Recently appointed as the Head of the Federal Agency for CIS, Compatriots Abroad and International Humanitarian Cooperation (Rossotrudnichestvo), Konstantin Kosachev recounts the objectives of his Agency, genuine “soft power” and its appropriate use.
– The agency you currently lead hit the news headlines, above all, because of its leadership reshuffle. It is little known to the broad public. Why is this?
– I wouldn’t downplay the importance of the work that has been done in the past three years; simply this is specific work mainly geared towards foreign audiences. I would venture to say that Rossotrudnichestvo is widely known in the world, especially among our compatriots abroad. Some praise it while others criticize – each sticks to his or her own opinion. This is not so much a problem of our agency as it is a problem of the fragmented and disunited Russian diaspora abroad, but this is a separate subject.
True, our agency’s activities received scanty media coverage or PR, if you please. And you know that a competent PR campaign is sometimes more important than real work. One of my tasks as the agency’s new head is to make sure that everything we really do should not only be in demand among those who need it but also known to everybody who keeps track of our activities and comments upon them.
– When Rossotrudnichestvo was being established in 2008, the primary idea was to facilitate the Russian influence in the world using the so-called “soft power” mechanisms. Does Russia know how to use this soft power?
– To date we have not been as effective as our rivals in this area. Quite often we simplistically define the soft power. Some think this is a set of indirect levers to coerce our partners to do something, when some regulations of economic cooperation are delicately altered and a certain valve is shut off. Such semi-hard power is formally described as “soft.” This is one of the radical interpretations.
The opposite and also mistaken belief is that soft power is about concerts, exhibitions and cocktail parties, when simple presence is passed for influence.
Both approaches are wrong. The soft power term was coined by American political scientist Joseph Nigh who suggested the following definition: promoting one’s own interests via the voluntary consent of allies, their eager rather than forced involvement in one’s projects and initiatives. This voluntary consent of our potential partners and our potential allies must be the main target of soft power exercised by Russia. But for now it is still yet in the bud.
– When Rossotrudnichestvo was just being founded, some said it was to be the Russian analogue of USAID (US Agency for International Development). Is this mission still relevant?
– USAID in the American terminology is an organization to offer official help from the US government. In Russia we use a different term: “assisting international development.” Back in 2007 the Russian president approved the concept of our participation in facilitating the international development. Already in those years that concept implied the creation of the respective Russian mechanism, although nobody knew what kind of mechanism this should be. Yet the very idea that this work ought to obtain “organizational” support was clearly stated. Almost five years have passed since that momentous decision, but no organizational solutions have been suggested.
One of the possible alternatives which I personally support is empowering Rossotrudnichestvo to carry out this work. This would be an optimal solution from the perspective of the Russian government. And this decision would not call for large financial outlay or organizational efforts, for it would be possible to rely on the network of Rossotrudnichestvo’s representative offices abroad and to launch these programs rather quickly and effectively. But I should repeat that there are several options and the final decision should be made by Russian president and the government. We hope they’ll make their decisions in the near future.
– How can the celebrations of the 200th anniversary of Russia’s victory in the Patriotic War of 1812 in the French provinces contribute to the development of humanitarian cooperation with France?
– They can indeed: the main events to celebrate the 200th anniversary of victory in the Patriotic War are mainly organized in Russia, to be sure, but also in 12 foreign countries which were either involved in that war or emerged later on the basis of the then existing states. There’s certain national specificity, no doubt about that. Yet we commemorate the valor of our soldiers and it’s understandable that in France these events should not take on the air of triumph over the defeated foe, this for sure. But this is our common history and we cannot escape it.
Just the other day I participated in the session of the government commission to prepare for celebrating the 200th anniversary of the victory in the Patriotic War of 1812 in the city of Maloyaroslavets. I never knew this before, but it is there that the idiomatic phrase “sticking in the mire” (or “in the puddle”) originated. It turned out that the carriages transporting Napoleon got stuck in the river Luzha (Puddle) flowing near Maloyaroslavets. Napoleon got stuck in Luzha and later this became a catchpenny phrase in Russian. This is just one example of how Napoleon’s carriages enriched Russian.
There are quite a few similar examples in France. Everybody knows the Russian tradition not to leave empty bottles on the table, but few know that this custom was formed in 1814, when our Cossacks entered Paris and went on a spree in local taverns. They quickly found out that they were billed by the number of empty bottles on the table, so how could they miss out on the opportunity to save on their restaurant bills? This is why they began hiding their bottles under the table and those of us who drink alcoholic beverages continue to blindly follow this custom nowadays.
There are a huge number of such historical touch points which no longer divide our nations into winners and losers. They need to be found and turned into uniting motifs for further rapprochement of the modern-day nations of Russia and France.
Vladmir Soloviev
Source: Kommersant
