« Rite of Spring: Russia's Fertility Trends | Main | U.S. Undersecretary of State William Burns
Remarks to the 2009 World Russia Forum »


April 29, 2009
The U.S. Politics of Russian Demographics

EberstadtNicholasHooverPodium.jpg
The American Enterprise Institute's Nicholas Eberstadt has become one of the leading proponents of the notion that Russia is in a terminal state of demographic decline

Last month Ross Douthat, a regular columnist for The Atlantic Monthly magazine now with The New York Times, commented on a new essay by Nicholas Eberstadt on the declining population of Russia. Dr. Eberstadt, a political economist, is a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute (AEI) in Washington D.C. Eberstadt's most recent essay (with the perhaps insulting title), "Drunken Nation: Russia’s Depopulation Bomb", which prompted Douthat's comments, is largely a rehash of his earlier report "Russia: The Sick Man of Europe" published in The Public Interest quarterly magazine back in the winter of 2004/2005.

Eberstadt's article provoked a larger discussion about global demographic trends between American "conservatives" like Douthat and "liberals" such as The American Prospect's authors Matthew Yglesias and Michelle Goldberg. However, these American pundits quickly changed their topic from Russian demographics to the reasons behind declining birth rates in Europe, Japan and other modern societies all over the world.

WillGeorgeFBlueTiemike.jpg
George F. Will's article published on April 19, 2009 called Russia a "Potemkin Country"

Eberstadt's essay was also cited this week in an article by the conservative columnist George F. Will, dismissing Russia as a "Potemkin Country" published in The Washington Post on Sunday, April 19, 2009. While The Post's editors probably meant no insult by publishing an article predicting the looming demographic death of Russia as we know it on the Orthodox Easter holiday, when millions of Russians celebrate the resurrection of Jesus Christ, the timing is certainly ironic.

Russia watchers familiar with the debate over U.S.-Russia relations in Washington D.C. will recognize two familar questions in these discussions. Namely:

1. As we get further into the 21st century, is Russia going to become too depopulated and sick to matter in world affairs?

2. Is Russia unique in its projected population decline, or is it merely a few years ahead of Europe and Japan in its overall demographic profile?

Is There an Agenda Behind Claims that Russian Demographics are a Catastrophe?

The answers to these questions, of course, have huge political ramifications. The argument that Russia is going to become a society so sick and depopulated that Russian power cannot be sustained -- and presumably, by the end of the 21st century, parts of the Russian Federation will be annexed into Greater China or revert to their medieval status as Muslim Khanates -- has become common in Washington. It is similar to the argument advanced during the Clinton Administration, and even during the first term of President George W. Bush, that post-Soviet Russia was too weak to matter.

It followed from these premises that policies like expanding NATO into the Baltics, and building oil and gas pipelines from former Soviet Central Asia to bypass Russian territory, could be pursued without any consequences. While George F. Will, as a self-proclaimed conservative realist, has often criticized American nationbuilding in Iraq and Afghanistan, he has very seldom had much to say about about whether American foreign policy in the former Soviet Union has been subject to hubris.

Russian Demographics and the U.S.-Russia Propaganda War

The notion that Russia is going to implode, and perhaps the policies this idea has contributed to, have proven so annoying to Russian elites that they decided, in one of the greatest examples of tit for tat in the history of the post-Soviet propaganda war between Washington and Moscow, to throw this argument back at America. Professor Igor Panarin, an academic who teaches future Russian diplomats at Moscow's elite diplomatic academy, has become Russia's most famous spokesperson for the view that it is the U.S., and not Russia, which is headed for a Soviet-style collapse in the nearest future. Prof. Panarin presented his controversial ideas this week at World Russia Forum on Capitol Hill in Washington D.C.

Panarin calls the new U.S. President Barack Obama "America's Gorbachev" (an analogy that a writer for the Associated Press also liked), suggesting that Obama is helpless to prevent a crackup of the American Union. Panarin claims that the decline in traditional morality in the U.S., federal overspending and excessive borrowing, long wars abroad, and other trends are pulling America apart.

A Hangover from the Cold War: Are There Still Any "Captive Nations" Today?

Rather than being original insights, most of Panarin's ideas are a hodge podge of notions first popularized by Professors Paul Kennedy and Samuel P. Huntington, in their books The Rise and Fall of Great Powers and Who Are We? The Challenges to America's National Identity respectively. The mirror image of these ideas is the notion that the Russia itself (and not just the late Soviet Union) was a "prison house for the Captive Nations" all yearning to break free from Moscow's oppressive yoke. Indeed, there are a handful of "experts" on the former Soviet Union in Washington who still speak of the "Republic of Ickteria" as if Chechnya and Dagestan were (or ought to be) independent countries and were not a part of the Russian Federation.

The Line Between Reporting on Separatism in the U.S. and Russia and Publicizing It

The fact that during the late Cold War some of these particular think tanks also became homes for CIA recruited Soviet defectors excerbates Russian stereotypes that, twenty years after the official end of the Cold War, these institutions are still dedicated to anti-Moscow propaganda, rather than research. For Russian observers of this phenomenon, the line between ex-State Department and CIA observers like Paul Goble reporting on alleged ethnic separatism in Russia and actually publicizing the notion that certain territorites will soon secede from the Russian Federation is not so apparent. Even if one chalks these concerns up to centuries of Russian paranoia, it's easy to imagine the hackles among The Wall Street Journal and Washington Post editorial boards if a leading Russian expert were to regularly report on the fringe Republic of Texas or MECha movements and happen to have a silovik (Federal Security Service) background.

Oil and Gas Politics and the "The Grand Chessboard"

Certainly, if Russia were to eventually lose control over some of its territory because of demographic collapse, it would open the door to questions about how Russia's huge natural resources would continue to be developed and exported to the rest of the world. This is why many Kremlin-connected Russian elites believe that some in the West are actually rooting for Russia to weaken. They see Western complaints about alleged Russian backlsliding on human rights or allegations of Kremlin "energy imperialism" as sour grapes. Most of these claims they would argue, were popularized only after the oligarch Mikheil Khodorkovsky went to jail for trying to sell half of Russia's crude production capacity to major Western oil companies in 2003.

In other words, a great deal of the tensions in the U.S.-Russia relationship, and the war of words and think tank reports that occasionally take a hard line on both sides, arise from Russian government resource nationalism and Western elites' resentment of the same. On the government-friendly Russia Today TV channel in Moscow, the Austin, Texas-based 9/11 denier and professional conspiracy theorist Alex Jones is regularly given a platform to air his views. Mr. Jones claims that former President Carter National Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski and the billionaire financier George Soros are plotting to breakup the Russian Federation.

Is Russia Unique in Its Projected Population Decline?

Nicholas Eberstadt acknowledges in his report that Russia is hardly the only major country that is facing a huge projected population decline in the 21st century. Eberstadt argues, however, that far higher mortality and abortion rates in Russia set it apart from countries like Italy, Spain, and Japan that are also experiencing birth rates far below replacement levels and aging populations.

The problem for anyone trying to use the demographic decline of Russia to score political points against the present Russian government is that all of these trends began decades ago, in Soviet times. Russia's birth and health crisis has its roots in seventy years of Communist policies, including promoting abortion to women as an allegedly easy solution for unplanned pregnancies, and the perpetual shortage of affordable housing for young families which continues to this day.

Russia in the Context of a Larger Debate Over Global Demographics and Government

Arguments over global demographics, at least in the U.S., are part of a larger debate -- that Western European welfare states, with their high rates of income taxation, socialized medicine, and the like, are unsustainable. Sooner or later, goes this argument, there will be more retirees or welfare recipients than taxpayers able to work, and the whole system will collapse, first in Europe, and perhaps a few years later in the U.S. The global baby bust has become Western conservatives' rhetorical trump card in their debates with the Western Left, which generally believes that the Earth only has so much carrying capacity and it can only support so many human beings -- particularly when millions in the developing world still aspire to an American-level lifestyle complete with cars, high meat consumption, and rampant consumerism.

Many North American conservatives like the recently outed Asia Times columnist "Spengler" and the Canadian National Post columnist Mark Steyn enjoy shocking liberals in their audience by contending that the world (at least the rich nations of the world) will run out of people long before they run out of natural resources. Thirty years after Paul Ehlrich published his influential book The Population Bomb arguing that world was headed for mass starvation due to overpopulation, the notion that it is a birth dearth and graying population that we have to fear rather than too many mouths to feed remains counterintuitive for many.

Why the American Left and Right Both Dislike Russia

The problem with imposing all of these Western templates on Russian society is that they simply do not fit in Russia's social context. Medvedev and Putin's government is equally loathed by America's The Wall Street Journal (which leans to the Right) and The Washington Post (which represents the American center-left, along with the possibly bankrupt New York Times). The former see a incorrigibly authoritarian Russian State, arising like a phoenix from the ashes of the old Soviet security services, which is determined to avenge the collapse of the USSR or at least hellbent on making trouble for American interests and democracy promotion efforts across Eurasia. The latter group sees a country that still depends to a great extent on oil and gas, arms sales, and metals mining -- industries many American progressives regard as in their twilight at best and a collection of polluters, war profiteers and price manipulators at their worst.

Why Russia Doesn't Fit Into Western Right and Left Templates

Post-Soviet Russia has neither a generous Western European-style welfare state nor a Hong Kong-style laissez faire system, though it does have a low 13% flat tax on individual incomes. The fact that so many Russians already owned their apartments outright led to a boom in disposable incomes and consumerism in the past several years, as oil and gas revenues soared. Now the economic crisis has slowed growth in Russia. While Russian consumers are not maxed out in debt like too many of their American counterparts, Russia's largest corporations remain heavily dependent on borrowing from foreign banks, and those sources of financing have become scarce in the current crisis.

Generous labor laws in theory benefit Russian workers, but more often in practice benefit employers -- though many small businesses that sincerely want to navigate the maze of rules find the red tape burdensome. During the recent economic crisis, many Russians were told if they did not like getting paid late or having to take a pay cut, to take a hike. None of these problems, however, have become anywhere near as severe as they were during the Nineties, when payday often involved taking home envelopes stuffed with hundred dollar bills. All of these social problems following the collapse of the USSR -- combined with the ghosts of millions who didn't live to have families but perished during the Second World War -- have left a huge hole in Russia's population. But are these wounds from which Russia can never recover? The answer is, not likely. There are reasons for cautious optimism about Russia's population reaching a floor in the next two decades and starting a gradually upward renewal.

Conclusions: Reasons for Hope

At the end of the day, pundits and policy wonks can argue about all the reasons -- whether of affluence in Europe, or of poverty in the former Soviet Union -- women and men around the world choose to delay childbearing, to have fewer kids, or to not have children at all. But human beings, regardless of nationality, are never as predictable as actuarial or demographic projections would suggest. Throughout its more than a thousand year history, Russia has never been as strong or as weak as it has appeared to outsiders. For my money, anyone betting on Russia to become too sick and depopulated to matter in the 21st century is making a losing wager. Russia is too proud of a nation to go gently into the night.

For more on this very important topic, see the essay published by Anatoly Karlin below:

Rite of Spring: Russia's Fertility Trends


Charles Ganske is the co-founder of the Real Russia Project. The views expressed here are his own.



TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.discovery.org/scripts/mt/mt-tb.cgi/18001

Comments

Although I have no educational background in "Russia-watching," it has been one of my favorite "sports" ever since I discovered my own Russian roots. I think that any turn-around in Russian demographics depends to some extent on Russia's regaining its awareness of itself as an Orthodox nation -- since Orthodoxy sees children as nothing but a great blessing, as people become more and more Orthodox, they will become more and more aware of child-bearing as essential to their faith, and to the survival of Russia. They already know something we refuse to accept in the West, that feminism is a sham -- they can work out the rest for themselves.

Much of the US influx is due to the yearly renewal of the Lautenberg Amendment. I think this recent spike in Russian emigration is similar to that which occured around 100 years ago; I'm most interested in seeing how it will affect the arts in Western Europe and in America.

http://www.lebutler.net

The funny thing about all those doomsayer theories/propaganda reports is that they've already been pretty much debunked. The population decline is currently seeing a relatively quick turnaround. Since 2005 the decline has been halving every year.

2005 decline:-0.5%, 2006:-0.3%, 2007:-0.15%, 2008:-0.08%. 2009 has continued to show improvements. (Source: Russian state statistics service)

An increase in immigration has played a significant role in that slowdown, but natural population growth has also played a part, with birth rates booming to post-Soviet highs and death rates falling to boot (albeit at a slower pace). Case in point, the number of new immigrants in 2007 and 2008 was virtually the same, but the population decline still slowed.

I wouldn't be surprised if we start to see Russia's population growing again within the next 2-4 years, while unfortunately for counties like Japan, Ukraine, Romania, Germany etc.. who can't use immigration as a temporary solution and/or aren't seeing natural growth improvements, they might just be the ones who suffer most in the long run.

Anyhoo, I've been following Russia's demographic situation for years and I felt the need to comment. There's nothing like some good ol' undeniable reality to kick those worthless "think tanks" in the butt.

Perhaps Russia's decline will match the rate of economic advancement in every industry when the inevitably improve the technology to improve that field of industry wither it be agriculture, media or manufacturing the number of people needed to work in that field decrease's.

Actually I think the analysis projects the mind set of the people running and operating these think tanks and there affiliated scholars come up with this analysis rather than the reality.

The main problem is Russia being replaced by a Muslim majority or a sizable minority.

@JFreegman

I thought Japan had a high population density?

@james

Japan does have a high population density. How is that related to population decline though?

re Muslim majority: Check out the article right below this one titled "Rite of Spring: Russia's Fertility Trends". It discusses the topic of Muslim demographics and why, once again, the doom and gloom scenarios don't hold any weight.

I'd rather be in Russia's shoes and have a declining homogenous population. In my country, France, the indigenous population will be a minority by the middle of this century, in 40 years.

This is an interesting look at changing demographics in the Western world in regards to the current cultures and the influx of immigrants with an emphasis on Muslim immigration

http://www.snopes.com/politics/religion/demographics.asp

Despite what the clip shows, which may be true, demographics are hard to pin down since any changes in the economy, war, weather, etc can effect demographics. Currently there is a rise in the sterilization and abortion rates in the US due in large measure to the uncertainty about the economy. Are people going to be able to afford to bring a baby into the world? Perhaps this will effect all the Western societies so even if, during the time of perceived prosperity the birthrates were on the rise all that might be quickly changed to the opposite.

Please understand, I mean the following only in a surly good humor, such that I hope might be at least vaguely reminisent of Fyodor Dostoevsky: Aye, the Russian bear, she has had too much Vodka, and not enough US dollars. Let us make a department of Russia Sobriety, and begin the new war on Russian beer.

Personally, while I know that I need not be personally involved about the matters of the think tanks' opinions (that they seem to then mistake as theory), I think it may be quite representative of an unfair view of Russia. In my opinion, Russia is a deeply tough nation, and beautiful though all the sort of historical and political eons.

Begging your pardon, if I offend. I just wanted to share my views on this, in as best as I thought I could. Adio.

Should we take the opinion of the AEI seriously?
Remember this is the think tank that lead the US to war with Iraq saying it would be a cake walk and cost a few billion dollars which would be covered by Iraq’s oil reserves and pushing for an even more disastrous war against Iran.

Plus they don’t factor in the large number of Diaspora Russians they can encourage with financial incentive to immigrate to Russia in Eastern Ukraine, Baltic’s and Central Asian states like Kazakstan, Uzbekistan, etc.

Jfreegman-- I agree that Russia's long-term demographics aren't as dismal as many assume, but here I totally disagree: "I wouldn't be surprised if we start to see Russia's population growing again within the next 2-4 years, while unfortunately for counties like Japan, Ukraine, Romania, Germany etc.. who can't use immigration as a temporary solution and/or aren't seeing natural growth improvements,"

You're lumping the wrong countries together there.

Ukraine and Romania, maybe-- but Germany? They have the world's highest immigration rate right now. And no, it's not Turks at all-- in the main it's East Europeans, overwhelmingly Czechs, Lithuanians, Ukrainians, Latvians, Estonians, Poles, Slovaks, Hungarians and, yes, plenty of Russians. To be honest, since they all physically resemble each other and are intermarrying like crazy in the entire "EU-east" region, ethnic lines are blurring regardless. As for birth rate, Germany's fertility has actually gone WAY UP over the past 4 years, one of the few Western countries to see that, and it's mostly the native-born population. (It's now around 1.7 and trending higher, even with the recession.) They appointed some Baptist minister with 7 kids of her own to run the program, and so far, seems to have worked.

I've worked on-and-off in Germany over the past 5 years, and to my surprise (I initially resisted the assignment back in 2004), Germany is probably the best-off of any Western country, demographically and economically. Yes, they're currently in recession too (they had a lot of USA investments), but the difference is that they have a much higher savings rate and much less debt than we do, no overseas military commitments or other long-term economic drains. They have outstanding schools, good cities-- if I had to make a long-term investment in the West, it'd probably be in Germany.

I'm also not too worried about the rest of Europe. Yes, France does have its Muslim rioters, but it (along with the Dutch) now has among the strictest immigration laws in Europe-- Sarkozy saw to that even before he entered office. And the results of the June 2009 Euro elections show that European voters aren't just blithely allowing their countries to be overrun by the Maghreb or Turkey (which, at any rate, are themselves approaching sub-replacement fertility).

The one exception is Britain, where it does seem like a major demographic change is afoot-- Tony Blair opened up the borders to the former Commonwealth countries in South Asia and Africa (also to the Poles who are, nonetheless, largely on the way out of Britain due to the British economic decline-- something that someone from Somalia or Bangladesh is less inclined to do). Kevin Rudd is doing the same sort of thing in Australia, and so those countries (along with the nation-of-immigrants USA of course) are indeed facing a major demographic change in 20 years. Is this good or bad? Who knows. But it just seems like a lot of the Russia-bashing (and Europe Continent-bashing in general) is misplaced.

As for Russia-- they have problems that need addressing, but I don't think it's as dire there as so many assume.

For one thing, ethnic Russians from Latvia, Ukraine, Kazakhstan and the other former Republics are still pouring back into Russia, and this will help to boost Russia's economy and forestall further economic declines. For another, Russia's natural-resource base in NE Siberia will guarantee a decent wealth source for decades.

Russian power may decline somewhat, but so what? They'll readjust as they've done before, and they'll be fine.

Post a comment

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)

Dotted Divider Line

Russia Blog presents up-to-date news, facts and commentary on the state of events in Russia and the former Soviet Union. The blog is managed by Yuri Mamchur, Director of Discovery Institute's Real Russia Project, a member of MBA class 2011 at Vanderbilt University's Owen Graduate School of Management, and a composer in his spare time.


 






Send an email to us at:
yuri@discovery.org
charles@discovery.org