Tweet
SPRING FOR THE PATRIARCHS
The National Interest Online
http://nationalinterest.org/commentary/spring-the-patriarchs-4786
Jan 27 2011
As the "power vertical" is consolidated in the post-Soviet space,
most nonstate institutions are getting weaker, with one interesting
exception: the national churches. In early 2011 the patriarchs have
a spring in their steps.
The phenomenon is strongest in Armenia, Georgia and Russia. The
Armenian catholicos, Karekin II is not just the leader of the Armenian
Gregorian Church but of Armenians worldwide. But he exercises the
enormous influence he has fairly quietly. Ilia II of Georgia (who has
been patriarch of Georgia since 1977) and the patriarch of Moscow,
Kirill I, are more visible and both are shrewd political figures.
You could say that these two patriarchs are possibly the only
untouchable figures in their two countries. In an opinion poll for NDI
last April Patriarch Ilia II won an astonishing 90 percent approval
rating, easily making him the most popular figure in Georgia-and
comfortably outstripping President Mikheil Saakashvili who earned a
positive rating of 58 percent.
Last year the Patriarch of Moscow, Kirill I, was in seventh place
in Nezavisimaya Gazeta's traditional list, compiled by experts,
of Russia's one hundred leading political figures-no mean feat for
a nonpolitician. Ahead of him were only Vladimir Putin and Dmitry
Medvedev and their closest allies. Behind him in the list were Russia's
defense and foreign ministers and Alexei Miller, head of Gazprom.
These men cannot be cut down to size. Surveys suggest that religious
belief in Russia is getting stronger, not weaker. According to the
Levada Center, two-thirds of the population now identify themselves
as Russian Orthodox believers, up from less than half in the
mid-nineties. The political leaders need to be associated with the
powerful symbol that this represents, so, rejecting their Komsomol
youth, they show up to religious services and share national platforms
with the patriarch. By temperament and outlook, Georgian president
Mikheil Saakashvili is far from being a pious Orthodox believer,
but he recently paid public homage to the patriarch and before that
consented to have his son christened.
The patriarchs use this affirmation to pursue their own agendas. To
the credit of both Ilia and Kirill, one way they have done this is to
insist on good relations with each other. They have opted out of the
extreme narratives that took hold of both Russia and Georgia during
the August war of 2008. Patriarch Ilia helped secure the return of
dead bodies and personally spoke up for two Georgian musicians who
had been vilified for holding concerts in Russia. Kirill instructed
the Russian Orthodox Church to take a nonconfrontational line on
the status disputes over Abkhazia and South Ossetia. Last month he
declared, "Our brotherly churches, which are so close to each other
geographically and cordially, should be two locomotives pulling our
interstate relations out of the difficult situation they are now in."
Although he wouldn't see it that way the Moscow patriarch is probably
the most effective instrument of Russian soft power in the "near
abroad." He made several visits to Ukraine last year and was the only
Orthodox Patriarch to be invited to the presidential inauguration
ceremony of Viktor Yanukovich.
More controversially, the respect given to the Orthodox churches gives
them space to advance their own conservative social agendas. Sometimes
they end up just tilting at windmills, as when Archpriest Vsevolod
Chaplin called last week for Russian women to stop wearing skimpy
dresses-he called it "striptease"-and proposed a "national dress
code". Good luck to him. But the churches are more effective on
shaping a social consensus that is hostile to homosexuality and other
liberal trends.
In Georgia the church message is even stronger. Ilia II urged Georgian
parents to have a third child, promising to be that child's godparent
if they did. The birth rate shot up as a result. Then he condemned
the spread of the observation of Halloween. Last year, he urged young
Georgians not to yield to the temptation of living abroad and to
resist the "danger" of globalization. "This is the time when a man
should not abandon his treasure and go abroad. Any treasure must be
taken care of! What is our treasure? The whole of Georgia-its temples,
its values and traditions, its nation; this is our treasure house."
The patriarch has also dipped his toe into politics, criticizing for
example Georgia's controversial education minister, Dmitry Shashkin.
In Russia it is unthinkable that the patriarch, for all his power,
would confront the governing elite on a key political issue. In Georgia
that is now a possibility and President Saakashvili now finds he has
one potential critic who is above criticism.
Thomas de Waal is a senior associate at the Carnegie Endowment for
International Peace.
From: A. Papazian
The National Interest Online
http://nationalinterest.org/commentary/spring-the-patriarchs-4786
Jan 27 2011
As the "power vertical" is consolidated in the post-Soviet space,
most nonstate institutions are getting weaker, with one interesting
exception: the national churches. In early 2011 the patriarchs have
a spring in their steps.
The phenomenon is strongest in Armenia, Georgia and Russia. The
Armenian catholicos, Karekin II is not just the leader of the Armenian
Gregorian Church but of Armenians worldwide. But he exercises the
enormous influence he has fairly quietly. Ilia II of Georgia (who has
been patriarch of Georgia since 1977) and the patriarch of Moscow,
Kirill I, are more visible and both are shrewd political figures.
You could say that these two patriarchs are possibly the only
untouchable figures in their two countries. In an opinion poll for NDI
last April Patriarch Ilia II won an astonishing 90 percent approval
rating, easily making him the most popular figure in Georgia-and
comfortably outstripping President Mikheil Saakashvili who earned a
positive rating of 58 percent.
Last year the Patriarch of Moscow, Kirill I, was in seventh place
in Nezavisimaya Gazeta's traditional list, compiled by experts,
of Russia's one hundred leading political figures-no mean feat for
a nonpolitician. Ahead of him were only Vladimir Putin and Dmitry
Medvedev and their closest allies. Behind him in the list were Russia's
defense and foreign ministers and Alexei Miller, head of Gazprom.
These men cannot be cut down to size. Surveys suggest that religious
belief in Russia is getting stronger, not weaker. According to the
Levada Center, two-thirds of the population now identify themselves
as Russian Orthodox believers, up from less than half in the
mid-nineties. The political leaders need to be associated with the
powerful symbol that this represents, so, rejecting their Komsomol
youth, they show up to religious services and share national platforms
with the patriarch. By temperament and outlook, Georgian president
Mikheil Saakashvili is far from being a pious Orthodox believer,
but he recently paid public homage to the patriarch and before that
consented to have his son christened.
The patriarchs use this affirmation to pursue their own agendas. To
the credit of both Ilia and Kirill, one way they have done this is to
insist on good relations with each other. They have opted out of the
extreme narratives that took hold of both Russia and Georgia during
the August war of 2008. Patriarch Ilia helped secure the return of
dead bodies and personally spoke up for two Georgian musicians who
had been vilified for holding concerts in Russia. Kirill instructed
the Russian Orthodox Church to take a nonconfrontational line on
the status disputes over Abkhazia and South Ossetia. Last month he
declared, "Our brotherly churches, which are so close to each other
geographically and cordially, should be two locomotives pulling our
interstate relations out of the difficult situation they are now in."
Although he wouldn't see it that way the Moscow patriarch is probably
the most effective instrument of Russian soft power in the "near
abroad." He made several visits to Ukraine last year and was the only
Orthodox Patriarch to be invited to the presidential inauguration
ceremony of Viktor Yanukovich.
More controversially, the respect given to the Orthodox churches gives
them space to advance their own conservative social agendas. Sometimes
they end up just tilting at windmills, as when Archpriest Vsevolod
Chaplin called last week for Russian women to stop wearing skimpy
dresses-he called it "striptease"-and proposed a "national dress
code". Good luck to him. But the churches are more effective on
shaping a social consensus that is hostile to homosexuality and other
liberal trends.
In Georgia the church message is even stronger. Ilia II urged Georgian
parents to have a third child, promising to be that child's godparent
if they did. The birth rate shot up as a result. Then he condemned
the spread of the observation of Halloween. Last year, he urged young
Georgians not to yield to the temptation of living abroad and to
resist the "danger" of globalization. "This is the time when a man
should not abandon his treasure and go abroad. Any treasure must be
taken care of! What is our treasure? The whole of Georgia-its temples,
its values and traditions, its nation; this is our treasure house."
The patriarch has also dipped his toe into politics, criticizing for
example Georgia's controversial education minister, Dmitry Shashkin.
In Russia it is unthinkable that the patriarch, for all his power,
would confront the governing elite on a key political issue. In Georgia
that is now a possibility and President Saakashvili now finds he has
one potential critic who is above criticism.
Thomas de Waal is a senior associate at the Carnegie Endowment for
International Peace.
From: A. Papazian