opinion
The victory of Boris Yeltsin in Russia’s July 3 presidential elections was an obvious relief for western democratic leaders. Not only is Yeltsin the symbol of Russia’s move to democracy, but his main challenger was a hard-line nationalist who threatened in many ways to turn the clock back to Cold War days.
Western nations, however, cannot afford to become complacent. The infant Russian democracy still faces serious dangers. Yeltsin’s challenger, Communist leader Gennady Zyuganov, won over 40 percent of the vote despite having the news media heavily biased against him.
Read Also
Land crash warning rejected
A technical analyst believes that Saskatchewan land values could be due for a correction, but land owners and FCC say supply/demand fundamentals drive land prices – not mathematical models
Another rival might come from within Yeltsin’s government. To achieve his 54-percent mandate, Yeltsin allied with Lt.-Gen. Alexander Lebed, who had placed third in the June 16 first round of presidential voting. Despite Lebed’s questionable support for democracy (he is a self-described “semi-democrat”), Yeltsin appointed the general as powerful head of security forces before the July 3 final vote.
If Yeltsin’s shaky health fails, he may well be replaced by some such authoritarian figure, whether through a coup or the ballot box.
That would be bad news not just for Russian civil liberties, but for international political and economic stability.
Behind the political personalities, the fundamental challenge facing the struggling democracy is economic.
In the rapid move toward a market economy, many groups of Russians have watched their real income drop as prices rise.
Rural areas share in this disaffection. Russian farmers have generally seen little benefit from the new economy, and many agricultural areas gave strong support to Zyuganov in last week’s vote.
In the end, Russians themselves will decide their form of government. But western nations can do much to help see that democracy is given a fair chance. Canada, for example, has the experience and expertise in agricultural technology to be of some help in Russian agricultural reform.
It needn’t be a matter of large-scale charity, which Canada couldn’t afford in any case. Rather, federal officials should do all they can to encourage Canadian agribusiness to investigate opportunities in Russia.
Russia needs the type of agricultural technology and expertise that Canada has, in everything from farm equipment to feedlot design to organizing co-operatives. Canada, meanwhile, needs to strengthen its global role in exporting technology and expertise.
Both nations would benefit from closer co-operation between the two agricultural sectors.
