The West’s most popular political drama has finally started taking Russia seriously — a measure of how much Putin has changed the game.
I just spent a weekend binge-watching the third season of the lethally addictive Netflix show House of Cards, which dramatizes the fraught relations the US has with its restive and violent global rival, the Russian Federation.
Some have called the new season’s portrayal of Russia superficial, and not very up to date, and it certainly falls back on lazy stereotypes. But the depiction of Russia is actually rather astute. In a show as prominent as this, it’s the mark of a major shift in the way Russia is seen in the West. It also does a lot to flatter President Vladimir Putin’s ego.
House of Cards’ previous seasons, which predated the worst of the Ukraine crisis, gave most of the geopolitical action over to the rise of China, while Russia was depicted as a rather weak and uncivilized power. But in season three, Russia is portrayed as a strong player in the international arena, led by a strong authoritarian power figure.
The whole season focuses on the West’s relations with Russia, and American attempts to grapple with the personality of a fictional Russian president. The fictional antagonist’s resemblance to Putin is striking: Viktor Petrov shares Vladimir Putin’s initials, his belligerent outlook and his penchant for wrestling bears and riding horses bare-chested. Both are also ruthless men with a tendency to act impulsively.
As a result of its behavior throughout 2014, Russia is now seen in the public sphere in the US and Europe as a great power with the potential to pose a direct threat to the West. And while House of Cards features a fictional crisis in the Jordan Valley rather than Ukraine, it still presents Russia not as a corrupt basket-case falling apart at the seams, but as the biggest obstacle in the US president’s quest to assure peace in the Middle East.
The show clearly takes the view that global peace won’t be secured until America treats Russia as an equal — arguably another lesson of the last two years, which have seen Russia make a dramatic effort to recoup its “great power” status.
Besides fueling the Ukraine crisis, Putin has had a central role mediating the Syrian crisis, and Russia is deeply involved in the Iranian nuclear negotiations. Putin has also mirrored the US’ “pivot” toward Asia by cultivating stronger relations with both China and India.
And much as in reality, in House of Cards the US and Russia do not trust each other. Russia is presented as not trusting the West for its failed promises, such as not to enlarge NATO or not to place the anti-missile shield in central and eastern Europe. On the other hand, the Russian president is presented as a strong leader, but also an impulsive thug whose words cannot be taken at face value.
As the show frames it, this mutual mistrust stems from a clash between Russian and Western political systems. The producers hint that American democracy makes it much harder for leaders to take swift decisions without being questioned. In turn, Russian leaders are not bound by democratic rules or institutions, but by the will of the people, who can quickly and violently overthrow a leader who goes too far.
The Big Leagues
House of Cards’ Russian diplomats are far more versatile and effective than their sluggish American counterparts, skilled at misleading foreign leaders and foiling their plots — much as in real life, Russian diplomacy has generally had the initiative in the Ukraine crisis.
American and European diplomats reacted rather slowly and indecisively to Russia’s actions in Ukraine, and they seemed disinclined to cooperate as closely as was clearly needed. The famous leaked conversation in 2014, when American diplomat Victoria Nuland concisely summarized her position as “fuck the EU,” certainly didn’t help Brussels’ diplomatic image.
And in a reflection of that unedifying reality, House of Cards leaves European diplomatic efforts and the European Union’s (EU) role in dealing with Russia out completely. Geopolitics in the show remains a very polarizing affair.
This is very interesting since in the previous seasons, Europe still got some credit as a natural and somewhat equal partner of the US in world politics. The absence of the EU from the picture is not particularly surprising, given the union’s perhaps unfair reputation for being toothless.
But then again, Europe and China’s might reflect an uneasy American sense that the world is becoming increasingly bipolar and ruled once again by hard power. The still-rumbling Ukraine crisis has revealed a new level of assertiveness in Russian foreign policy. During 2014, Putin essentially managed to restore Russia back to the great power status he clearly thinks is its destiny.
Many outside Russia think this renewed heft has been bought at an outrageous cost, but Putin and his regime have managed to show that Russia is unwilling to compromise any longer, and that it is ready to challenge the supremacy of the West.
Russia’s reappearance as a serious antagonist in the most popular political drama in the US is a serious victory for Putin, as for the past decade he has been arguing that Russia should be treated as equal by the West and complaining about denigration and belittlement.
And after years spent exhorting the virtues of soft power, Western diplomats must be watching House of Cards with gloom.
*[This article was originally published by The Conversation.]
The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Fair Observer’s editorial policy.
For more than 10 years, Fair Observer has been free, fair and independent. No billionaire owns us, no advertisers control us. We are a reader-supported nonprofit. Unlike many other publications, we keep our content free for readers regardless of where they live or whether they can afford to pay. We have no paywalls and no ads.
In the post-truth era of fake news, echo chambers and filter bubbles, we publish a plurality of perspectives from around the world. Anyone can publish with us, but everyone goes through a rigorous editorial process. So, you get fact-checked, well-reasoned content instead of noise.
We publish 2,500+ voices from 90+ countries. We also conduct education and training programs on subjects ranging from digital media and journalism to writing and critical thinking. This doesn’t come cheap. Servers, editors, trainers and web developers cost money. Please consider supporting us on a regular basis as a recurring donor or a sustaining member.