Last days of the father of colored revolutions
Sensation has become the information that U.S. Ambassador to Russia, Michael McFaul is going to leave Moscow immediately after the Olympics. He called "family circumstances" an official reason for his resignation but, according to most analysts, both Russian and foreign, the reason is not in this. Experts believe that he was not able to carry out the tasks of the State Department.
Michael McFaul, "in the secular world" a political science professor, Stanford University, main specialist for Russia in America, became an official representative of the U.S. in Moscow in 2012. However, his acquaintance with Russia began long before that, as far back as 1990, when he worked for 6 years at the National Democratic Institute in Russia (NDI). In recent years he worked in the administration of Barack Obama, at the same time being the senior director of Russian and Eurasian affairs of the U.S. national security service.
Despite the fact that McFaul himself associates no more with scholars, in fact, he is a top-ranked and highly specialized political technologist with very specific backgrounds. The whole world knows him not only as the author of books and theorist of "color revolutions", but also as a genuine father of some of them.
Analyzing the activity of the academic, executive director of the Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity, Daniel McAdams says that it is to him that the repeatedly proven tactics of "maintaining the opposition under the nationalist banner" belongs. In such cases, an "American" candidate by words holding himself out as a "nationalist", though receiving a salary at the U.S. Embassy, often gain much popularity up to a complete overthrow of the existing government. McAdams also calls the National Endowment for Democracy – Michael McFaul's brainchild – an "engine of color revolutions" and a "relic of the Cold War era", allowing the U.S. State Department to "openly do what special services do in secret – to weaken and change unfriendly regimes.".
Whereas the U.S. ambassador calls the disorders in 2012 and his arrival coincidence, there is much to say that this moment was not chosen by accident. Probably the Russian opposition preparations for his arrival was carried out distantly, because he was formally appointed to the post of ambassador as early as 2011, and the so-called "coordination of documents in the Congress", which lasted nearly a year, was actually a preparation for the Bolotnaya Square, on which Michael McFaul got off.
Straight after his arrival, the diplomat took up the "public diplomacy" – what, as he said, is to his liking. First off, the new ambassador held meetings with representatives of the opposition - Boris Nemtsov, Yevgenia Chirikova, Sergei Mitrokhin, and Ilya Ponomarev, quickly giving them "instructions" from the White House.
Speaking about McFaul's resignation, official spokesperson for the U.S. Department of State Jennifer Psaki stressed that it "has nothing to do with his failures, in particular, on Syria and Russia." Psaki said nothing that McFaul messed up the "white-ribbon" or "snow" revolution in Moscow in 2012, and in the Syrian issue he could not exert enough influence on Russian community to enable the United States to easily overthrow the government the Assad government. McFaul's knowledge and practical experience in the organization of "color revolutions" proved totally inappropriate for Russia.
Michael McFaul proudly calls his main achievement the reset of relations with the Kremlin. At the same time, in an interview with the Kommersant newspaper, he says that he is also proud of practice of "dual participation" – "to come into direct contact with the civil society and defend universal values, continuing cooperation with the Russian government." Amusing form of contrasting the government and citizens, is not it?
McFaul does not deny that after the expiry of his term as the U.S. ambassador in Moscow, he will continue work in the Obama administration obviously in the same quality of an expert on Russia. He says about his priorities in the future as follows: "strengthening of relations between business circles and civil societies of the two countries."
Professor of the Higher School of Economics, Oleg Matveychev summarized the work of McFaul most accurately and succinctly: "McFaul, unfortunately, did not aim to improve relations between our countries. All he was doing here was quite open and offhand support of the Russian opposition. Perhaps, the next ambassador will be more appropriate and will not become hostage to the position of only one of our political forces."