WHAT SHOULD WESTERN POLICY BE FOR DEALING WITH ZHIRINOVSKIY?

There are several alternative approaches the West could take vis-a-vis Zhirinovskiy, including:

neglect,
aloofness,
purposeful ignoring,
constructive engagement, and
active criticism and containment.

Neglect

If Zhirinovskiy were perceived as harmless, in terms both of intent and power, then the West could basically shrug its shoulders and neglect Zhirinovskiy and his followers. This approach could be based on a presumption that Zhirinovskiy does not really believe or support some of the more outrageous statements or positions he has espoused and that he has made these only to gain attention. It could also reflect a presumption that the relative success of Zhirinovskiy's party in the December elections represented only a protest vote and one that is not likely to be repeated. Another presumption might be that Zhirinovskiy, who despite his efforts, has not been appointed a government minister or selected as chairman of a major parliamentary committee, is not very powerful now and is not likely to become much more influential in the future. A further assumption might be that even should Zhirinovskiy rise to positions of authority, he would become more responsible in his statements, policy, and actions.

Aloofness

If one believes that in dealing with other countries, particularly democracies or countries attempting to establish democratic institutions and procedures, it is fundamental that the West remain neutral and not oppose--or support--any specific politician or party, then an approach based on aloofness and remaining above or outside the fray might be pursued. If Russia's executive branch remains basically neutral toward Zhirinovskiy and his party, then this might be a further reason to pursue this approach.

This course might also be prescribed if one is concerned that active Western opposition to Zhirinovskiy might be exploited by him or others to gain popular support in Russia from those who dislike or are suspicious of the West. This approach might also be pursued if one believed that Zhirinovskiy might rise to power and Western relations with him after his rise to power would be better if the West had not opposed him on his way up.

Purposeful Ignoring

The West might purposefully ignore Zhirinovskiy, believing that he and his movement thrive on publicity and that the best way to oppose him is to ignore him. Under this approach, Western governments would not have their senior leaders, statesmen, or even their ambassadors meet with him. They would also not issue statements or warnings about Zhirinovskiy, even when he says or does something outrageous or irresponsible, nor would they include references to him in major speeches. They might conduct classified research on him and address his activities in restricted diplomatic channels, but they would not promote any public responses. They might, however, quietly open or pursue contacts at a low level with those in his movement in an effort to assess the movements' activities and policies.

Constructive Engagement

If Western leaders judge that Zhirinovskiy is misinformed or misguided and can be influenced to change his rhetoric and positions, then the West could attempt to engage him constructively in an effort to cease his offensive, irresponsible statements and positions and to develop closer relations. Western ambassadors might meet with him to discuss issues, and meetings with Zhirinovskiy might be sought for important Western government officials and citizens travelling to Russia. In this regard, he might be treated at least equally to leaders of other political parties in Russia, or even given greater attention. The West might indicate that if he becomes more responsible, the West would not oppose and might even welcome visits by Zhirinovskiy to the West.

Active Criticism and Containment

If leaders in the West believe that Zhirinovskiy is fundamentally a dangerous individual who presents an increasing threat to democracy in Russia and peace and stability in the world, then an approach involving active criticism and efforts to contain his influence might be pursued.

This approach might be based on assumptions that Zhirinovskiy has deep prejudices within him, and that he seeks power and is prepared to say and perhaps do most anything to obtain it. It could also include the presumption that if he were to gain power in Russia, he would reverse the process of democracy, moving it back toward dictatorship, stimulate an aggressive Russian nationalism as outlined in his book Last Dash to the South, and threaten the interests of neighboring states and much of the world at large.

Under this approach, the West would carefully study, monitor, record, and, as appropriate, publicize the statements and activities of Zhirinovskiy, using the assets of government agencies and supporting efforts by the private sector. Public diplomacy campaigns might be developed to publicize irresponsible and threatening positions espoused by Zhirinovskiy. When he says or does something irresponsible, Western leaders would publicly take him to task.

Countries could be encouraged to deny him visas to visit their territory, as Germany, Spain, and apparently Slovenia have. When Western leaders visit Russia, they would avoid contact with him and could criticize his activities before other Russian leaders and the public, taking into account internal political sensitivities.

Western governments could also begin contingency planning for political, economic, and national security steps they might want or need to consider should Zhirinovskiy gain increasing political strength in Russia.

The Author's Views and Recommendation

The author believes that Zhirinovskiy is fundamentally dangerous for democracy in Russia and international peace. Zhirinovskiy's statements and activities show him to be a reckless demagogue, willing to say almost anything to attract attention and gain political power. He has indicated that, if he comes to power in the near future, he would rule dictatorially at least in the first few years. He appears fundamentally prejudiced against many non-Russian or non-Slavic ethnic groups inside Russia and on Russia's periphery, especially the southern periphery. Despite his protestations, he appears to have anti-Semitic and anti-Muslim prejudices. He has shown a special affinity for Saddam Hussein's regime in Iraq and for right-wing elements in Germany and elsewhere in Europe. He is antagonistic toward the United States and other Western states. He advocates an aggressive Russian nationalism, extending Russia throughout the territory of the former Soviet Union, and deploying Russian forces southward to the Indian Ocean and the Mediterranean as part of a mission to save and revive Russia and its armed forces. He advocates redrawing state borders in Europe and has threatened to attack or annihilate many other states. While some may disregard this as bluster, should he accede to power, he could significantly threaten international peace. While it should not be overdrawn, the rapid rise from obscurity, the oratorical skills, the quest for power and dictatorial proclivities, the apparent ethnic and nationalistic prejudices, the interest in redrawing borders, and the grand design of military conquest of other states to save and revive the fatherland, all conjure up an image of Zhirinovskiy as a Russian Hitler.

Responsible political leaders in Russia, in neighboring states, and in the West in general should share an interest in helping to diminish the chances that Zhirinovskiy could gain greater power and even accede to a leadership position in Russia. While this might be a shared strategic objective, reasonable people can debate the best tactical approaches to take vis-a-vis Zhirinovskiy.

The author believes that Western and other countries should pursue, and encourage Russians to pursue, an approach of "active criticism and containment" of Zhirinovskiy. Zhirinovskiy is too dangerous to neglect, and remaining aloof or only ignoring him cedes him the field. Western leaders, statesmen, and senior officials should not meet with him, and efforts toward constructive engagement risk our giving him credibility and, in effect, helping him win power, only then to see his dangerous, aggressive nature reemerge. While an "active criticism and containment" approach might give Zhirinovskiy additional media attention, educated publics and leaders are the best protectors of democracy and peace.