph Stalin was dissolving. In Moscow, Western reporters could arrange visits to crumbling nuclear-weapons sites, once secret underground bunkers, and half-empty pris- on camps. The most forbidding commissars of the Soviet Union—leaders of the K.G.B., the Army, and the Communist Party—failed in an attempt to pull off a counter-revolutionary coup d’état, in August, 1991, and were locked away in a notorious prison called the Sailor’s Rest. Other high-ranking loyal- ists, refusing the judgment of the new order, ad- ministered justice for themselves. The head of the Ministry of Internal Affairs, knowing that he was about to be arrested, wrote a note (“I lived honest- ly all my life”), shot his wife, shoved the barrel of a revolver into his mouth, and pulled the trigger. For Westerners caught up in post-Cold War tri- umphalism, it was easier to take note of the new liberties than of the new anxieties, which were profound for millions of Russians. The fall of the imperial state meant the loss of two million square miles of territory, a parcel larger than India. Tens of millions of ethnic Russians now found themselves “abroad.” Amid newfound freedoms of expression, travel, religion, and association, there was also a palpable sense of disorientation, humiliation, and drift. In speeches and interviews, Putin rarely men- tions any sense of liberation after the fall of Com- munism and the Soviet Union; he recalls the nine- Putin revealed his distrust for an open system almost immediately. He saw a state that had be- come barely functional, and he set about restoring its authority the only way he knew how: manually, TRUMP, PUTIN, AND THE NEW COLD WAR 9