A reader has directed my attention to this interesting article by Clifford Levy published in The New York Times about a seemingly unnecessary $1 billion bridge - which would be the longest suspension bridge in the world - connecting Vladivostok to the sparsely populated small island of Russki (there is also an interesting video). Levy focuses the example of the bridge, but the issue really at stake is the Kremlin's drive to create an Eastern economic identity, preparing to show off some muscle before the Asian Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) summit meeting in 2012 ... part of a budget package of some $6 billion being funneled toward this region despite lacking need, population, or significant economic activity. Kind of a "if you build it, they will come" attitude to the Vladivostok area.Despite the crush of the economic crisis, with so many Russians watching basic food staples become unaffordable, the state is pouring funds generously in these absurd projects. One motivation to continue forward with this APEC bridge is obvious - just like in Alaska, the corruption economy surrounding such pork barrel budgets provides many opportunities for leakage (let's not forget that one prosecutor has said that 1/3 of the state budget, $120 billion per year, is lost to graft).
However, there are other more complex motivations behind the mega-projects, related to certain ideas held in Moscow reflecting nationalism and a nagging inferiority complex.
These actions over in Vladivostok have been building for several years now. Our Russia correspondent Grigory Pasko has been filing reports on the strange politics of this Eastern port city for quite some time,
which coincidentally was also the site of some of the most serious
protests of the Putin era related to auto tariffs. Along with the development of Sochi in
preparation of the Olympic Games, the quantity of money being poured
into the barren East represents yet another project of "Stakhanovite" ambition - a trend we have pointed out in the past.
This latest bridge to nowhere is consistent with the rhetorical signature of the current Russian government - no matter what they are doing, it is outsized, brash, fantastic, massive, and in practical terms, unbelievable ... whether it is Gazprom's claim to buy all the gas in the world (or at least all of Libya), wild architecture projects, the accusation that Khodorkovsky "embezzled" enough oil to fill train cars circling the equator three times, or the state's attempt to simultaneously build two underwater natural gas pipelines (Nord Stream and South Stream) to neatly fit the noose around Europe's willing neck.
There's no doubt that impossibly ambitious projects are a helpful demonstration of power, proactivity, and capability - three things that many Russian citizens had hungered for during the drift following the collapse of the Soviet Union - no matter whether or not in the end these ideas turn out to be feasible (remember Stalin's dream of the Palace of the Soviets?). However it is especially disturbing to watch with growing unease as the Stakhanovite, high budget political projects of the Kremlin, slide further and further away from the public interest.
My prediction is that as the economic crisis makes life for the average Russian worse, we will see more hype around initiatives like space missions, impressive new military gear, Olympic stadiums, bridges, skyscrapers, and other potemkin signs of revitalization - when in fact Russia is in a critical moment in which these public funds should be directed toward diversifying the economy away from commodity exports for the future.
This latest bridge to nowhere is consistent with the rhetorical signature of the current Russian government - no matter what they are doing, it is outsized, brash, fantastic, massive, and in practical terms, unbelievable ... whether it is Gazprom's claim to buy all the gas in the world (or at least all of Libya), wild architecture projects, the accusation that Khodorkovsky "embezzled" enough oil to fill train cars circling the equator three times, or the state's attempt to simultaneously build two underwater natural gas pipelines (Nord Stream and South Stream) to neatly fit the noose around Europe's willing neck.
There's no doubt that impossibly ambitious projects are a helpful demonstration of power, proactivity, and capability - three things that many Russian citizens had hungered for during the drift following the collapse of the Soviet Union - no matter whether or not in the end these ideas turn out to be feasible (remember Stalin's dream of the Palace of the Soviets?). However it is especially disturbing to watch with growing unease as the Stakhanovite, high budget political projects of the Kremlin, slide further and further away from the public interest.
My prediction is that as the economic crisis makes life for the average Russian worse, we will see more hype around initiatives like space missions, impressive new military gear, Olympic stadiums, bridges, skyscrapers, and other potemkin signs of revitalization - when in fact Russia is in a critical moment in which these public funds should be directed toward diversifying the economy away from commodity exports for the future.
Building a bridge to a peninsula is ALWAYS a geostrategical issue . It permits to assess control of the land power on the surrounding maritime powers .
It creates a " Stutzpunkt " ( strong point ) of the land power which will " project " its power onto the sea . Russkki island seems to be a good projection aerea for Russia in the region and could become the front-port of Vladivostock .
When a peninsula has no connections with its " hinterland " , it is subject to the power of the maritime power ( Japan , Usa )
Gregory Bienstock ( The struggle fot the pacific - 1936 ) and Karl Haushofer ( Weltmeere und weltmachte - 1936 : seas of the world and world power ) have outlined the weakness of Russo-Soviet infrastructures in the region .
Investing in geostrategical " objekti " ( objects ) rather than in every day life spendings is an intelligent policy that disturbes of course all Russian so-called " friends " or " friendly advisers " .
It's also a sign that Russia is confident in the future .
Why should Russia divert money of space missions , new military hardware , which promotes new technologies to invest it in flat television screens factories or car factories ( aka " diversify its economy " ) ?
Roosevelt constructed dams and motorways during the Great depression , Russia is building bridges .......
And after all , if its a question of prestige , why not ?
Portugal has built the Vasco de Gama bridge which was totally unnecessery !