Cato Institute
Policy Analysis
<<  <  >  >>
Conflicting Agendas
grams." The report concluded that "intelli-
Another fallacy is expecting that any
gence and other operations are performed by
group--even a group of talented, visionary
such organizations, including the Peace
reformers--will ignore its own agenda, espe-
Corps, which has nothing to do with the goals
proclaimed by these organizations."68
cially when it is designated the sole beneficiary
of so much aid. For example, in apparent pur-
Thus, while professing simply to support
suit of their own agenda, key St. Petersburg
reform, U.S. policies afforded one group a
players have been known to actually obstruct
comparative advantage and allowed much aid
reform when reform initiatives have originat-
to be used as the tool of that group. That feels
ed outside the group. When a U.S. AID­fund-
familiar to Russians raised in the communist
ed organization run by St. Petersburg players
practice of political control over economic
did not receive the additional funds it had
decisions--the quintessence of the discredited
expected from U.S. AID, those players inter-
communist system. Ironically, far from help-
fered with legal reform initiatives in title regis-
ing to separate the political and economic
tration and mortgages that had been launched
spheres, U.S. economic aid has instead served
by other U.S. AID­funded contractors and
to reinforce the interdependency of those
their local partners.
spheres.
How Russians
Whereas in the West consistent support for
perceive the effi-
The IMF Bailout: Making a Bad Situation
the same policy group might signal effective-
Worse
ness, many Russians regarded the clan as a
cacy of aid pro-
communist-style group that created and
The latest IMF bailout of Russia represents
grams and the
shared profits. The fact that the chosen St.
not only a continuation but an escalation of
motives of donors
Petersburg "reformers" were visibly involved in
that policy. The $22.6 billion aid package
politics and creating opportunities for them-
crafted by the IMF in July 1998 was supposed
should be a
selves reinforced such suspicion. By siding
to put an end to Russia's financial crisis. Yet
source of concern,
with a particular group in a highly politicized
certain political-economic players--and by no
especially because
environment, U.S. assistance undermined the
means the population at large (such as the
importance of its own ostensible objectives
"employed" masses who have gone without
many Russians
and may have inadvertently encouraged
wages for months)--stand to reap any benefits.
have questioned
skepticism about capitalism, reform, privatiza-
Sokolov and his auditors investigated the des-
tion, and the West. How Russians perceive the
tination of some previous monies from inter-
American inten-
efficacy of aid programs and the motives of
national lending institutions and aid organi-
tions.
donors should be a source of concern, espe-
zations. In a visit to Washington in May­June
cially because many Russians have questioned
1998, before the IMF's July bailout, Sokolov
spoke against further loans.69 He reported that
American intentions. According to one public
opinion survey carried out by Igor Kliamkin in
"[a]ll loans made to Russia go to speculative
the spring of 1995, two-thirds of the Russian
financial markets and have no effect whatso-
people believed that the United States had a
ever on the national economy."70 Yet those
calculated anti-Russian foreign policy.67  As
loans are the obligation of the Russian people
to repay. Sokolov's appearances were summed
long as suspicion of Western motives remains
up by Anne Williamson, a journalist specializ-
pervasive, anti-Western, anti-reform politi-
ing in Russian and Soviet affairs who inter-
cians can manipulate the Russian self-image
viewed him, as follows:
of a wounded superpower and proclaim that
Russia is, as always, being exploited by the
Russia's fiscal watchdog blew the
West. Members of the Duma, after an investi-
whistle on how Western loans are
gation, issued a report decrying the "dozens if
squandered on speculation and
not hundreds of American organizations
siphoned off by American profiteers,
operating in Russia within the framework of
how Russia's cash-flush "oligarchical"
various assistance and cooperation pro-
11