8月再度给俄罗斯带来了灾难。十多年来，俄罗斯在这个月份里经历过主权违约、两次潜艇事故、飞机恐怖袭击和格鲁吉亚战争。如今，俄罗斯正处在该国有史以来最严重的致命热浪之中。
野火已直接导致至少54人丧生，几千人无家可归。从熊熊燃烧的森林和闷烧的泥炭沼中散发出来的热浪与烟雾，又导致另外数千人过早离开人世。莫斯科的死亡率翻了一倍，达到每日死亡700人。然而，火灾比任何时候都更加赤裸裸地暴露出了俄罗斯基础设施和公共管理的恶化——尽管过去十年石油和天然气为俄罗斯带来了大量收入。
消防车等设备短缺、路况糟糕以致设备无法及时运抵，以及协调不善，均加重了火情。俄罗斯前总统、现任总理弗拉基米尔•普京(Vladimir Putin)曾提到村民拨打应急部门电话却被挂断的事情。简言之，这一切再次证明现代化对于俄罗斯的极端重要性。继普京之后出任俄罗斯总统的德米特里•梅德韦杰夫(Dmitry Medvedev)，去年秋季就宣布以建设现代化为目标。
本次危机可能会进一步助长未被大肆宣扬的另一个新现象，即俄罗斯国内媒体所称的外交政策的“可贵”转变。按照这种新思想，外交必须服务于俄罗斯的现代化事业。这意味着与西方重修旧好。西方是俄罗斯所需投资和技术的唯一来源。
新外交思想的第一个确凿证据来自俄外交部5月份外泄的一份文件。梅德韦杰夫上月向俄罗斯大使们发表讲话时，也对此予以了证实。思想极为现代的梅德韦杰夫甚至在Twitter上阐述了相关主旨。总之，俄罗斯在普京第二个总统任期内由石油助长的傲慢与慷慨激昂已成为过去。取而代之的是务实主义。俄罗斯应该奉行的是“没有朋友，也没有敌人，只以利益为重”。它“首先应与德国、法国、意大利、欧盟和美国”（没提到英国）建立现代化的伙伴关系。
关注俄罗斯的观察家们对此展开了热评。上世纪90年代为俄罗斯提供经济改革建议、对普京时代多有批评的瑞典经济学家安德斯•阿斯伦德(Anders Aslund)称，这是一次“巨大、但没有引起人们充分重视的转变”。观察家们说，这一新思想已流露出许多迹象，并展现出一些成果：斯摩棱斯克坠机后与波兰修好；与美国签署新的《裁减战略武器条约》(Start)；突然与挪威化解长达40年的边境争端；支持对伊朗实施新制裁。
观察家们同时也发出了大量告诫。俄罗斯无法一夜之间从大灰熊变成泰迪熊。其方针仍是强硬甚至愤世嫉俗的，特别是针对其在前苏联地区的邻国。那份外交部文件便指出，目前正是在波罗的海国家及乌克兰捞取廉价资产的好时机——这些国家属于在去年金融危机中受创比俄罗斯更重的少数经济体。就连亲近波兰也是因为俄罗斯认识到：以往两国关系冷淡，妨碍了俄罗斯与欧盟建立广泛合作。
熟知克里姆林宫想法的人士表示，俄罗斯在外交上的转变，一定程度上是受到美国总统巴拉克•奥巴马(Barack Obama)“重置”美俄关系的推动。重置之说，缓和了莫斯科在布什时代的受围心态。莫斯科认为，美国已经默认其在前苏联地区的势力范围——华盛顿对此予以否认。
俄罗斯在外交政策上的反思，主要是受该国经济去年下滑8%的触动。经济大幅滑坡，暴露出俄罗斯资源型经济的脆弱。危机前流向俄罗斯企业的廉价外国资金也已枯竭。
这一反思是对上一位信奉“务实外交”的克里姆林宫主人的呼应——那位主人就是米哈伊尔•戈尔巴乔夫(Mikhail Gorbachev)。当年，戈尔巴乔夫就试图在一个功能失调的国家推行现代化。梅德韦杰夫不久也将遭遇与戈尔巴乔夫相似的困境。在俄罗斯当前发展阶段，不进行政治和社会改革，经济就不可能复兴。单纯颁布建设高科技产业的命令是不可取的——比如克里姆林宫下令在莫斯科郊外建设“俄罗斯硅谷”之事。
一个发达的经济体要求在政治和思想领域存在竞争。领导人必须接受公众监督。除了一、两个海湾石油国家，在人均产出上位居世界前列的国家（俄罗斯渴望加入这一行列）都在实行民主。普京和梅德韦杰夫明白这一点。但他们同时也认为，戈尔巴乔夫的步伐迈得太大、太快，以致失去了对改革的控制。正如他们所见，其结果就是造成了十年的混乱，令俄罗斯蒙羞。
因此，政治放开的进程可能会很缓慢，无论2012年当选总统的是普京还是梅德韦杰夫。这个“二人组”需要在以下两个方面巧妙地加以平衡：力争在威权统治下推行现代化，同时在俄罗斯广袤的土地上更新基础设施；促进高科技产业发展，同时满足民众对改善基本民生的渴望。
大部分俄罗斯人仍执着于普京式的稳定。但是，就像俄罗斯地下的泥炭火会散发出烟雾一样，在言论自由的俄罗斯博客世界，也传出了不满的声音。一位来自特维尔(Tver)乡下的博主抱怨道：“如果我们连最基本的消防车都缺少，我们为什么还需要俄罗斯硅谷呢？”
译者/杨远
http://www.ftchinese.com/story/001034303
August has once more brought disaster to Russia. This same month has, over a dozen years, seen Russia's sovereign default, two submarine accidents, terror bombings of airliners and the Georgian war. Now it has witnessed the deadly climax of the country's worst heatwave.
Wildfires have directly killed at least 54 people and left thousands homeless. The heat and smog from blazing forests and smouldering peat bogs has caused the premature deaths of thousands more. Moscow's mortality rate doubled to 700 a day. Yet, more starkly than ever, the fires have exposed – despite the flood of oil and gas revenues over the past decade – the degradation of Russia's infrastructure and public administration.
The fires have been worsened by shortages of equipment such as fire engines, delays in transporting apparatus over Russia's dreadful roads, and failures of co-ordination. Prime minister and former president Vladimir Putin himself has told of country-dwellers calling emergency services which simply hung up. In short, they have demonstrated once more how crucial is the modernisation of Russia that Mr Putin's successor as president, Dmitry Medvedev, declared last autumn to be his goal.
The crisis may further reinforce another, less publicised, recent phenomenon: what domestic media have called a “sensational” shift in foreign policy. Diplomacy, according to this new thinking, must become a servant of Russia's modernisation project. And that means rebuilding bridges with the west – the only source of both the investment and technology Russia needs.
The first concrete evidence of this fresh approach came in a leaked foreign ministry document in May. Mr Medvedev confirmed the themes last month in a speech to Russian ambassadors. The thoroughly modern Mr Medvedev even tweeted the main points on Twitter. In essence, the oil-fuelled hubris and breast-beating of Mr Putin's second presidential term is out. In comes pragmatism. Russia should have “no friends, or enemies, only interests”. It should form modernising partnerships “above all with Germany, France, Italy, the European Union and the US”. (The UK gets no mention.)
Russia-watchers are abuzz. Anders Aslund, a Swedish economist who advised on Russia's 1990s economic reforms, and a frequent critic of the Putin era, calls the shift “huge, and very underestimated”. That said, there had already been signals – and results – of the new approach: the rapprochement with Poland after the Smolensk air crash; a new Start treaty with the US; sudden resolution of a 40-year border dispute with Norway; Russia's support for new sanctions against Iran.
There are also hefty caveats. Russia will not go from grizzly bear to teddy bear overnight. The logic is hard-nosed, even cynical, especially towards Russia's former Soviet neighbours. The foreign ministry paper suggests now is a good time to scoop up cheap assets in the Baltic states and Ukraine, among the few economies hit harder by last year's financial crisis than Russia. Even the cosying up to Poland was motivated by realisation that the previous chill blocked the path to broader co-operation with the EU.
People familiar with Kremlin thinking say the shift was facilitated in part by President Barack Obama's “reset” of relations, which has eased Moscow's Bush-era siege mentality. Moscow believes the US has tacitly acknowledged its sphere of interest in the former Soviet republics – something Washington denies.
More than anything the foreign policy rethink reflects the shock of Russia's 8 per cent slump last year, which exposed the weaknesses of its resource-based economy. The pre-crisis flow of cheap foreign credit to Russian companies has also dried up.
There are echoes here of the last Kremlin-dweller who embraced pragmatic foreign relations as he tried to modernise a dysfunctional state: Mikhail Gorbachev. And Mr Medvedev will soon confront the same dilemma Mr Gorbachev did. Economic renewal of a country at Russia's stage of development is impossible without political and social renewal. It is no good simply to decree that a high-tech industry should come into being – as the Kremlin has attempted by ordering construction of a “Russian silicon valley” outside Moscow.
An advanced economy requires competition in politics and ideas. It needs leadership exposed to public scrutiny. Barring one or two Gulf oil states, the global leaders in output per capita – which Russia aspires to join – are functioning democracies. Mr Putin and Mr Medvedev know this. But they also believe Mr Gorbachev went too far, too fast, and lost control of his reforms. The result, as they see it, was a decade of chaos and humiliation for Russia.
Progress on political loosening is therefore likely to be slow, whether Mr Putin or Mr Medvedev takes the presidency next in 2012. Yet the tandem faces a tricky balancing act in trying to deliver authoritarian modernisation, while renewing infrastructure across Russia's vastness; in stimulating high-tech business while satisfying popular desires for more basic improvements.
Most of the population still cleaves to Putin-style stability. But, like the smoke seeping from its subterranean peat fires, signs of discontent are filtering up from Russia's free-speaking blogosphere. As one blogger from rural Tver complained: “Why the hell do we need Skolkovo . . . if we don't have elementary fire engines.”
没有评论:
发表评论