The Washington Times
  • Subscribe
  • RSS
  • Mobile Headlines
  • e-edition
  • E-MAIL ALERTS
  • REGISTER
  • LOG IN
  • E-MAIL ALERTS
  • WELCOME
  • Your Profile
  • Log Out
  • Front Page Image
  • Classifieds
  • Autos
  • Real Estate
  • Jobs
  • Special Sections
  • Customer Service
  • Home
  • News
  • Opinion
    • Editorials
    • Commentary
    • Columns
    • Water Cooler
    • Letters
    • Cartoons
    • Books
  • Sports
  • Culture
    • Home & Living
    • Family & Kids
    • Travel
    • Health
    • Washington Visitors
    • Books
    • Auto
    • TV Listings
    • Movie Listings
    • Death Notices
    • Entertainment
  • Communities
  • Rebate Shopping
    • Stores
    • Coupons
    • Daily Double
    • Promotion
    • How It Works
  • Photos
  • Podcasts
    • About Headlines
    • Audio and Radio
    • America's Morning News
  • Business

    Obama pledges to boost U.S. exports

  • Politics

    House leaders call pro-life group's bluff

  • Politics

    House GOP bans earmarks for members

  • Politics

    Public unmoved by Obama's health bill PR

  • Politics

    Rove: We mishandled Katrina recovery

  • Politics

    Bush's union transparency rules retracted under Obama

  • Politics

    House KOs call for speedy Afghanistan withdrawal

Home » Opinion » Commentary

Sunday, September 7, 2008

GREGORY: Punishing Putin?

Rate this story

Average 0.00
after 0 votes
Login or register to rate this story

  • Font Size -+
  • Print
  • Email
  • Comment
  • Tweet this!
  • Share
  • Article
  • Comments ()
  • Click-2-Listen
Please stand by, images loading!
  • Vladimir Putin

More Commentary Stories

  • VADUM: New indictments hit crumbling ACORN
  • FRANKO&BURNETT: Enron values at EPA
  • REIFSTECK: Obama plan could attack farmers
  • TIBI: Israeli extremism exposed

By Paul Gregory

COMMENTARY:

Can the United States and the West punish Vladimir Putin for his hot war on Georgia in a way that catches his attention? The answer is probably no.

Mr. Putin and his apprentice Dmitry Medvedev operate a "soft" dictatorship based upon high popularity ratings. Josef Stalin ran a "hard" dictatorship in which he forced his policies, such as collectivization, on a generally resistant population. Mr. Putin has basically delivered what Russians want: payment of wages and pensions on time and a resurgence of Russian national pride.

Mr. Putin's war against Georgia will likely raise his popularity. The subservient press will explain it was Georgia's fault, and the Russian population will buy this story. Public opinion polls show the Russian people, like Mr. Putin, regard the political breakup of the Soviet Union as a mistake. U.S. or NATO aid to Georgia will be interpreted as a sinister attempt to encircle a valiant Russia. Kicking Russia out of the G8 would be interpreted similarly. We now know the Soviet Union's invasion of Afghanistan was based on faulty KGB intelligence that the United States planned to use it as a launching pad against Soviet Central Asia. Could not the same be said of America's "friendship" with Georgia?

How about economic measures and sanctions? Mr. Putin has conclusively demonstrated he is willing to sacrifice economic for political goals. He, like V.I. Lenin and Stalin before him, regard the economy's "commanding heights" as an essential instrument of domestic and international policy. Gazprom is nothing more than a Soviet-style industrial ministry that carries out the state policies of intimidating Eastern and Western Europe and Ukraine and ensuring that satisfied domestic consumers receive electricity below the cost of production. The same can be said of Russia's pipeline monopoly Transneft.

Although the Baku-Ceyhan pipeline through Georgia could actually raise Russian export earnings by reducing congestion in its own export pipelines, it would lessen Russia's political stranglehold on Western markets. Mr. Putin liquidated Russia's most efficient oil company (Yukos) without batting an eye, turning its assets over to inefficient state concerns.

In the days of the Soviet Union, the economic costs of such arbitrary state interventions could be hidden. In today's world of international capital markets, they cannot. Despite the state's goal of making Gazprom the world's most valuable company, the Georgian incursion likely cost Gazprom a hundred billion in market capitalization.

Despite Mr. Putin's gifts of billions of barrels of reserves from other companies, Gazprom's market capitalization is about half of ExxonMobil despite proven reserves more than 10 times larger. This "Putin discount" cannot be overlooked, but it is a price Mr. Putin is willing to pay.

Mr. Putin and Mr. Medvedev would like a booming Russian economy; they would like Russia's most visible companies to be highly regarded by international investors; they are proud of Russia's healthy growth rates. But they remain willing to sacrifice economic goals for political ones. Mr. Putin's soft spot is his popularity ratings, but with his control of the media, it would take an economic disaster for them to fall. At this point, the United States and Europe are not able to produce such a result.

The willingness to sacrifice economic for political goals goes back to the critical debate between Stalin and his rival, Nikolai Bukharin, in 1929. As Stalin began extracting grain from agriculture by force, Bukharin argued (correctly) that this would destroy agricultural production. Stalin's paraphrased answer: "I do not care about agricultural productivity; I want agriculture under my control." In this regard, Mr. Putin appears to have learned from Stalin. He will place politics above economics.

Paul Gregory is a research fellow at Stanford University's Hoover Institution and professor of economics at the University of Houston. He is the author of "Lenin's Brain and Other Tales from the Secret Soviet Archives" (Hoover Press, 2008) and his book "Terror by Quota" is forthcoming from Yale University Press.

[Get Copyright Permissions] Click here for reprint permissions!
Copyright 2009 The Washington Times, LLC

Post a comment

There are comments on this article, submit your opinion!

Please login or register to post a comment

Top Stories

Most Shared

  1. Gov't workers feel no economic pain
  2. WOLF: Obama family health care fracas
  3. Bush's union transparency rules retracted under Obama
  4. Some Democrats shun Obama event in St. Louis
  5. EDITORIAL: Obama's a pain at the pump
More Top Stories »
  1. EDITORIAL: Packing a gun in Starbucks
  2. Chief justice reignites feud with Obama
  3. Detroit looks at downsizing to save city
  4. EDITORIAL: The NRA outshoots Obama
  5. McDonnell counters Va. attorney general on gays

Most Commented

  1. Gov't workers feel no economic pain
  2. White House laughs off Emanuel's naked lobbying
  3. Chief justice reignites feud with Obama
  4. Bush's union transparency rules retracted under Obama
  5. Some Democrats shun Obama event in St. Louis
More Top Stories »
  1. EDITORIAL: Obama's a pain at the pump
  2. EDITORIAL: Packing a gun in Starbucks
  3. CURL: Massa defends himself on Beck
  4. First gay marriages performed in D.C.
  5. LETTER TO THE EDITOR: Recognition of Kosovo a boon for terrorists

Listen to Washington Times Radio

  • America's Morning News

    with John McCaslin

Question of the day

What film will win Best Picture during Sunday's Academy Awards?

Blogs & Columns

  • Water Cooler

    Off the beaten path online: CBC: Obama not listening...

  • Belief Blog

    Sayonara to the president's faith-based council

  • Technology

    April 3 is iPad launch date, Apple says

Advertising Links
TWT Store
  • e-edition
  • Print Edition
  • Weekly Washington Times
TWT Affiliates
  • Middle East Times
  • Golf
  • UPI
  • Arbor Ballroom
  • Washington Times Global
  • About TWT
  • Press Room
  • F.A.Q.
  • Work for TWT
  • Advertise
  • Sponsors
  • Contact Us
  • Privacy Policy
  • Site Map

All site contents © Copyright 2009 The Washington Times, LLC.