What’s Russia’s Problem of not Jumping on our Troubled Economy

Sometimes we become wrapped so tight in our own world we forget how other look or feel towards us Americans.  Since our economical troubles began late last September, just about every country has weighted in with both proposed solutions and/or condemnations or any combination there of, regarding what we have caused to the international community at large, but one country has been relatively silent over the economic burdens around the globe, and that country is Russia.

For me, this is rather amazing, since Russia’s economy has been performing very well over the past few years; so along came the international down turn, what’s their reaction?

A fellow blogger (Andrew) posted this interesting article, entitled: “Fresh Angle on US-Russia “New Era”” yesterday, which is primarily devoted to an editorial authored by Mark H Teeter, an American writer residing in Moscow, and Mark’s view of how the Russians are perceiving the world’s economy.

Here are some excerpts from Andrew’s posting:

Sometimes the Moscow Times opinion editorial columns can be a little overbearing. While undoubtedly well written and informative, they are almost universally po-faced. Amid this environment of solemn political analysis and grave social policy, Mark H Teeter brings a delightfully light touch and sharp wit to his keenly observed bi-weekly columns about life and news in Russia.

Most weeks he addresses US-Russia relations through the prism of an American living in Moscow, and this week must have provided a bonanza for Teeter, as Barak Obama apparently “pressed the reset button” on US-Russia relations, and wants to reopen nuclear arms control talks with the Kremlin.

(Note to self: I do wish the press wouldn’t refer to the pressing of any kind of button when it comes to nuclear arms. It causes a certain… frisson. NTS2: And speaking of uncouth Obama press coverage, when will they stop referring to the fiscal stimulus bill as Obama’s stimulus package?

Anyway, back to Teeter: funny guy, sublime writer, irreverent vignettes on US-Russia relations and cultural differences through the eyes of a veteran American expat in Moscow.

Today, Teeter has managed to trump every single one of the major op-eds and foreign policy wonk notes I’ve read on the start of a another new ‘new era’ of Russo-Yankee relations.

Click here for an engaging read.

What makes Andrew’s posting more than interesting is Mr. Teeter’s ability of comparing both of our country’s past history and relating it to the present, all with a toung -in-cheek approach.  Here are a few selected excerpts from Mr. Teeter’s editorial in the Moscow Daily Times, entitled: “U.S. Russianists and Reset”, with high lighted sections I have talked the liberty of enhancing.

U.S. Russianists and Reset

09 February 2009
By Mark H. Teeter

Both Russians and Americans are acutely anxious about national fiscal policy these days. Perhaps we should let history suggest where our worrisome bailout billions might serve good ends for both countries — and others as well.

Sometimes a little panic is a good thing. When the Soviet Union put the world’s first artificial satellite into orbit in 1957, official Washington soiled its collective shorts. The U.S. response to Sputnik was very American — throw money at it — but with one salutary difference: For once in our national life, we threw smart money.

Beyond a predictable increase in military spending, Sputnik also inspired Congress to pass the National Defense Education Act, which provided major financial aid to education — particularly in science, math and foreign languages, notably Russian — so we could “catch up with the Soviets.”

Simultaneously, the government began funding education of another, and wholly novel, variety: It hired U.S. citizens to tell Russians about the United States — in person. In 1959, the U.S. Information Agency opened its first exhibition of “Americana in Moscow,” with young U.S. exhibit guides enthralling huge crowds of information-starved Soviet visitors with accounts of their country, its values and themselves.

The ensuing three decades proved how smart these two investments were. U.S. performance in the targeted areas improved substantially, helping the Cold War die of both natural causes and George Kennan’s “containment.” But wait, it gets better. The NDEA and its derivatives, along with further USIA exhibits, also produced a corpus of U.S.-Russia specialists who are now poised and ready to refit the U.S.-Russian relationship after decades of mismanagement and neglect. “Cold War II” could soon be history.

Just who should “press the reset button,” as U.S. Vice President Joe Biden aptly put in Munich on Saturday? Here are a half-dozen Americans, the tip of a modest iceberg, who spent significant time in the 1970s as either U.S.-subsidized exchange students at Soviet universities or USIA exhibit guides — or both — and have stayed conversant with things Russian ever since: Harley Balzer, professor of Russian studies at Georgetown; Blair Ruble, director of Washington’s Kennan Institute; Laura Kennedy, deputy commandant and international affairs adviser at the National War College; Thomas Robertson, former Russia director at the National Security Council and ambassador to Slovenia; Rose Gottemoeller, previous director of the Carnegie Moscow Center; and John Beyrle, U.S. ambassador to Russia.

The extent to which the Obama administration takes their advice and uses their skills may dictate how much the U.S.-Russian relationship improves on multiple fronts. Or doesn’t.

Even before Munich, things were warming up in several areas. Gottemoeller, a former Rand Corporation analyst, was named point person for breaking the U.S.-Russian nuclear negotiations logjam. Muscovites who have seen her in action call the appointment a boon to both sides. Beyrle, moreover, went on Vladimir Pozner’s national television program recently and inspired myriad viewers to reconsider the United States and U.S. intentions. One veteran of Russia’s “surveillance organs” wrote that he “listened to [Beyrle] for a few minutes and came to believe an entire country.” Now that’s “your tax dollars at work.”

All right, today’s learning points for the bailout-obsessed: 1. A stimulus package or subsidy plan is neither the Big Rock Candy Mountain nor a free lunch. It’s an investment, and it has to pay off twice — next month and next generation. 2. Education, in all its domestic and cross-cultural forms, always pays for itself — and a good deal else.

Oh, and point 3: The Iranians launched their own Earth-orbiting sputnik last week. Any more questions?


0 Responses to “What’s Russia’s Problem of not Jumping on our Troubled Economy”

  1. Leave a Comment

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

The Month in Review

February 2009
« Jan   Mar »

%d bloggers like this: