Russia and Europe need new rules of etiquette

GRECO was established by the council's resolution. It is not planning to carry out combat missions, but helps its members to assess compliance with their commitments on fighting corruption, and wants the process of mutual evaluation to make its efforts more effective. This should help GRECO members find weak spots in national anti-corruption mechanisms, and, hence, facilitate the implementation of legislative and institutional reforms.

Corruption is a big problem in Russia. It spoils our image, casting a dark shadow on relations with us. The main point is that it is a serious obstacle to the development of our national economy. It will be very useful for us to listen to what others have to say about the malfunctioning of our anti-corruption instruments.

But it is easy to predict that as a new member, Russia will be assailed with a tornado of claims and reproaches. Corruption offers a good excuse to criticize Russia for its drawbacks, troubles, and problems once again. GRECO is most likely to be the place where Russia is bound to be lambasted. This is a source of serious concern against the background of the foreign media's massive campaign to accuse Russia of creating a new global threat and of other sins, both real and far-fetched.

They will bark at us, we will snap back what is the point of it all? A search for mutual understanding and constructive cooperation would be much more helpful. But a chance for such cooperation will largely depend on the tone that Russia's partners will take in talking about its corruption problems. For the time being, this tone does not quite justify the hopes.

What explains the lack of understanding? Where are the roots of discord?

They emerged in the early 1990s, when the image of new Russia was taking shape. It discarded its totalitarian past and opted for freedom and democracy on its own free will. At that time, Russia was a mature student that had to be forced to learn the ABCs of democracy and civilized rules. In short, Russia had to be taught sense and reprimanded in case of subterfuge.

This process was expected to last for a long time for objective reasons (as the default of 1998 bore it out once again), although Russia was given the best advice and support by top professionals. But this advice did not work, and support produced little effect.

However, in spite of all that, Russia started rapidly gaining strength and this is when problems cropped up. Parents always consider their children small, no matter how old they are or how many kids they have. The same force of inertia was at work with Russia. The West still preferred to look at Russia as an adult primary school student lagging far behind if not a hopelessly lost cause, just as it did in the early 1990s. We were changing, becoming more mature but were still looked down upon as a regular troublemaker. This was contrary to Russia's self-awareness.

We would say: "We are adults now, and can live as we see fit; you are dealing with a completely different country," and would receive a reply: "No, you're wrong here, you haven't finished the school program yet; you have to do this and that."

Our European and other Western partners could not take it easy so little time has passed, and are we supposed to change our attitude to Russia once again? We have planned to teach it patiently for years to come what should we do now?

In turn, Russia emotionally displayed its resentful temper our drive for democracy has produced nothing but criticism. How fair is this?

I think that the West has chosen the wrong tone for talking to Russia. To be more precise, the West has not adjusted to changes. It is sticking to the role of a mentor, lashing out at Russia for its shortcomings and failures. Russia is changing, but the tone of dialogue is not. The emerging misunderstanding breeds mutual irritation.

As for corruption, it is not the Russian government's exclusive privilege. It has plagued countries with much older traditions of democracy, where respect for law was cultivated for centuries. Have they eradicated corruption? No. If there is a universal method of resisting corruption, could you tell us what it is about? Should we throw bribe takers behind bars? We are doing this. Should we shoot them? China resorts to this exceptional measure on a massive scale. Should we hope for effective legislation? Name a country where anti-corruption laws have done away with corruption once and for all.

Under any government authority that decides on permits and bans or allocation of money, there will always be people longing for a good deal. Likewise, there will always be officials who will meet them halfway. This rule is as immutable as physiological laws.

It goes without saying that Russia needs help in fighting corruption, and it will be grateful for GRECO's assistance unless it is treated like a mischievous child whose parents have to stand him in a corner for his own good. Besides, any corner will be too small for Russia no doubt about that.