However while wily politically, he only used primitive methods in maintaining power. To elicit confessions from innocent defendants at show trials he used the most elemental torture techniques. Physical and psychological coercion were the solutions to all of his problems. He is attributed with the aphorism that said. “to eliminate the problem it is necessary to eliminate the individual who creates it”.
Although less harsh than Stalin, Putin's regime is said to be just as autocratic as Stalin's. It has consistently eliminated any feasible political competition, built a fawning timidity amongst parliamentarians, demanded obedience from judicial authorities, controlled large media outlets, encouraged xenophobic nationalism in propaganda, and rigged elections.
While Putin's respect for Stalin is widely recognized, he has outright denied in public forums that there is any element of Stalin's approach in his government. While the widely-read neo-conservative journal “The National Interest” is known not to be pro-Putin, it has some serious reservations about labeling the Russian's president's regime as Stalinist as seen by its contributor Dimitri A. Simes.
He states that “Ever since Vladimir Putin was sworn in for the third term as President of Russia, numerous academics, journalists and politicians have been pressuring the U.S. government to view modern day Russia as the second incarnation of the Soviet Union under Joseph Stalin. It's a dangerous trend that should be resisted”.
“The National Interest” points out that Stalin is responsible for having some sixty million people killed. But there's no evidence that Putin has done anything similar nor has been accused of it. Stalin forbade any political opposition, with opponents being executed or sent to slave labour camps. Putin allows numerous opposition groupings and publications to exist, albeit not without intimidation. Owners of bookstores with sections dedicated to anti-government literature fear no reprisals. The government owned TV channel ‘Rossiya 1' has often allowed outspoken opponents of Putin to voice their uncensored opinions on popular discussion panels. [It must be stated that the Russian State television adheres to a strictly pro-government stance and Putin uses quasi-judicial and administrative mechanisms to hinder any political opposition to develop into feasible political alternatives. Ed.]
Stalin implemented an imperialistic expansionist foreign policy as clearly evidenced in his invasions of Finland and Poland in 1939 and the annexations of the Baltic states in 1940 and the occupation of Eastern Europe after WWII. Putin's only foreign military incursion was into Georgia in 2008.
While these are only some of the arguments advanced by the journal, perhaps for some the most compelling suggestions of ‘The National Interest' are that labeling Putin as the inheritor of Stalin's legacy “interferes with the United States' ability to pursue its national interests in dealing with Russia; and when you demonize somebody, working together with them on issues of common interest becomes far more difficult. … To argue that Putin is the moral equivalent of Stalin is not only misleading, but it trivializes the victims of Stalin's tyranny.” [One might ask what truly genuine, credible ‘issues of common interest' might there be other than the all-inclusive motherhood mantra of ‘world peace'. Ed.]
While admitting that differences between Putin and Stalin must be acknowledged in making a comparison, undeniable similarities still exist. The concept of ‘re-Sovietization' of the Russian state under Putin is seen as a distinctive Stalinist trait. It refers to the continued support and strengthening of ineffective, massive state enterprises and the reluctance to continue with the privatization of major state-owned corporations. In the first quarter of 2013, some 300,000 small to medium sized private sector concerns were closed, nearly 7% of the total.
Putin, by stating that the military production sector of the economy is the most important for the country, military projects have received priority in spending. Related to this is his stance in foreign policy, which observers see as Putin's return to cold war rhetoric. The territory of the former Soviet Union is unwaveringly seen as Moscow's to control. Thus opposing the integration of formerly Soviet-occupied states with the European Union and hindering them in developing stronger ties with the West are two of the basic principles guiding the Kremlin's behavior internationally.
In the spring of 2012 the State Duma adopted legislation limiting citizen's rights. Thus freedom of speech, association and assembly have been placed under comprehensive restrictions. In 2013 there has been much attention directed at non-governmental organizations amounting to the harassment. Many say this puts NGOs directly under government control. It has been indicated by opponents of Putin that directors of NGOs who resist government interference in their organizations will be prosecuted and imprisoned – harsh treatment, no milder than Stalin's.
The imprisonment of the Pussy Riot female rock group on charges of hooliganism, the conviction on spurious charges some years ago of Russian business magnate Mikhail Khordorkovsky, a serious potential rival, who received a second term of imprisonment in 2011and the unsolved killing of Anna Politkovskaya, an author, journalist and investigator of Russian atrocities in Chechenya, are three of many more reasons for claiming that Stalin has made a comeback of sorts under Putin. The current Russian president has concentrated power and centralized control in the Kremlin and drawn on the legends of tsars, Soviet leaders, including Stalin.
Stalin looms mightily in Russia's background, subject of a bitter debate and an emotional interpretation of Russia itself. Discussions about Stalin may seem to be about the Gulag, the show trials, repressions, leadership during the war etc. But in actuality this discourse is about Russia itself, its soul and substance.
Without acknowledging the success or failure of de-Stalinization critics say that Russia will not thrive until it comes to honest terms with Stalin's crimes, with all of its political and emotional consequences, both in and without the government. And then many add: Putin has resisted efforts to make that happen.
Laas Leivat
- Opinion – Stalinization, de-Stalinization, what's it to be? – IX
- Opinion – Stalinization, de-Stalinization, what's it to be? – VIII
- Opinion – Stalinization, de-Stalinization, what's it to be? – VII
- Opinion – Stalinization, de-Stalinization, what's it to be? – VI
- Opinion – Stalinization, de-Stalinization, what's it to be? – V
- Opinion – Stalinization, de-Stalinization, what's it to be? – IV
- Opinion – Stalinization, de-Stalinization, what's it to be? – III
- Stalinization, de-Stalinization, what's it to be? – II
- Stalinization, de-Stalinization, what's it to be? – I
