Tim has sent me a personal e-mail. He said he would pass my e-mail onto you. If you write to me I will respond.

I am BTW an ardent supporter of Israel, so we can take that off the table.

You said of me “… you started out to find data that proves your anti-Russian position …”. No, I started out to test the validity of your assertions. However, I’ll concede the order in which I responded perhaps gave you the impression of a poisoned search. Yet, as I told you forthrightly in both my first and second comments, I favored Russian sources over secondary sources; taking Russian self-assessment at face value, and using the secondary sources (how others see Russians) more for confirmation. This, then, represents a ‘best case’ assessment we can concede Russia. Had I been seeking to take the Russians out, I could have collected far more material and been far more scathing.

First, mine isn’t an ‘anti-Russian position’, neither is it pro-Russian. I had great hopes for Russia after the Soviets folded, and I have watched with concern for ordinary Russians the return of authoritarian policies. I also find somethings in the individual Russian character to admire, yet recognize in these same traits an undesirable effect when raised to the level of a state power. I haven’t made my mind up yet Russia’s recent actions rise to the level of a superpower confrontation on the scale of the Cold War (the title of my article asks ‘Wither Russia’, if you recall). However, I do note (along with Birdnow) that Russia is once again flexing its muscle, rapidly rebuilding its military, preemptively staking claim to arctic oil & gas reserves (in disputed waters), playing chicken with us in other people’s backyards, and bullying its neighbors; all of which puts Russia on a collision course, daring anyone to do something about it, and coming awfully close to the conditions if not the substance of a Cold War. I would like to see Russia ease off from wherever they think they are heading before things come to that. None of us needs another 40+ year, hair-trigger, global standoff; especially not with a bunch of terrorists running around playing both sides against the middle while setting off bombs.

Second, If not an actual Russian-American, it is clear both from your chosen alias and several pro-Russian comments you have some strong affinity with the country (more than is normal for a non-Russian) shaping your view of events. I admit my biases favor America in the main, Israel whenever in the right, and everyone else as appropriate, but yours give an unmistakable impression of a Russophile. Are you now denying you think Russians so wonderful they are ‘practically us’? Because, that’s the impression you gave. From things you have said, I wouldn’t suspect you of making the multiculturalist ‘we are no better, they are no worse’ argument for cutting some slack. So, why do that for Russia? I am willing to give Russia some benefit of the doubt, but so far Russia has not been very convincing they were ‘pushed’ into or justified in attacking Georgia, strong-arming Ukraine last winter, Belarus before that, building advanced smart-weapons having no other object than evading defense shields, bullying Poland and Czechoslovakia out of an adequate defense, using oil as a weapon on the OPEC model, bypassing our terrorist containment to do business with state sponsors, and diplomatically and materially aiding our sworn enemies Iraq and Iran. This is your idea of a partner we should trust in our campaign against terror? Why, because they also have terrorist problems?

I don’t have the advantage of face-to-face contact with very many Russians (only a handful of émigrés) and none I can call close, so I have to go by what I can glean from secondary sources. In the effort to be fair, however, I gave the strongest credence to how Russians describe themselves and then favorable secondary sources; so, you can’t exactly complain I stacked the deck. Taking these Russian-on-Russian observations, I dialed them into what we have seen directly of Russian actions and came to what I believe to be a fair but logical conclusion regarding actions and national character. Now, you ask us to ignore the things Russians reveal of themselves, substituting the picture you have of them.

Hogwash comes in two flavors. The kind cynically dished out by phonies, and the kind sincerely dished out by friends. Yours falls in the latter category. I don’t scorn you for it because, sooner or later, we all do it. I have caught myself doing it. It is a very common trap. I merely point out it doesn’t hold water and I am not buying. Nor do I buy the implied ‘more experience in these matters than thou’ argument, because too often experts get lazy and are then proved wrong. A corollary to Murphy’s Law says ‘the village idiot will invariably and immediately find the fatal flaw in the highly-sophisticated contraption experts labored decades to build’ (or some such). I feel like that sometimes, spotting the obvious and exploding other people’s long cherished certainties. A simple fact check then turns into an embarrassment they could easily have avoided. I could have said nothing, but then others would have been swayed by your conviction or exploited you as a conservative caught in the act of unjustifiably defending bullies. Mostly, I like and agree with the things you say, but in this case you went way out on a limb. I hope, as a friend and ally, to bring you back to solid footing.

You and I have had some good discussions, so I hope you will take this in the right spirit.

Hogwash!

I realize you are a bit sensitive with regard to Russia and Russians but saying “The Russian people have more in common with Americans than just about anybody in the world” and “… as much sense to talk about present day Germans as Nazis as it does to speak of Russians as Soviets ”. Oh, Please! Would you believe that if I said the Chinese have more in common with us than anyone because they are ‘natural capitalists’ or Australian-aboriginals because they are ‘fiercely independent’, or Israelis because both have a ‘comparable worldview’. Germany was militarily defeated and dragged through the mud for its atrocities. That never happened to Russia. Soviet-Russia was allowed to stalk quietly off into history, never having had to atone or apologize for its atrocities and aggressions. Germany took its mistakes to heart and resolved never to repeat them. Russia hasn’t and refuses to acknowledge any but economic miscalculations. Yes, Russia did allow foreigners into its archives, but hasn’t exactly busted its butt helping uncover ‘war crimes’ or ‘crimes against humanity’ and is even now in the process of closing its books.

Okay, let’s explore your assertion of commonality. Not wishing to pontificate from ignorance I did my usual homework via the Internet, mostly referencing Russian self-descriptions, to see how well your assertion of commonality bears up. I found U.S. State Department guidance to diplomats, Heritage Foundation analyses, a businessman’s guide to negotiating with Russians, Pravda, Johnson’s Russia List, Travel-Russia, a site aiding American boys in hot pursuit of Russian girls, and two Russian-English blogs. Here’s what I found:

Some highly un-American but typically Russian traits:
– rule-breakers (Americans, despite our protestations to the contrary, are conformists; it’s not for nothing we coined the term PC); Russians, while conforming outwardly, try to be non-conformists in myriad small ways (run traffic lights, thumb noses at safety regulations, take a snort on duty, &c)
– indifferent (less finicky) about a great many things that make Americans squirm (dirty streets, dirty socks, not saving or investing, the bullying of others by their government, other people’s opinions, appearance, posture, &c)
– hubris regarding Russia’s importance (okay, may be some commonality on this one)
– generous to a fault, but with a catch; Russians expect a quid pro quo and get pissed by failures to reciprocate; so if a Russian offers you his kid sister for those cold Moscow nights, you better cough up that prized Rolex
– insular (very friendly on surface, but don’t try to get too close)
– suspicious (don’t pry, you just could be KGB after all)
– righteously greedy (i.e., aggressively liberate foreigners (especially Americans) of our ill-gotten wealth because long conditioned by communists to regard us as ‘evil capitalists’ and our wallets, therefore, as legitimate plunder); even newly-rich, allegedly cosmopolitan Russians practice this minor piracy
– unvaryingly and correctly polite, especially the young toward the elderly (when is the last time you saw an American offer his seat on a bus; for that matter, when is the last time you were on a bus!); certain kinds of public rudeness will get you in trouble and many a Russian relishes the opportunity to lecture others on the perils of impropriety (ne kulturny! Nyet?)
– rude, especially the elderly toward the young (have no idea what goes on here, because every Russian seems devoted to his/her particular babushka but regards yours an alter kochër), apparently sweet old Russian grannies are renown for stabbing their way to the best seat on the bus
– sexual chauvinists; men still pick up the tab and women want to stay home after marriage cranking out babies (way behind the times!); well, maybe not the stay-at-home part, but definitely into having babies; most American women I know want no more than one or two babies and not a high priority
– political chauvinists; Russia is best, everyone else should get in line and grovel
– The consensus seems to be, Russians can be cold and rude initially, but warm up to strangers and friendly once they get to know and trust you.
– heavy drinkers (I don’t care how many beers you can down in an evening, no way you want to get into a drinking contest with one of these prodigies – and don’t be suckered she says she only drinks ‘tea’. Russians like something more than just heat in their tea to take the edge of those long subzero nights); I’ve noted a couple of posters who complained against the stereotyping of Russians as drunkards (you?) However, I also seem to remember a number of articles coming out of Russia and the Soviet Union around the time of the collapse and soon after verifying alcohol was and remains a serious social problem inside Russia, contributing to things like marital breakups, production losses, lethargy and indifference, &c. We can attribute part of that to a failing political system with its massive dependencies, but it also long predates the Soviets as a Russian trait of which both Tsarist Russia and Russians émigrés are famous.
– volcanic roughnecks (aka, hooligans) love to mix it up far more than Americans; quick to anger, quick to forget; erupts into more than usual number of injuries and fatalities; our Irish and Italian neighborhoods used to be like that, but no more and even the source countries have settled down
– mystical/spiritual/superstitious – how many times have we debated American secularism; well, it doesn’t seem to bother former atheists from the ex-atheist paradise
– tough negotiators, will probe for weakness and exploit every one of them; verbal (and sometimes physical) battering; imagine an American businessman intimidating clients and suppliers this way. Heck, we’re even helpful tto the competition. Russian negotiators respect strength and despise weakness; also far more patient than Americans in reaching agreements (willing to walk away from a deal), cagey and unwilling to agree on deliverables or dates; can be deal breakers – no such thing as a ‘final agreement, whereas Americans are sticklers for ‘a deal is a deal’ that is non-‘re’negotiable; Reagan understood all this and used it at Reykjavik

So far, more dissimilar than similar, don’t you agree? I promise you I was as inclusive as the sources were, but your Russians keep throwing up these differences; not I (though the way they said it made it sound more like stuff we should relate to, as in ‘Isn’t this how everybody does it?’ Uh, like no, not really, dude).

Among European hoteliers, it seems, Russians compare unfavorably. Among the reasons given: “Russian tourists were often aggressive and noisy and preferred to stay in their hotels all day and all night long.” This was from a survey I read while doing research in Pravda for my ‘Moscow Update’ article, but could not locate again but kept with my notes.

A young Russian calling himself Kenga (post #26 @ http://www.waytorussia.com/TalkLounge/conversation5990-0.html ) says part of the dilemma in defining modern-Russia and Russians stems from the eradication of Russia’s past by the Soviets, artificially disconnecting them from a past that, in critical ways, can’t be resurrected. It is one thing to learn the past you thought you knew was a fake, quite another to unlearn all the cultural baggage that went with it and have nothing else to give you bearings. You have been taught all your life to embrace socialism because capitalism kept your great-grandparents dirt poor and subservient, only to learn the opposite was true; that it was a feudalism not greatly different from the socialism you worshipped all your life (and still believe despite this newfound knowledge and determination to think differently); and that capitalism was just starting to free them of it when they were sold the Bolshevik bill of goods. How is that like the American experience of our selves in a historical context? How is it different?

Clearly, it is alike in that our own revisionists are trying to do it to us. It is different in that they have yet to succeed in hoodwinking a whole people, and there are enough of us still kicking and railing against the trend that it hasn’t triumphed. Even the wobbliest, socialism-worshipping liberal still has a past he can’t quite duck and often finds him/herself defending. Despite the best efforts of secularists, multiculturalists, and socialists to convince us of a past in which the framers were vile, corrupt, racist bunglers, or (alternatively) that they aimed for socialism from the start, the story of our founding and monumental advancements on the human condition manage to shine through – informing the wobbly of a glorious, promising past of which he/she is an unlikely product. The American socialist can’t quite escape his freedom-loving, enterprise-embracing, rugged-individualist past. Meanwhile, the Russian ex-socialist neo-capitalist is struggling to put together any sort of past he/she can relate to in a radically altered reality.

Perhaps, the best measure of any culture (character) is how it holds up under stress. Recent behavior of Russian soldiers in Georgia has not been greatly altered by the change in regimes (see http://www.russianaggression.org/2008/08/sos-russians-resort-to-heavy-violence.html ) it seems. Nor is this an isolated case (see http://www.time.com/time/europe/magazine/2000/36/grozny.html ). Now, before someone accuses me of a pro-American bias, have a look at the freely recounted stories of American and Russian soldiers (http://www.soldiertestimony.org/wordpress/?cat=25). Note the qualitative differences in the actions, reluctance, and remorse of each. I am not making a value judgment, only noting a very real difference in Russian versus American attitudes to a common situation. This is close to the difference in attitudes we had in WWII (Russian army raping, pillaging, and massacring enemy and friendly alike) and Vietnam (Russian advisors encouraging Vietnamese savagery). Atrocities happened on our side too; but, where the reaction of the Russian leadership has been first cover it up, vanish the offender, and only then blow it off as nobody else’s business, American leaders eventually (if not immediately) own up and publicly punish the offender. The effect this has on American soldiers has been to generally reinforce moral turpitude in the field minimizing this kind of behavior from happening, whereas the effect on Russian soldiers has been to harden them against and blame civilians for what happens to comrades (only know the guy disappeared, never why). This is failure of leadership, but its repetition over several generations and conflicts tells us the failure is cultural as much as individual (Okay, maybe a little of my bias did slip in here, but I just happen to think that way and not much I can do about it). We may be able to comprehend this young Russian soldier’s attitude (perhaps even empathize a little), but we can’t and won’t emulate or support it; and that defines a world of difference.

A person’s character is intertwined in some degree with his nation’s culture. Some of us feel this strongly, and others less. But, all have it in some degree and are subject to its dictates. An American and a Russian will regard the events in Georgia very differently, and that can be explained away as vested interests. But, these same two will also view lax Sub-Saharan sexual mores or Indonesian corruption (where neither has much at stake) very differently; and that is purely cultural.

So, too, two governments and their reactions and manipulations, half a world apart, are very different. Russian attitudes toward ‘their sphere and interests’ are very different and on a collision course with our own. Russian interests in sustaining their gas & oil boom are guaranteed to conflict with our need to nullify terrorist activities and, conversely, our anti-terrorism is playing havoc with Russian designs in the –stans. So, no, I don’t see the Russians being much of a help in defeating terrorism; though I will take what help I can from them so long as it doesn’t compromise our own integrity.

What all this adds up to is Russians aren’t at all like us (though they may be a little more like you individually because of a genuine affinity), they just don’t have the necessary equipment to think or be like us anymore than we have the necessary equipment to be or think like them. Even first- or second-generation Russian-Americans can’t make this claim because the reference points just won’t hold us in place longer than it takes to feel momentary connections (e.g., share jokes, agree on issues, forgive insults, anticipate reactions). We like to think we understand the ‘old country’ or the ‘created ethnic-homeland’ we’ve never really been a part of, but, every time we think that, ‘they’ do something totally outside our frame of reference; and that’s when we know it just doesn’t add up the same.

I understand your feelings toward your ‘rodina’ (your Russian name is a dead give away). Yours are not unlike my own feelings toward Israel. When Israel is attacked, I feel a stab in my heart; when threatened, a cold anger. And, those few times Israel has been the aggressor I want to leap to her defense as you do; convinced the allegations must be false. Russia is crying out it is they who are the one offended, and you want to believe them. But, our passion does not legitimize heartfelt presentments as impartial fact. Your situation is more ticklish, as Russia has, too often, been the aggressor, and is behaving very much again like its ‘old’ self. I argue this is not ‘“acting” like its old self’ or, as you would have it, behaving superficially like its old self. It is acting exactly as Russia has always acted in similar situations and totally in character. ‘Soviet’ and ‘Russian’ here are no more than labels for the same country and people doing the same things they have always done. Not all the same things Soviet Russia did or might do, okay, but pretty close; and, once started down that path, do you really think proud-Russia incapable of the same hubris as Soviet-Russia and Tsarist-Russia?

We need to be honest and realistic in our appraisals of these things if we expect others to take our arguments seriously, and disregarded in our opinions if we play fast and loose with the truth. How does covering for Russia disguise what is going on right now? How does this help your Russian friends and relatives recognize their leaders have overstepped and need to back off? Instead of helping by acting as a conduit for how the rest of the world sees them and likely to react, you signal support for further misdeeds. Where Russia is in the right or has transgressed against no one, absolutely defend her. But, don’t go over the precipice along with her. Stand back so you can be a real friend, and not a flatterer.

It makes as much sense to talk about present day Germans as Nazis as it does to speak of Russians as Soviets.

You said “… it should be our goal to make them allies in the war on Islamists.”

Didn’t we try that once and end up conceding half of Europe to the Soviets?

Looks like people like you have driven yourselves out of power by doing what you’ve been doing for the past two administrations.

So. . . economic collapse in Russia is a good thing, yes? Total collapse in Iraq has been just great, right? You have a poor grasp on Russia-US relations in the 1990s. Clinton did almost everything possible to prop up Boris, including helping destroy the communists in October, 1993, (Yeltsin’s team used the US Ambassador’s residence in Moscow as a headquarters before sending tanks to fire at Russia’s democratically elected Parliament) and again in June 1996 (providing election campaign expertise and ignoring violations.)

How does Russia exactly threaten us exactly? It doesn’t at all, at the moment. Putting US anti-missile defense systems in Europe will only entrench Putin further, justifying more spending on the military.

The Russians (and the rest of the world) have a right to be wary of Americans with views like yours.

You sound like Chicken Little to me. Some are still trying to keep Bush Derangement Syndrome alive. It seems you are moving on to Putin Derangement Syndrome.
The Russian people have more in common with Americans than just about anybody in the world, except maybe the Scots, and it should be our goal to make them allies in the war on Islamists.