Pyrrhic victory

The WTO accession agreement has been officially ratified . Formally, the discussion is over. And we will sum up the results meaningfully in about eight months, when everything becomes obvious. It will be especially interesting to admire those economists and publicists who promised us a sharp drop in prices after joining the WTO.

Alas, the same thing is repeated over and over again. Criticism of the reforms is rejected as unfounded, ignored, and ridiculed. Then all the critics’ forecasts are confirmed, except that the reality turns out to be worse than even many pessimistic forecasts. After which new reforms are launched with the same results. The rightness of critics is retroactively recognized; moreover, it becomes a commonplace. This happened in our country with privatization in 1992-93, and with the government debt pyramid in 1997-98, and in the West with the introduction of the euro in the early 2000s. Now the same thing is happening with education reforms. But they still don’t listen to critics, even after admitting that before this they turned out to be right in each specific case. Now with the WTO everything happened according to the same pattern. The opinion of the majority is not taken into account either—from 70 to 80 percent of the population opposed the WTO. Nobody cares.

Thomas Hobbes said that if geometric axioms affected human interests, they would be vigorously contested.

The reason, of course, is not that arguments are not taken into account. It’s just that the decision is always made long before the discussion begins, and its real motives have nothing to do with those being discussed. As, for example, in the case of the WTO: our oil corporations still have a certain amount of “extra” revenue, which will be spent on purchasing all sorts of rubbish imported into Russia through distribution networks owned or controlled by the same corporations. The reduction in duties will not affect retail prices, since the market is monopolized (it was the monopolists who lobbied the WTO), the difference will go to corporate accounts. Industry lobbyists, in turn, extracted commitments from the government to increase subsidies to the extent possible under the new rules. This will still not be enough to protect real production from the shock of the transition period, but another hole will form in the budget: revenues will sharply decrease and expenses will increase. The result will be either a curtailment of social programs and another squeeze of funds from the population, or an increase in inflation. Most likely a combination of both.

What about the opposition? They seem to be happy with everything. Although there are nuances here. The Duma “opposition,” hiding behind “patriotism” and “traditional values,” voted for the law on “foreign agents” and for Internet censorship. At the same time, the extra-parliamentary liberal opposition applauds the country’s accession to the WTO. In short, on substantive issues, oppositionists are always ready to support from one side or the other those whom they brand as “the party of swindlers and thieves.”

The majority of Russians are not represented in these matters, they do not have their own voice, and nothing depends on their opinion. That is why discussions turn out to be meaningless: those who make decisions are not interested in arguments or counterarguments. And those who perceive arguments do not make decisions. Liberal experts have long stopped trying to convince society; they rather reassure themselves, shivering uncomfortably in anticipation of the troubles that will inevitably follow. After all, even 12-15% of the population, who still trust not so much their argumentation as their authority, can change their minds when faced with real troubles. And here there is no other argument other than a reference to the inevitability of joining the WTO. Even if it will be bad, painful, dangerous for us, there is no other way, because all the main countries have long ago joined this organization. So we need it too. This, they explain to us, is something like old age and death - sooner or later it must come (although is it worth rushing there?).

The “everyone does it” argument in relation to the WTO brings to mind the well-known mantra of school teachers: “And if everyone jumps out of the window, will you follow them too?”

In the early 2000s, at an international seminar, my English colleague and I confronted a whole swarm of liberal economists, predicting the problems that would inevitably follow with the introduction of the euro (increasing debt in the countries of Southern Europe, conflicts on this basis between them and the North, decline in production in weaker countries). states, etc.). Our arguments were simply ignored, and when the other side had nothing left to say, the same classic formula followed: “How can it be that the governments of all the leading European countries have a different opinion?” “Very simple,” answered the Englishman. - They are all wrong. This happens every step of the way in history.” In reality, of course, the point is not the mistakes. Disagreement between 70-80 percent of the population with government policies is typical today in most European countries, not to mention other regions. The key problem is that the elites have stopped taking into account the opinions of citizens, and not only in Russia.

The real question worth discussing is not whether our country will receive any benefits from joining the WTO, but how the economic stress that we will inevitably face this fall will affect us. And here I am ready to join the supporters of the optimistic view. No, we cannot expect any economic modernization, increased investment or other joys from the WTO. But it is precisely the sharp aggravation of economic and budgetary problems that, while aggravating the crisis, can simultaneously strengthen the positions of those who demand a change of course and accelerate the turn from neoliberal policies to protectionism. But what about the WTO, which prohibits such a turn? Most likely, this will be her problem, not ours. After all, the failure of the WTO policy affects the entire global economy, the vast majority of countries, not excluding China recently. If the WTO rules destroy the Russian economy, then they must be ignored or maliciously, demonstratively violated (as the Americans and Chinese often do). If it is obvious to everyone that the decision to join this organization was contrary to the interests of the country and people, then it will have to be canceled.

How will we leave the WTO? - you ask.

Yes, just like they came in!

They say that no one has yet managed to leave the WTO. It's like a prison from which there is no escape. But prisons do not last forever. And if Russia becomes the first country to decide to leave the WTO, rest assured, others will follow. It may very well be that Russia’s accession to the World Trade Organization will become for it not just a Pyrrhic victory, but also the beginning of the end. This piece will not be easy to digest.

We’ll see how things go in a year or two, but for some reason I have a feeling that the WTO will still regret that they achieved Russia’s entry there.