Three Thousand Versts of Loneliness

Last Saturday a lengthy political saga  finally came to an end at United Russia’s conference in Moscow.  Dmitry Medvedev and Vladimir Putin announced that the latter will contest next year’s Russian Presidential election.  This resolves the “will he or won’t he” speculation about President Medvedev seeking a second term in office. There will, of course, be many Russian liberals who see this decision as a fatal blow to Russia’s democracy.  There will also be a chorus of “we told you so”s from commentators hostile to the Kremlin who always maintained that Medvedev’s presidency was a sham.   Their arguments have some force, but they’re very far from the full picture.   The President has defended his decision to step aside and let Putin contest the election, observing that the Prime Minister is Russia’s “most authoritative” leader.   The Russian public has consistently expressed its preference for Putin, ahead of Medvedev, wher...

When either the President or Prime Minister of Russia wants to emphasise their liberal credentials they head to Skolkovo.  A business school, set to become heart of Moscow’s answer to Silicon Valley, it’s an emblem for the new Russia: educated, tech savvy, pro-business and punching its weight. Something of a kerfuffle accompanied Dmitry Medvedev’s press conference , planned for Skolkovo this afternoon.  There was some expectation that the President would declare his hand and announce whether he would run for a second term, in next year’s election. The conference followed hot on the heals of the announcement that Mikhail Prokorov, currently Russia’s third wealthiest billionaire, would lead Right Cause, the pro-business party which has backed Medvedev for the presidency, into December’s state Duma election. Interesting choreography, but the journalists who flocked to the Moscow Management School were disappointed.  The President said that it is ‘too soon’ to announce hi...

Will Putin or Medvedev contest next year's presidential election in Russia?  The answer is by no means certain.  Everything either man does at the moment is interpreted as pre-campaign manoeuvring. To that end the New Times has sketched up an intriguing map showing pro Putin and pro Medvedev regions of Russia.  It's all rather conjectural, but the speculation is rather fun. It scores it 28 solid Putin regions to 14 for Medvedev .   The remaining 41 regions are dominated by neither man.    It must be said that the stats aren't based so much on voter intention as the administrative subtleties in each region.

Dmitry Medvedev has given a lengthy interview to the Financial Times . It is the President-elect’s first major interview with a western news source. Choosing the FT is significant in itself. The UK and the City of London in particular play an important role as trade-partners and financiers of Russia’s economy. Medvedev’s stated priority is retaining stability economically and growing and liberalising the economy. Delivering an interview to the FT is a strong signal that Russia is open for business and in particular open to foreign investment. Equally the interview will raise hopes of a thaw in political relations between the UK and Russia. I have read the interview quickly and there are a number of noteworthy points to raise even after a relatively cursory perusal. Medvedev continues to emphasise his commitment to improving the standard of living for Russians. This is his stated priority and he believes that this can best be achieved through broad adherence to the policies of V...

Sir Roderick Braithwaite expounds a sensible and sober assessment of Russian democracy in the Moscow Times, via the Financial Times. He rubbishes both the notion that the west needs to dictate to Russia how its government should be ordered and also the argument that Russians are genetically indisposed to democracy and incapable of instigating it. Braithwaite argues that Russians are a sophisticated and knowledgeable electorate, quite capable of using the franchise they do possess to unseat a regime should they wish to. He sees their assent for Putin and now Medvedev as a rational response to the chaotic 1990s. This argument is well-founded and dismisses the mildly racist suggestions that Russians are incorrigible opponents of democratic politics. The former UK Ambassador’s conclusion is that we should allow Russia to find its own way to democracy without excoriating attacks on the character of its regime.

Simon Jenkins has written one of those rare articles in yesterday’s Guardian which cause me to chuckle and grunt my assent at practically every paragraph. Jenkins points out how different elections seem to provoke inconsistent responses from the west. He argues that democracy is far from a realisable or absolute set of values. I’d recommend that you read the article.

Dmitry Medvedev was 25 when the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991. He was only 19 when Mikhail Gorbachev came to power and introduced Glasnost and Perestroika (openness and restructuring), the twin pillars of reform which were to transform Russia. The 42 year old, who will become the President of the Russian Federation in May, will be in many respects the first genuinely post-Soviet leader that Russia has experienced. In the wake of Medvedev’s election victory yesterday, in which he appears to have claimed in the region of two thirds of the vote, speculation has re-emerged as to whether the outgoing President, Vladimir Putin, who will become Medvedev’s Prime Minister, will retain the bulk of political influence in Russia. Although the incoming President has indicated that he will work closely with Putin and continue to follow a similar policy course, at yesterday’s rally in Red Square he reiterated that he would exercise his constitutional right to formulate foreign policy. Gordon Bro...

In countering the more hysterical commentary about perceived Russian tyranny, I am sometimes aware that it might appear that I do not want the country to be more free or democratic. That is assuredly not the case. I simply think that the best way in which to achieve such an outcome is not to brow-beat and demonise Russia, nor is it the display of flagrant hypocrisy and double-think in dealings with the Kremlin. I do not, for example, think it is helpful to lecture Russia about intervention in their neighbours’ affairs, whilst simultaneously intervening most blatantly and directly in the affairs of a great many countries around the world. I do not believe it is reasonable to invoke international law to denounce separatist conflicts in Georgia (for example) whilst concurrently condemning Russia for invoking international law to denounce Kosovo’s declaration of independence. I do not consider reasonable demonising Russia for a failure to extradite Andrei Lugovoi, whilst reserving the ...

As Russia goes to the polls on Sunday, conflicting messages are issuing from pro western opposition within the country. On one hand we are told that the elections are a charade and that the new president will not be receiving a legitimate mandate and on the other we are told that Russians should not put store in Medvedev’s liberal credentials. He is trying to trick those who favour liberal democracy into backing him. There is a fundamental inconsistency between these lines of argument. If Medvedev needs to win the backing of the Russian electorate, by persuading them that his policies are one thing or the other, if he feels a compulsion to present his beliefs in the language of democracy and rationalise them by reference to concepts such as freedom and the rule of law, then Russia is not in the clutches of autocracy or dictatorship. Whilst elections may not be free and fair and whilst pluralism may be more an illusion than a reality, the elections do have an importance in Russia a...

If western democratic values are really based at their root on a belief in a Hobbesian contract whereby the governed consent to the sovereignty of those who govern, then it appears that Russia falls comfortably within this model. A poll conducted by Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty suggests that Russians are under no illusions about the electoral process they are about to partake in. Despite an acceptance that the presidential election will not be transparent or honest, the electorate assent to the process as it is. Over 75% intend to cast there vote and a majority will support Putin’s chosen successor, Dmitri Medvedev. What is inferred is the emergence of a social contract between the Russian people and the Kremlin. "There is an unwritten agreement in which people have received a certain level of personal freedoms and a rise in their living standards," Nikolai Petrov of the Moscow Carnegie Center explains to RFE/RL's Russian Service.

Although I suspect that my comment about Russia is the least read content on this blog, there is an election in just over two weeks time and I shall plough ahead posting about it whether youse are interested or not! In this spirit I thought I might highlight some of the main sources through which the election can be followed over the next few weeks (for those who are interested in keeping up with events). To begin with some background Rupert Wingfield Hayes has been compiling a series of articles over the past few weeks on the BBC’s website. The sequence follows the journalist on a trip along the Volga River where he tries to give a flavour of provincial European Russia as it prepares to go to the polls. The link is to his final instalment , but the previous articles are linked to the right of the page. Only Dmitri Medvedev has English language content on his official webpage which also provides links to speeches given by United Russia’s candidate. For the perpetually curious the...

To maintain the theme of sporting analogies for presidential elections, if the US presidential contest is the World Cup, the Russian equivalent is some manner of professional wrestling bout. The winner has been pre-ordained since Dimitry Medvedev received the United Russia nomination in early December. Whatever the discrepancies in competiveness between the two elections, the Russian winner will have scarcely less geo-political clout as the world’s largest country continues to exert increasing influence strategically and economically. Medvedev has so far been engaged in a low key campaign. Following the template created by Vladimir Putin in 2004, United Russia’s candidate seems to regard conventional electioneering as beneath his dignity. As such he has been eschewing stormy television debates featuring the other candidates. Medvedev therefore avoided becoming embroiled in clashes between Democratic Party candidate Andrei Bogdanov who expressed his hopes that Russia might join the...

Dmitry Medvedev has begun his campaign for election to the Russian presidency using language which is in stark contrast to the often belligerent utterances of his mentor Vladimir Putin. On Tuesday he delivered a speech at the Association of Russian Lawyers of whose Board of Trustees Medvedev is the chairman. In this speech he emphasised the centrality of the rule of law to the Russian state and affirmed his intention to put the individual at the centre of development of Russia. Medvedev began campaigning in earnest last Tuesday after officially registering as a candidate the day before. His speech at the Civic Forum , an amalgamation of various public organisations representing a cross-section of Russia’s developing civil society, similarly concerned itself with ideas of freedom, social responsibility and justice. These concepts have often been portrayed as inimical to the vertical authority which Vladimir Putin favoured. Medvedev speaks warmly and approvingly of progress made und...

An interesting opinion piece appears in today’s Moscow Times penned by Anders Aslund. Aslund draws parallels between the succession which will take place when Dmitry Medvedev assumes the role of President of the Russian Federation this year and the situation which pertained in 1991 when members of the Soviet government launched a coup against Mikhail Gorbachev. His premise is that the ex-KGB elite promoted to power under Putin will be victims of the changeover and indeed already effectively no longer enjoy their mentor’s patronage. The diminution of power for the security organs and their ex-members could cause a coup. Although Aslund is correct in identifying that both situations have in common a security elite threatened with substantially diminished influence, it is a leap too far to compare the succession of the new president with 1991. At that time the KGB’s influence was not the only prescient factor in fomenting the coup. The structures of the Union were being changed and t...

Given that the Guardian has been warning everyone for some time that Vladimir Putin does not intend to give up politics and that there will be two centres of power when the next President of the Russian Federation is elected, the paper’s surprise at Putin’s indication he will accept the position of Prime Minister under Medvedev is slightly excessive. It confirms my suspicion that despite repeated stern warnings in the western media, that there remains an incredulity that Putin really intends to take the path which he appears to be taking. We may have predicted it, but we didn’t really believe he would have the audacity to actually go through with it, if you will. Putin does not intend merely to install his chosen lieutenant as president and then retire gracefully from politics to let his successor get on with things. He genuinely does intend to remain active and potentially undermine the authority of Dmitry Medvedev. He claims that no constitutional alterations will take place in ...

The shape Russia’s future government may assume is beginning to emerge after Dmitry Medvedev was revealed as Vladimir Putin’s favoured successor as president. With Putin’s monopoly of power, Medvedev effectively becomes president elect. The role that Putin himself will adopt when Medvedev takes up the presidency has been subject to much speculation. Putin has given contradictory signals about the possibility that he might become Prime Minister, but this option has gained further credibility after Medvedev expressed his hope that the current President would become Prime Minister after March’s election. Although there are those who have expressed cynicism about the independence of Medvedev, he will be acquiring a role with extensive powers and it should not be presumed that Putin’s continued influence will relegate the new President to simply being a figurehead. He is a trusted ally of Putin and clearly intends his mentor to retain a crucial position, but whilst he may seek continuity...

Dmitry Medvedev looks set to be the next President of the Russian Federation. Whether he acquires real power or whether Vladimir Putin, who will give United Russia's chosen candidate his backing, retains the bulk of influence will become clear in the months after the March election. Putin’s murmurings about alleviating election fatigue have been interpreted in a sinister fashion by some commentators . The suggestion is that Russia is embarking on a course whereby managed elections could become effectively no elections at all. The difficulty with this argument lies not necessarily with the assertion that Putin is becoming increasingly tyrannical but rather with the conception of Russia between 1991 and 2000 being on a meaningful road to liberal democracy. This view posits a tradition of authoritarianism linking Putin to the Soviet regime, interrupted by movement toward a democratic path under Boris Yeltsin. More subtle commentators may acknowledge a much earlier psychological a...