The Kremlin, according to President Barack Obama, is stuck in the old ways, trapped in Cold War or even 19th century mindsets. But look closer at the Kremlin’s actions during the crisis in Ukraine and you begin to see a very 21st century mentality, manipulating transnational financial interconnections, spinning global media and reconfiguring geo-political alliances. Could it be that the West is the one caught up in the old ways, while the Kremlin is the geopolitical avant-garde, informed by a dark, subversive reading of globalization?
The Kremlin’s approach might be called non-linear war, a term used in a short story written by one of Vladimir Putin’s closest political advisers, Vladislav Surkov, which was published just a few days before the annexation of Crimea. Surkov is credited with inventing the system of managed democracy that has dominated Russia in the 21st century, and his new portfolio focuses on foreign policy. This time, he sets his new story in a dystopian future, after the fifth world war.
Surkov writes: It was the first non-linear war. In the primitive wars of the 19th and 20th centuries it was common for just two sides to fight. Two countries, two blocks of allies. Now four coalitions collided. Not two against two, or three against one. All against all.
This is a world where the old geopolitical paradigms no longer hold. As the Kremlin faces down the West, it is indeed gambling that old alliances like the EU and NATO mean less in the 21st century than the new commercial ties it has established with nominally Western companies, such as BP, Exxon, Mercedes and BASF. Meanwhile, many Western countries welcome corrupt financial flows from the post-Soviet space; it is part of their economic models, and not one many want disturbed. So far, the Kremlin’s gamble seems to be paying off, with financial considerations helping to curb sanctions. Part of the rationale for fast-tracking Russia’s inclusion into the global economy was that interconnection would be a check on aggression. But the Kremlin has figured out that this can be flipped.
A few provinces would join one side, Surkov continues, a few others a different one. One town or generation or gender would join yet another. Then they could switch sides, sometimes mid-battle. Their aims were quite different. Most understood the war to be part of a process. Not necessarily its most important part.
We can see a similar thinking informing the Kremlin as it toys with Eastern Ukraine, using indirect intervention through local gangs, with a thorough understanding of the interests of such local power brokers such as Donetsk billionaire Rinat Akhmetov (Ukraine’s richest man) or Mikhail Dobkin, the former head of the Kharkiv Regional Administration and now presidential candidate. Though these local magnates make occasional public pronouncements supporting Ukraine’s territorial integrity, their previous support of former president Viktor Yanukovych makes them wary of the new government in Kiev. Just the right degree of separatism could help guarantee their security while ensuring that their vast financial global interests are not harmed. Think global, act local is a favorite cliché of corporations – it could almost be the Kremlin’s motto in the Donbass.
Influencing the West
And the Kremlin’s non-linear sensibility is evident as it manipulates Western media and policy discourse. If in the 20th century the Kremlin could only lobby through Soviet sympathizers on the left, it now uses a contradictory kaleidoscope of messages to build allian- ces with quite different groups. European right-nationalists are seduced by the anti-EU message; the far-left are brought in by tales of fighting U.S. hegemony; U.S. religious conservatives are convinced by the Kremlin’s stance against homosexuality.
The result is an array of voices, all working away at Western audiences from different angles, producing a cumulative echo chamber of Kremlin support. Influencers often appear in Western media and policy circles without reference to their Kremlin connections such as PR company Ketchum placing pro-Kremlin op-eds in the Huffington Post or media appearances by influential German political consultant Alexander Rahr that fail to note his paid position as an adviser for the German energy company Wintershall, a partner of Gazprom, Moscow’s massive natural gas company (Rahr denies a conflict of interest).
What’s the defense?
Combating non-linear war requires non-linear measures. International networks of anti-corruption NGOs could help squeeze corrupt flows from Russia. At the moment, this sector is underdeveloped, underfunded and poorly internationally coordinated: In Britain, for example, NGOs such as Global Witness or Tax Justice rarely engage with Russian counterparts.
Anti-corruption NGOs need to have the backing to put painful pressure on corrupt networks every day, naming and shaming corrupt networks and pressuring western governments to shut them down and enact their own money-laundering laws. This would squeeze the Kremlin’s model even in the absence of further sanctions, ultimately playing a role as important as human rights organizations did in the ’70s and ’80s, when groups like Amnesty and the Helsinki Committee helped change the Cold War by supporting dissidents in the Communist block and shaming their governments.
Perhaps, despite what Obama says, there is a battle of ideas going on. Not between communism and capitalism, or even conservatives and progressives, but between competing visions of globalization, between the global village and non-linear war. It is naïve to assume the West will win with this new battle with the same formula it used in the Cold War.
Back then, the West united free market economics, popular culture and democratic politics into one package: Parliaments, investment banks and pop music fused to defeat the politburo, planned economics and social realism. But the new Russia (and the new China) has torn that formula apart: Russian popular culture is Westernized, and people play the stock market and listen to Taylor Swift all while cheering anti-Western rhetoric and celebrating American downfall.
The only things that interest me in the U.S. are Tupac Shakur, Allen Ginsberg and Jackson Pollock, said Surkov when he was one of the first Russian officials to be put on the U.S. sanctions list as punishment for Russia’s actions in Crimea. I don’t need a visa to access their work. I lose nothing.
We live in a truly non-linear age.