Skip to main content

Russia starts to reap the whirlwind

The blunt political reality is that Vladimir Putin needed to cheat, even just to get the "sharply reduced majority" that is the official result of the Russian Parliamentary election. When we blow away the fog of the 99.9% results in some parts of the country, it is quite clear that United Russia lost the election.


The problem now is, what comes next?


There have been the largest street protests for many years in Moscow and St. Petersburg, and - as usual, these have been broken up by the thuggish internal security service. The future of Russia is not likely, in the short term, to be determined on the snowy streets of Moscow. However, there is no doubt that the weakness of United Russia opens up some serious future problems for Vladimir Putin' s bid for the Presidency.


In classic authoritarian style, Putin is likely to try to prevent any credible opposition leader from standing against him, yet the weakness of United Russia may entice a few of the opposition leaders to stand regardless. In which case, Putin will seek to divide the opposition by encouraging many more candidates. Yet Putin may be losing his sure political touch. His tin ear on the job swap between President and Prime Minister is a significant part of what has got him into serious trouble in the first place. His instincts remain firmly authoritarian, at a point in his regime where he needs to be more flexible in order to avoid real political challenges.


Putin can now expect little from the West. His failure to engage with the US after they publicly sought to "reset" relations with Moscow now means that he is internationally isolated. He has lost such Western leaders as Berlusconi, Chirac or Schroder from the previous generation who were prepared to intercede in his interest. Although Russia has often voted with China on such subjects as support for the Libyan or Syrian uprisings (against both), all he ended up doing was making an ineffectual protest and being ignored.


The global economic and financial crisis has hurt Russia too, and although it has become customary to talk of BRIC states as the rising future, Russia has been losing political influence and economic cohesion over the past few years. Adding political instability into the mix makes the Putin regime a pretty unappealing partner- and the Chinese already barely bother to hide their lack of respect for Moscow.


In the short run it seems that Putin can hold power, at least until he is formally returned to the Presidency. Then, however, his problems may seriously begin. Another obviously fraudulent election will severely weaken his political legitimacy, and although history shows authoritarianism can survive on force alone for some time, the examples of the Arab rebellions are being widely discussed in Russian chat rooms. Putin and Mubarak, and their countries, have much in common, and continuing to impose his rule without consent could easily lead to the violent collapse that Russians most fear.


The bigger problem for Putin is that he rides a tiger already, in the shape of the various contending "bizness" groups which comprise his regime. Without the legitimacy of a popular mandate, he will find it far more difficult to control disputes as they arise. The implication is that the foundations of the regime, resting on the criminal theft of billions of state assets could be undermined from within as well as by popular pressure.


From the point of view of the West, there is ever less point in engaging with Moscow, and while tens or even hundreds of thousands of the Russian middle class now prepare to leave, we can not avoid the increasingly high probability that Putin's shelf life could be down to far less than the period of his next Presidential term.  A backlash is already brewing. The crushing corruption, brutality and criminality that have become the hallmarks of the Putin era may now, finally be sowing the seeds of popular rebellion.


The problem is that the future may be even less stable, and could be far more difficult to cope with than the cantankerous Putinistas.    

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Waiting for the Barbarians

What are we waiting for, assembled in the forum? The barbarians are due here today. Why isn’t anything going on in the senate? Why are the senators sitting there without legislating? Because the barbarians are coming today. What’s the point of senators making laws now? Once the barbarians are here, they’ll do the legislating. Why did our emperor get up so early, and why is he sitting enthroned at the city’s main gate, in state, wearing the crown? Because the barbarians are coming today and the emperor’s waiting to receive their leader. He’s even got a scroll to give him, loaded with titles, with imposing names. Why have our two consuls and praetors come out today wearing their embroidered, their scarlet togas? Why have they put on bracelets with so many amethysts, rings sparkling with magnificent emeralds? Why are they carrying elegant canes beautifully worked in silver and gold? Because the barbarians are coming today and things like that dazzle the barbarians. Why don’t our distingui...

Liberal Democrats v Conservatives: the battle in the blogosphere

It is probably fair to say that the advent of Nick Clegg, the new leader of the Liberal Democrats, has not been greeted with unalloyed joy by our Conservative opponents. Indeed, it would hardly be wrong to say that the past few weeks has seen some "pretty robust" debate between Conservative and Liberal Democrat bloggers. Even the Queen Mum of blogging, the generally genial Iain Dale seems to have been featuring as many stories as he can to try to show Liberal Democrats in as poor a light as possible. Neither, to be fair, has the traffic been all one way: I have "fisked' Mr. Cameron's rather half-baked proposals on health, and attacked several of the Conservative positions that have emerged from the fog of their policy making process. Most Liberal Democrats have attacked the Conservatives probably with more vigour even than the distrusted, discredited Labour government. So what lies behind this sharper debate, this emerging war in the blogosphere? Partly- in my ...

Lib Dem v. Tory (Round 2)

The Liberal Democrats stand for a distinct political ideology. It is an ideology built around both socially and economically liberal precepts. In as far as our ruling Labour government can be said to have an ideology at all, it coincides with Liberalism only incidentally. Labour stands for pragmatism, and where it does not there is still a core of values that are collectivist and not individual. Sometimes people are prepared to claim the moral high ground for policies of social solidarity and redistribution of wealth. Liberals may argue in favour of equality of opportunity, we can not argue in favour- as Socialists do- of "and equal society". The reason is simple: Socialism does not work. If one places equality above freedom, then eventually we get tyranny. This is why, while we may argue in favour of a more equal society as being a stronger society, the tools that we may use to gain -in our view- socially desirable outcomes must rest upon freedom above all else. As PJ O'...