• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Russia in Decline

Kirkhill

Puggled and Wabbit Scot.
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
7,955
Points
1,160
I could have sworn we have a Russian Superthread on this board but I'm blowed if I can find it.

Consequently we have another thread.

Taken from the Washington Post


By Murray Feshbach
Sunday, October 5, 2008; Page B03

....Putin's military is still in tatters, armed with rusting weaponry and staffed with indifferent recruits. Meanwhile, a declining population is robbing the military of a new generation of soldiers. Russia's economy is almost totally dependent on the price of oil. And, worst of all, it's facing a public health crisis that verges on the catastrophic.

....Russian society may actually be weaker than it was even during Soviet times.....

While Russia has capitalized impressively on its oil industry, the volatility of the world oil market means that Putin cannot count on a long-term pipeline of cash flowing from high oil prices. A predicted drop of about one-third in the price of a barrel of oil will surely constrain Putin's ability to carry out his ambitious agendas, both foreign and domestic.

That makes Moscow's announced plan to boost defense spending by close to 26 percent in 2009 -- in order to fully re-arm its military with state-of-the-art weaponry -- a dicey proposition. What the world saw in Georgia was a badly outdated arsenal, one that would take many years to replace -- even assuming the country could afford the $200 billion cost.

Something even larger is blocking Russia's march. Recent decades, most notably since the breakup of the Soviet Union in 1991, have seen an appalling deterioration in the health of the Russian population, anchoring Russia not in the forefront of developed countries but among the most backward of nations.

This is a tragedy of huge proportions -- but not a particularly surprising one, at least to me. I followed population, health and environmental issues in the Soviet Union for decades, and more recently, I have reported on diseases such as the HIV/AIDS epidemic ravaging the Russian population. I've visited Russia more than 50 times over the years, so I can say from firsthand experience that this national calamity isn't happening suddenly. It's happening inexorably.

According to U.N. figures, the average life expectancy for a Russian man is 59 years -- putting the country at about 166th place in the world longevity sweepstakes, one notch above Gambia. For women, the picture is somewhat rosier: They can expect to live, on average, 73 years, barely beating out the Moldovans. But there are still some 126 countries where they could expect to live longer. And the gap between expected longevity for men and for women -- 14 years -- is the largest in the developed world.

So what's killing the Russians? All the usual suspects -- HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, alcoholism, cancer, cardiovascular and circulatory diseases, suicides, smoking, traffic accidents -- but they occur in alarmingly large numbers, and Moscow has neither the resources nor the will to stem the tide. Consider this:

Three times as many Russians die from heart-related illnesses as do Americans or Europeans, per each 100,000 people.

Tuberculosis deaths in Russia are about triple the World Health Organization's definition of an epidemic, which is based on a new-case rate of 50 cases per 100,000 people.

Average alcohol consumption per capita is double the rate the WHO considers dangerous to one's health.

About 1 million people in Russia have been diagnosed with HIV or AIDS, according to WHO estimates.

Using mid-year figures, it's estimated that 25 percent more new HIV/AIDS cases will be recorded this year than were logged in 2007.

And none of this is likely to get better any time soon. Peter Piot, the head of UNAIDS, the U.N. agency created in response to the epidemic, told a press conference this summer that he is "very pessimistic about what is going on in Russia and Eastern Europe . . . where there is the least progress." This should be all the more worrisome because young people are most at risk in Russia. In the United States and Western Europe, 70 percent of those with HIV/AIDS are men over age 30; in Russia, 80 percent of this group are aged 15 to 29. And although injected-drug users represent about 65 percent of Russia's cases, the country has officially rejected methadone as a treatment, even though it would likely reduce the potential for HIV infections that lead to AIDS.

And then there's tuberculosis -- remember tuberculosis? In the United States, with a population of 303 million, 650 people died of the disease in 2007. In Russia, which has a total of 142 million people, an astonishing 24,000 of them died of tuberculosis in 2007. Can it possibly be coincidental that, according to Gennady Onishchenko, the country's chief public health physician, only 9 percent of Russian TB hospitals meet current hygienic standards, 21 percent lack either hot or cold running water, 11 percent lack a sewer system, and 20 percent have a shortage of TB drugs? Hardly.

On the other end of the lifeline, the news isn't much better. Russia's birth rate has been declining for more than a decade, and even a recent increase in births will be limited by the fact that the number of women age 20 to 29 (those responsible for two-thirds of all babies) will drop markedly in the next four or five years to mirror the 50 percent drop in the birth rate in the late 1980s and the 1990s. And, sadly, the health of Russia's newborns is quite poor, with about 70 percent of them experiencing complications at birth.

Last summer, Piot of UNAIDS said that bringing Russia's HIV/AIDS epidemic under control was "a matter of political leadership and of changing the policy." He might just as well have been talking about the much larger public health crisis that threatens this vast country. But the policies seem unlikely to change as the bear lumbers along, driven by disastrously misplaced priorities and the blindingly unrealistic expectations of a resentment-driven political leadership. Moscow remains bent on ignoring the devastating truth: The nation is not just sick but dying.

I was going to excise just the salient facts and leave out the commentary - but there isn't actually that much commentary there. 


 
Wow.  If what is reported in the article is accurate, Putin has a lot more to worry about than Georgia, or missle defense shields.
 
That’s a good catch, Kirkhill (specially given that it has no unrecognizable (to the civilized ear) Scots words). The issue isn’t what Russia s doing, right now, in South Ossetia/Georgia, nor is it what mischief Russia might make in Crimea/Ukraine. The question is: whiter Russia: Up or Down?

The answer, for me, is DOWN and down and down. And that’s what makes Russia so dangerous. We have an essentially primitive political culture that had great power and it wants the trappings of power back.

When I was a young man Russia was a superpower – one of only two – and the issue of “who wins” was an open question. Later we routinely considered Russia as part of the BRIC (Brazil, Russia, India and China) with the US and Europe as the main only significant economic powers. But now we pretty much recognize that China is also a significant economic power and a emerging military one, too. India has achieved a special relationship with the USA – one that I guess will survive a change n the White House.

So is Russia now in a collegial relationship or an equivalency with Brazil? Not in Putin’s mind dreams.

But, realistically, where does Russia ‘fit?’ It was, in 2007, accoding to a useful set of tables collected from reputable sources in Wikipedia:

• 11th (behind Brazil, Canada and Spain) in the IMF’s list;

• 11th (behind the same countries) in the World Bank’s list; and

• 11th (same top 10) in the CIA’s World Fact Book – which uses slightly different data.

Will it, can it grow to 10th or fall to 12th? According to Kirkhill’s article it is on a slow, graceful decline towards 20th – in a tie with Indonesia. That will infuriate ordinary Russians who voted for Putin because he promised to restore Stalin’s glory. Then Russia becomes very dangerous.

Russia is not our friend. It may be a future enemy – but on a par with Indonesia.

 
E.R. Campbell said:
..... That will infuriate ordinary Russians who voted for Putin because he promised to restore Stalin’s glory. Then Russia becomes very dangerous.

Russia is not our friend. It may be a future enemy – but on a par with Indonesia.

Aye, but an Indonesia with nuclear weapons peopled by dying middle-aged men with no future generations to be concerned about.  We can hope that their nuclear weapons don't work as advertized. Unfortunately at least some will.
 
The nightmare scenario for the Russians is the growing Islamic populations in the 'Stans and the "Near Abroad", probably followed by the growth of China as a peer competitor and eventually surpassing Russia in wealth and power. Since Russia, "Islam" and China are all continental powers, with limited force projection capabilities (compared to the United States with it's global power projection, and the Western allies who have regional and limited global reach), then we can see central Asia as the cockpit of conflict in the early 21rst century.

As Russia tries harder to maintain its imperial pretensions with fewer and fewer human and economic resources, then, yes, they will become very dangerous and unstable indeed. The question is, where will they vent their rage?
 
Well for a good number of decades Europe and the especially the US were the villain......there's no reason they can't be again....
 
A lot of these problems have been known for years - what no one knew before was the numbers involved, as the Russian/former USSR government never released them or allowed anyone to learn of them. 


 
I find many things scary with this article, assuming all information is accurate.  I think that Russia is not in any shape to be restored back to its "Stalinistic Glory", there are too many elements against it. The bit about the Russian military being way too outdated is rather worrying considering the Ultra-nationalists might decide they can do a better job than the government in the coming years (accuse me of playing too much call of duty 4 if you must haha). If Russia wasn't armed with an array of nuclear missiles, I might feel a little more at ease...
 
[RICE] said:
I.................If Russia wasn't armed with an array of nuclear missiles, I might feel a little more at ease...


I wouldn't.  Think of all the other "Predators" and "aspiring despots" on their borders.  That would really make for a nasty world security situation.
 
George Wallace said:
I wouldn't.  Think of all the other "Predators" and "aspiring despots" on their borders.  That would really make for a nasty world security situation.

I only said a little  :P :)

That is a very good point however... I think we can all agree that what ever happens, it probably won't be good.
 
Sometimes, if you take the lid off the pot, all the scum will rise to the surface.
 
I would be a little hesitant to call Russia a power in decline.

Russia holds the world's largest natural gas reserves, the second largest coal reserves, and the eighth largest oil reserves. Russia is also the world's largest exporter of natural gas, the second largest oil exporter and the third largest energy consumer.
from http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/cabs/Russia/Background.html

People can be born, weapons can be bought but oil and natural gas is a finite commodity which will continue to be in demand ESPECIALLY with growing economies like China and India.

Furthermore, Russia continues to grow economically with a growth rate of 8.1% (CIA factbook), which puts it well ahead of the United States (2%) and any of the big European countries (they are behind both China and India).

Summary? Russia: Oil, nukes and an annual GDP growth...

 
mjc_1812 said:
I would be a little hesitant to call Russia a power in decline.

People can be born, weapons can be bought but oil and natural gas is a finite commodity which will continue to be in demand ESPECIALLY with growing economies like China and India.

Furthermore, Russia continues to grow economically with a growth rate of 8.1% (CIA factbook), which puts it well ahead of the United States (2%) and any of the big European countries (they are behind both China and India).

Summary? Russia: Oil, nukes and an annual GDP growth...

You forgot to add crumbling infrastructure, low birth rate, high death rate, and a nice slew of environmental problems left over from the good old days.

http://www.economist.com/world/europe/displaystory.cfm?story_id=8896844
 
chanman said:
You forgot to add crumbling infrastructure, low birth rate, high death rate, and a nice slew of environmental problems left over from the good old days.

http://www.economist.com/world/europe/displaystory.cfm?story_id=8896844

low birth rate = common for most european and developed countries, there is even a nice economic explanation for this. In countries that fare well you need less kids to take care of you when you get old.

high death rate = I'll give you that one, for males.... hence the National Project for healthcare, as an investor, a good place to put your money

crumbling infrastructure => invest in concrete and steele.. they are industries that will grow and hire lots of people, leading again to GDP growth and diversification away from oil

really, as much as the economist likes to say bad things about Russia's future, actual economists project GDP growth 6.5-8.5% for the foreseeable future, depending on who you believe. Which brings me to the point, Russia is growing, the USA is in decline, given its defecits (today: new record), its national debt (the NY national debt sign had to remove the dollar sign recently to place a "1" there instead, because the sign is running out of room). Yet somehow "Russia" is the one in decline. Sounds like wishful thinking by some.

Cheers!
 
Back
Top