Global protests: Russia and China risk ending up on the wrong side of history
By James M.
Dorsey
A podcast version of this story is available on Soundcloud, Itunes,
Spotify,
Stitcher,
TuneIn, Spreaker,
Pocket
Casts,
Tumblr, Podbean, Audecibel, Patreon
and Castbox.
Widespread perceptions see Russia together with China as the rising
powers in the Middle East as a result of America’s flip flops in Syria and US
president Donald J. Trump’s transactional approach towards foreign policy as
well as Russian and Chinese support for regimes irrespective of how non-performing
and/or repressive they may be.
Russia has
sought to capitalize in other parts of the world, particularly Africa, on its
newly found credibility in the Middle East as part of its projection of itself
as a world power on par with the United States and China.
African
leaders gathered in late October in the Black Sea resort of Sochi for the first ever Russian African summit chaired by president Vladimir Putin.
China has hosted similar regional summits.
Mr. Putin
has proven adept at playing a weak hand well and for now, Russia alongside
China, that has the financial and trading muscle that Moscow lacks, are basking
in their glory.
Yet, Russia
and China could find themselves in tricky situations with protests across the
globe from Latin America to Hong Kong threatening to put the two powers on the
wrong side of history.
Iran,
Russia’s partner in supporting Syrian president Bashar al-Assad and a strategic
node in China’s Belt and Road initiative, is already struggling to come to grips
with being in the bull’s eye of protesters.
Protesters
in Iraq have denounced Iranian influence in the country while Iran’s Lebanese
Shiite ally, Hezbollah, is part of the elite that protesters hold responsible
for their country’s economic malaise.
Russia and
China are well aware of the risk. Not only because of the resilience of protest
in Hong Kong but also because of past popular revolts in former Soviet
republics that constitute Russia’s soft underbelly and in some cases border on
the strategically important but troubled Chinese north-western province of
Xinjiang.
Recent
protests in Kazakhstan were as much about domestic governance issues as they
were about Chinese influence in the country and
the crackdown on Turkic Muslims, including ethnic Kazakhs in Xinjiang.
Central Asia,
moreover, is potentially for China a black swan. It is together with Southeast
Asian nations Laos and Cambodia, home to countries most indebted to China.
A recent
study by scholars at Harvard University’s Kennedy School, the University of
Munich and the Kiel Institute for the World Economy concluded that about half of Chinese overseas lending
remained unrecorded
leaving Central Asian and other nations with no precise oversight of their
debt.
“These
hidden overseas debts pose serious challenges for country risk analysis and
bond pricing,” the study warned.
The risk of
ending up on the wrong side of history looms even larger with Russia seeing prevention
and/or countering of popular revolts as one of its goals in attempting to
stabilize the Middle East, a region wracked by conflict and wars.
Russia, as
part of its stabilization effort in the wake of its intervention in Syria, has
proposed replacing the US defense umbrella in the Gulf with a multilateral
security arrangement.
“Russia is
seeking stability which includes preventing colour revolutions,” said Maxim
Grigoryev, director of the Moscow-based Foundation for the Study of Democracy,
using the term employed to describe popular revolts in countries that once were
part of the Soviet Union.
Echoing
Kremlin policy, Mr. Grigoryev said Syria was “a model of stabilizing a regime
and countering terrorism.”
Russian
military intervention in Syria has helped president Bashar al-Assad gain the
upper hand in a more than eight-year long brutal war in which the Syrian
government has been accused of committing crimes against humanity.
Russia has
denied allegations that its air force has
repeatedly targeted hospitals and other civil institutions.
Russia’s
definition of stability with Syria as its model is unlikely to go down well
with youth-driven protests that have already affected twelve of the Arab
League’s 22 members.
In some of
the most dramatic incidents, this year’s popular revolts forced the leaders of
Algeria, Sudan and Lebanon to resign. Iraqi prime minister Adil Abdul-Mahdi
is next in line.
Latin
America and Africa, like the Middle East and Central Asia, home to often poorly
governed, resource-rich countries with youthful populations, are in many ways
not that different.
Some Latin
American leaders, including Argentine Foreign Minister Jorge Faurie and Luis Almagro, the
secretary-general of the Organization of American States, have denounced what they see as
interference in protests in Chile, Ecuador, Bolivia and Haiti by two Russia and
China-backed countries, Venezuela and Cuba.
Ecuador’s
interior minister, María Paula Romo, said last month that authorities had arrested 17 people at an
airport, “most of them Venezuelans . . . carrying information about the
protests.”
Policy
analysts Moisés Naím and Brian Winter argued that irrespective of whether
Venezuela and Cuba have sought to exploit continental discontent, “Latin America was already primed to
combust.”
Messrs. Naim
and Winter attribute popular anger to disappointing economic growth, stagnating
wages, rising costs of living, mounting inequality, and corruption on the back
of a commodity boom that significantly raised expectations.
Russian and
Chinese support for embattled regimes at the risk of alienating protesters, who
have proven in among others Chile, Iraq and Hong Kong undeterred by repressive
efforts to squash their protests, will have paid off if it helps engineer the
kind of stability Mr. Grigoryev is advocating.
Russian and
Chinese leaders may be banking on a development akin to what Messrs. Moses and
Winter describe as the emergence of repressive Latin American regimes in the
1970s and 1980s as a result of leaders’ failure to tackle slowing economic growth.
The failure fuelled a decline of faith in democracy and the rise of populists.
“The same
gears may churn toward mayhem and division, sown from within Latin American
countries and without. Venezuela and Cuba may not be the main reason for the
current protests. But if the region continues down its current path, it will be
vulnerable to the next conspiracy, whether from Havana, Caracas, or somewhere
else,” Messrs. Moses and Winter warned.
Events
elsewhere in the world may well unfold differently. Yet, Russia and China could
ultimately find themselves on the wrong side of history in an era of global
breakdown of popular confidence in political systems and incumbent leadership
and increasingly uncompromising, determined and resourceful protests.
Said Timothy
Kaldas, a senior fellow at the Tahrir Institute for Middle East Policy,
commenting on the protests in the Middle East: “This isn’t a revolution against
a prime minister or a president. It’s an uprising demanding the
departure of the entire ruling class,” the very people Russia and China would like to see remain
in place.
Dr. James M. Dorsey is a senior
fellow at Nanyang Technological University’s S. Rajaratnam School of
International Studies, an adjunct senior research fellow at the National
University of Singapore’s Middle East Institute and co-director of the
University of Wuerzburg’s Institute of Fan Culture
Comments
Post a Comment