The basic story is pretty straightforward, but so odd that there must be something going on below the surface that I just am not quite getting. If anyone could explain it to me, I’d be really grateful!

From what I can gather Shevchenko, who lives in an apartment on the floor below Patriarch Kirill, was having some kind of construction work done. As a result, some kind of undetermined substance (dust, sand, or harmful nanoparticles, depending on who you believe) was carried up and coated many of the surfaces in Patriarch Kirill’s apartment. Lidiya Leonova, who lives in the apartment, and is described in the media as it’s “keeper”, “discovered that all of the property, including the library, was covered in a thick layer of dust” and took it upon herself to sue Shevchenko for the damage caused to Patriarch Kirill’s apartment, including to some very valuable religious texts.

The case went to court and ultimately, after being barred from leaving the country by the court to treat his cancer abroad, the judgement went against Shevchenko and, again according to the media, he was forced to sell an apartment that he had bequeathed to his daughter in order to meet the bill.

Most of the reports in the English language media I’m reading seem to being fairly critical of Patriarch Kirill. The Moscow Times is laughing at the claims that the dust was harmful, pointing out that it was just sand and it would have been far more efficient to just hire a maid to vacuum it up. RFE/RL are taking a slightly different tack in also observing that the Partiarch has a very nice (and presumably very expensive) Swiss watch that, in order to substantiate his claim that he never wears it, has to be airbrushed out of official photos whenever the sleeves of his robe ride up and the world catches a glimpse of it.

Others, though, seem more supportive of the Patriarch. Pravda.ru says that any damages awarded will be donated to charity (which makes you wonder whether it is actually very expensive to clean up the damage) and that the Patriarch has reportedly pronounced that it would be “incorrect” to forgive Mr Shevchenko for his crime. RT points to a sustained anti-Church information campaign, of which this and the Pussy Riot demonstration are just examples.

I’m just so confused. Does anyone know what’s really going on here? If so, please could you explain it to me?

Picture courtesy of the Russian President’s website

The strange case of the Patriarch, some sand, and 20 million rouble lawsuit is a post from: Siberian Light

9,100 attended, according to RIA Novosti's estimate

This weekend’s rally was smaller than many of the protests seen in Moscow recently. Rally organizers put attendance at around 25,000, but police estimates said the crowd was closer to 10,000 in size. RIA Novosti, who use special software to estimate crowd sizes, put the size at 9,100 with a margin of error of 15%, which indicates that the police estimate is the more accurate.

Although a few arrests were made – including Left Front leader Sergei Uldatsov – they were not of the scale seen at the previous weekend’s rally, where more than 500 were arrested.

A number of prominent opposition movement leaders addressed the rally, including Vladimir Ryzhkov, Garry Kasparov and Sergei Uldatsov. Notably, though, senior members of Russian opposition parties and the four defeated opposition candidates stayed away.

What next for Russia’s opposition movement?

It seems likely to be the last major protest that Moscow will see for a while.

Attendance has been gradually decreasing through the year and, without the focus of an upcoming election, it is unclear what direction Russia’s nebulous and politically disparate opposition movement will take over the coming months.

Some, disheartened by the apparent failure of the current methods of holding legally approved rallies, seem to be arguing for more direct action. Key proponents of this way forward include Sergei Uldatsov, leader of the Left Front movement, who was arrested at Saturday’s rally and at the previous rally. He seems to be supported by Alexei Navalny, who was arrested at last week’s rally and has recently called for a campaign of “civil disobedience”.

Many others, though, feel that opposition in Russia needs to move away from being in simple opposition and towards offering a genuine alternative to the current government, view expressed by Dmitry Gudkov, a member of the A Just Russia party who has been heavily involved in organizing a number of protests. In his blog, he wrote (RUS): “The next demonstration must not be ‘against’ but ‘for’. We need to move away from the format of ‘five minutes of hate’ and announce a plan of action, answer the question ‘What next?’ and demand the authorities conduct reforms.”

10,000 protest in Moscow against Putin is a post from: Siberian Light

There’s a lot to think about after the election, and I thought I’d follow Anatoly Karlin and offer a few of my thoughts on the outcome of the weekend’s excitement.

Cheating

Cheat? Me?

Although some of the claims of fraud in the vote itself are a little over the top (as Anatoly rightly points out, carousel buses aren’t enough to swing an election), it’s horribly depressing to see that the problems we experienced in the Duma election are still there. It is worrying that Putin’s share of the vote is a good 5% higher than the exit polls indicated.

And, of course, Putin still has an absurd 99% support in Chechya, as well as more than 90% support in four other Russian regions (Dagestan, Ingushetia, Karachey-Cherkessia and Tuva). As I’ve mentioned previously, fraud in just a few regions can easily add a couple of percent to Putin’s vote.

Moving on to the media coverage. An ‘establishment’ figure like Putin is always going to have a slight advantage when it comes to getting press and tv coverage. But the sheer volume of coverage that Putin gets in comparison to his rivals doesn’t seem to have changed for the better – I’d wager he got more air time during the campaign than all his rivals combined. The debate on the internet was vibrant and refreshing, but most voters don’t get exposed to it much and so it can not yet be considered a substitute for the power of traditional media.

Putin is genuinely popular

Strip away all of Putin’s advantages, and he would still have won the election comfortably.

Whatever you think of him, Putin is a genuinely popular politician in Russia. Almost every Russian has seen their income and their quality of life improve over the past decade, and it’s not surprising that they credit him for making Russia stronger (although you could argue that one of the reasons they give him this credit is because of Russia’s sycophantic media).

Although Putin will be a bit worried about his reduced share of the vote compared to previous years (Medvedev scored 71% in 2008 and Putin himself scored 72% in 2004) it’s not really all that much of a difference. The real damage to his aura of invincibility won’t come from the election result, it will come from a reinvigorated opposition.

Weak, but strengthening opposition

One of the main reasons that Putin has had such an easy ride over the past decade is that there has been no opposition to speak of. And this year’s election was no different – at least, when it came to the candidates. When the best candidate the opposition can muster is Gennady Zyuganov who himself managed to poll almost as many votes as the 3rd, 4th and 5th placed finishers combined, targeting an election victory involves little more than aiming at fish in a barrel.

There were some really encouraging signs, though, and the street protests that we saw demonstrated (sorry, poor pun) that there are people out there who strongly want an alternative. They made the current grey crop of opposition leaders sit up and change their strategy slightly, and they inspired someone new (Prokhorov) to get involved in politics.

I expect the protests to die off pretty quickly after the election, but I think in 6 years time they will have proved tremendously valuable in kickstarting a genuinely engaging opposition movement in Russia. I have no idea what that opposition will look like – will it be co-opted by the current opposition or will a new grouping emerge? But I’m fascinated to see how it develops.

Thoughts on Putin’s Win is a post from: Siberian Light

Dmitry Medvedev giving his final State of the Nation address

However, his initiative comes amid signs that his ambitious proposals for electoral reform may be coming up against sustained opposition within the Duma.

225 new electoral districts

The draft law is the latest of a series of electoral reforms first proposed in his State of the Nation address last December.

It proposes taking the 450 Duma seats and dividing them into two groups. 225 would continue to be elected on the basis of proportional representation, as currently happens for the full Duma. The other 225 would be allocated to geographical electoral districts.

Introducing his proposal last year, Medvedev told Duma representatives that it would allow “each territory to have their own direct representative in the parliament” and would “enhance communication between deputies and the electorate”.

Two of the other reforms he proposed in his State of the Nation address have already been submitted and are being considered by the Duma. One would allow for the direct election of state governors. The other would make it much easier to register political parties, partly by dramatically cutting the the number of signatures that new parties must submit to the Central Election Commission.

Growing opposition

Medvedev’s reforms were welcomed by many observers as a step towards increasing democratic participation within Russia and, in the case of changes to rules about electing state governors, removing the ability of the Kremlin to hand-pick candidates.

However, in an indication of Medvedev’s lame duck status, they seem to be meeting increasing opposition from within the State Duma and there is some doubt about just how closely the final laws will resemble Medvedev’s proposals.

When Medvedev first proposed changing the way that governors were elected, we noted that Medvedev had taken a proposal initially made by Vladimir Putin and subtly changed it to remove the President’s right to veto candidates. However, it appears that Putin may not have been happy with this meddling, and already United Russia have supported an amendment that puts the veto clause straight back into the law.

Extraordinary meeting

An extraordinary meeting of the State Duma has been called for 28 February 2012 to discuss the proposals.

It’s extraordinary in the sense that as well as the 450 Duma members, representatives of political parties who didn’t win any Duma seats will be invited to take part, as well as delegates from political groupings such as the People’s Freedom Party that have been barred from registering as political parties in Russia.

Of course, they won’t be able to participate in any vote on the draft laws – that remains the perogative of the elected Duma representatives – but it does mark an interesting departure from the norm of Russian politics.

Medvedev submits draft electoral law amid growing opposition is a post from: Siberian Light

Moscow Protests from earlier this year

What are the political parties doing?

The Communists have scored a bit of a coup by gaining permission to hold their rally at the prized Manezh Square in the centre of Moscow. Pro-Putin supporters had also requested permission to rally there, and eyebrows were raised when the Moscow authorities approved the pro-Communist rally ahead of the pro-Putin rally. The Communists’ cause was probably helped by only asking for permission for 5,000 people, whereas the pro-Putin organisers asked for permission for 200,000 people to cram into the centre of Moscow.

The pro-Putin rally is split into two parts. First, permission has been given for 40,000 people to march to the Luzhniki Sports Complex. Secondly, permission has also been granted for a 100,000 strong static rally at the sports complex itself.

A Just Russia and the Liberal Democrats have also applied to hold rallies in central Moscow on 23 February and, although not yet formally approved, it seems unlikely that they will be blocked. An organisation called Essence of Time has also applied for a permit to hold a 15,000 strong rally, which is expected to be pro-Government in nature.

And the independents?

For Fair Elections don’t seem to be planning a formal rally as such. Instead, they have a couple of interesting plans. The first, planned for 19 February, is a car-based protest which will involve people putting white ribbons on their cars and driving around their city, presumably in a pre-defined route.

The second is the intriguing idea of creating a human chain around the Kremlin on Sunday 26 February. The organisers think that this will need more than 30,000 people and, surprisingly, Moscow officials are indicating that this won’t require official permission.

Mikhail Prokhorov, the only independent rally in the Presidential race doesn’t seem to have a formal rally planned, as far as I can see.

Moscow gearing up for more rallies is a post from: Siberian Light

Moscow Protests

The rallies attracted between 75,000 and 200,000 people in total, but no-one really knows for sure how many attended. With all the different claims and counter-claims out there, it really depends on who you believe.

In fact, both the organisers from each side claimed attendance of 100,000 plus. The Moscow Times reports that its journalists on the scene estimated a turnout of 50,000 at the opposition rallies and around 25,000 at the pro-Putin rally.

Anti-Putin rally

The opposition rally, which focused on calling for a re-run of December’s disputed parliamentary elections and on opposing Putin’s bid for the Presidency, seems to have been a relatively peaceful affair, with far fewer reports of arrests than at previous rallies.

Although two of the candidates in the March Presidential election were due to attend the rally, only one showed up in the end. Mikhail Prokhorov took part in the rally, although strangely for a politician, declined the opportunity to make a speech. Sergei Mironov, who had previously promised to attend eventually decided to stay away entirely.

The organisers will no doubt be pleased overall with the way things went. This weekend’s march demonstrates that the opposition seems to be maintaining its momentum and is capable of repeatedly pulling tens of thousands (a hundred thousand if you believe the organisers claims) of people out onto the snowy streets of Moscow. This will give continued heart to those who oppose Putin’s re-election bid, and may also provide food for thought for those from the establishment who hope that opposition might melt after the election season is over.

Pro-Putin rally

The copmpeting pro-Putin rally was also well attended, although perhaps not as well attended as its organisers would have you believe.

There has been a lot of speculation as to whether the pro-Putin rally was a spontaneous as the opposition rallies, and whether those who attended did so because they truly believed in Putin or because they were coerced into attending – an example of the latter is this report from RIA Novosti of a schoolteacher who was allegedly fired for not ensuring that staff at his school attended the rally.

According to a reporter for the New Yorker, it was a bit of both:

“There were, as expected, people who had been paid to come; people who came out because of a work-place ‘initiative’; people who were less than fluent in Russian; and people who were less than sober. But there were also a lot of people who actually support Putin, either because they see no alternative to him, or because they really do like him.”

Putin has professed himself as pleasantly surprised by the strength of feeling of those who took to the streets to support him. So pleased, in fact, that he has offered to pay the fine that will be levied on the organisers for organising a rally that attracted more people than was allowed by their permit.

It will be interesting to see if Putin’s supporters will be able to keep up their momentum in the coming month – and worth remembering that half-hearted pro-Government rallies in places like Egypt have actually ended up hurting the government’s cause more than they helped.

Duelling Rallies in Moscow is a post from: Siberian Light

Although both candidates claimed that they had obtained the 2 million signatures needed for a candidate from a party not represented in the Duma to secure a place on the ballot, the CEC said that more than 5% of each candidate’s signatures (the maximum allowed) were invalid. In Yavlinsky’s case, the CEC reported that almost a quarter of his signatures were invalid – mostly because they were on photocopied sheets.

The CEC confirmed that oligarch Mikhail Prokhorov – the third ‘independent’ candidate – did collect enough legitimate signatures and he will be entered onto the ballot.

Early Reaction

Grumpy Yavlinksy

As far as I can see, Mezentsev hasn’t made any public comment on the decision. Widely regarded as a technical candidate, there only to ensure that the election could go ahead if every other candidate withdrew, his exclusion is odd in some respects as it does mean that the election could technically not happen in the unlikely event that the other candidates agreed to pull out. On the other hand no-one is quite sure how a candidate such as Mezentsev, who had never been involved in national politics before, could have legitimately collected 2 million signatures in such a short period of time.

Although Mikhail Prokhorov will no doubt be pleased that he is now on the ballot, he also criticised the CEC’s decision, calling it “a blow to the legitimacy” of the election. Communist leader Gennady Zyuganov has also criticised the decision, calling it “illegal”.

As expected, Vladimir Putin hasn’t commented directly on the issue, but a Presidential spokesman told reporters that the exclusion shouldn’t affect the legitimacy, or the perceived legitimacy, of the election. “If one of the candidates failed to score the required number of votes, it shouldn’t give rise to claims about the illegitimacy of the election, even before the elections even took place.”

Beleagured CEC Chairman Nikolai Konkin has also defended the decision to exclude Yavlinsky and Mezentsev, resignedly telling reporters: “No politics here, just pure arithmetic.”

Who is left standing?

This week’s shakeup leaves just five candidates in the race to become Russia’s next President – Vladimir Putin (United Russia), Gennady Zyuganov (Communist), Sergei Mironov (A Just Russia), Vladimir Zhirinovsky (Liberal Democracts) and Mikhail Prokhorov (Independent).

The latest reported polling, from FOM shows that Putin remains the overwhelming favourite, with 45% support. Of the others, Zyuganov (11%) and Zhirinovsky (10%) look to be in a battle for the runner up spot and a possible second round runoff against Putin. Mironov and Prokhorov are both polling a disappointing 3%, leaving them battling for the wooden spoon.

Yavlinsky and Mezentsev barred from Russian Election is a post from: Siberian Light

Prokhorov, who with $18 billion to his name is Russia’s third richest man, plans to run as an independent candidate with no party backing and Yavlinsky plans to run as a candidate of the liberal Yabloko party. Both made announcements via their Facebook pages and both plan to submit the signatures they have collected to the Central Election Commission for inspection.

Complex approval process

Mikhail Prokhorov's Facebook announcement

To make the task even more difficult only a maximum of 50,000 signatures can come from a single Russian region, which means that 50,000 people must be found in each of at least 40 Russian regions.

Approval is by no means guaranteed, and the CEC has been accused in the past of using the difficult registration process as a way to block opposition parties from taking part in elections. Mikhail Kasyanov was denied entry into the last Presidential election because some of his signatures were deemed invalid and, as recently as last summer, the People’s Freedom Party was blocked from registering as an official political party for failing to collect enough valid signatures.

Both candidates are confident that their applications will be approved, though, and that they will be on the ballot come March. Given the increased scrutiny of this election, refusal to grant approval would be a PR disaster for the Russian Government.

Additionally, it’s looking increasingly likely that Putin will fail to reach the 50% threshold needed to win the election outright in the first round. The more candidates there are in an election, the better the excuse Putin’s team has for not securing a first round victory so, unless there are some blatant violations of electoral law, I think it’s unlikely that the CEC will take the risk of refusing to register either Prokhorov or Yavlinsky.

Campaigning begins in earnest

Putin's 2012 Presidential election campaign website

Vladimir Putin unveiled his manifesto on his putin2012.ru website earlier today. He seems to be playing the ‘steady hand in a storm’ card, playing on his previous successes and observing that while calls for revolution can be attractive, especially in Russia, they rarely have a positive outcome:

“A recurring problem in Russian history is the desire of a part of its elites to make leaps, to embrace revolution instead of sequential development. Not only Russian experience, but all world experience shows the fatal result of historic leaps: haste and subversion , without creation.”

Off less interest to the foreign observer, perhaps, Putin also promised that, if he is elected, he will improve education in Russia, create millions of new high tech jobs and eradicate poverty in Russia within a decade.

Mikhail Prokhorov, meanwhile, has turned his attention to negative campaigning. In an article for Russian newspaper RBK Daily, he accused the other Russian opposition parties of selling out Russian voters in their haste to accomodate Putin and United Russia. He added that they had “decided to ride the wave of public discontent and convert it for their gain, both politically and commercially.”

The Communist Party hit back with a well aimed below the belt jab of their own, suggesting that Prokhorov might want to explain just how he managed to acquire a personal wealth of $18 billion.

Finally, Vladimir Zhirinosky, the ever-youthful leader of the nationalist Liberal Democrats unveiled his upbeat campaign slogan today. “It’s Zhirinovsky or it will be worse”.

Prokhorov and Yavlinsky collect 2 million signatures needed to run for Russian President is a post from: Siberian Light

Key proposals include directly elected regional governors, making it much easier for new political parties to register for parliamentary and presidential elections, and a form of proportional representation in the State Duma.

Reform proposals

Proposals to increase participation in national elections seem the most interesting.

Medvedev specified that, in order to register for national elections, political parties will in future need to collect only 500 signatures, rather than the 40,000 currently required. Restrictions on candidates entering Presidential elections have also been reduced – instead of having to collect 2 million signatures to register, independent candidates will in future have to collect only 300,000 signatures and candidates representing registered but small political parties will have to collect just 100,000 signatures.

Dmitry Medvedev giving his final State of the Nation address

Although his supporters deny it, Medvedev’s proposed reforms are clearly aimed at lowering the tension in the country, and while they will never satisfy many, they are likely to attract some of the more moderate opposition to Putin and United Russia. They have already brought grudging praise from Vladimir Ryzhkov, a co-chairman of the unregistered People’s Freedom Party (Parnas), who told RIA Novosti that

“Of course, the president has heard society’s demands and made a step forward… He in particular admitted that deep political reform is required, that there should be a free registration of parties, single-member constituencies, direct election of governors and that the election commission formation systems should be changed.

These are all demands voiced at Bolotnaya Square. These are the most radical steps in many years,” he said, adding however that these were “half-measures.”

In my opinion these are certainly useful reforms, and to be welcomed. It’s important not to read too much into them, though. They will have no impact on the Presidential election scheduled for next March, and the next election run under these rules, assuming they are approved, is likely to be in 2016.

Response to protests

In a nod to this month’s protests about the recent Duma elections, Medvedev opened his speech by observing that all opinions were welcome and that he believed they were a sign of a healthy democracy. He explained that the Russian Government would “treat any criticism of state institutions and individual officials with the utmost attention and respect.” However, he also added a stern warning:

“Attempts to manipulate Russian citizens, to mislead them and incite social discord are unacceptable. We will not let instigators and extremists involve society in their reckless activities, and we will not allow foreign interference in our internal affairs. Russia needs democracy, not chaos.”

Foreign Affairs

There was little about foreign policy in Medvedev’s address. His key message was that Russia was open to dialogue with NATO on missile defence, but only if NATO took Russia’s concerns seriously.

“I only want to confirm that we are open for constructive dialogue and substantive work with our partners, if they learn to listen to us. We count on reciprocity in order to reach mutually acceptable solutions as soon as possible and to maintain an atmosphere of trust.”

To stop it looking as though Russia is entirely on the back foot in foreign affairs, Medvedev also talked up the Eurasian Economic Union, that Russia intends to create along with Belarus and Kazakhstan, calling it “an ambitious task” that would “act as a link in the European and Asia-Pacific regions”.

Here’s a video of the foreign policy section of Medvedev’s address.

As you can see, it was a very short section.

Government achievements

As with any state of the nation speech, Medvedev made sure to dwell on his Government’s achievements.

Russia’s economy is recovering nicely from the recent economic dip, he explained, noting that last year’s growth of 4% was far higher than most major economies, and that Russia’s inflation last year was the lowest since 1991. As a result, he said, unemployment had dropped by a staggering 2 million in the past two years – that’s a massive drop in such a short period, and it’s not clear how accurate a claim this is.

Unsurprisingly, given that we’re fast approaching an election, Medvedev took pains to spell out that, because of Russia’s good financial health, Russian social programmes would not face the same cuts as are being experienced elsewhere in Europe.

“We must continue living within our means, without squandering resources, especially in the conditions of an approaching global recession. But this does not mean that we must give up new social programs or cut existing obligations. All these obligations will be met in full.”

Russia’s demographic crisis of the past two decades seems to be reversing as well. Average life expectancy has increased by over three years since 2006 to an average of 69, and to 75 for women – no direct mention of the still low male life expectancy. More children are being born than in the past, and mortality rates have also dropped.

Full Transcript

If you want to read the full text of Dmitry Medvedev’s final State of the Nation address, you can find it on the Kremlin.ru website. As I write this it’s partly uploaded – the translators must be struggling to keep up with the workload, as it seems that a new chunk of the text is being uploaded every hour or so.

Medvedev promises reforms in his final State of the Nation address is a post from: Siberian Light

Webcams in every polling station

In his recent marathon TV interview, Vladimir Putin proposed placing webcams in every single polling station during March’s Presidential election. The proposal came in reaction to criticism that United Russia’s victory in the Duma elections was due to fraud – namely ballot stuffing.

And, today, Putin put a price on this proposal. According to RIA Novosti a staggering $470 million has been allocated to the task of putting a webcam in every single one of Russia’s 95,000 polling stations.

Great, some will say – spending so much money on blanket coverage webcams is a wonderful way of demonstrating Russia’s commitment to holding free and fair elections. Sceptics, such as myself, might take a moment to divide $470 million by 95,000 and wonder why Russia is spending $4,947 per webcam.

Old Warriors break out their Zimmer frames and stand for election

Gennady Zyuganov - fresh faced Presidential candidate

Almost all of the candidates for the Presidential election have now been nominated by their parties, and rather depressingly it will surprise no-one to discover that almost of them have contested at least one previous Presidential election.

• Gennady Zyuganov, the Communist Party candidate, has contested three of the last four Presidential elections, finishing second each time (always the bridesmaid…).
• Vladimir Zhirinovsky, the nationalist Liberal Democratic Party’s ageing standard bearer, goes one better by entering his fifth election.
• Grigory Yavlinsky, the Yabloko candidate, will be – assuming he collects the required 2 million signatures – entering the race for Russia’s top job for the third time. He stood for election in 1996 and 2000, so I guess he’s at least had a chance to take a break and recover his vitality.
• Sergei Mironov, who’ll be representing A Just Russia, is a relative rookie – he’s only taking part in his second election.

In fact, the only complete newcomer in the race* is independent candidate Mikhail Prokhorov – and that’s assuming that, like Yavlinsky, he manages to secure the 2 million signatures that any candidate who isn’t nominated by a Duma party needs to get to enter the race.

(* I’m assuming that Dmitry Mezentsev, the Irkutsk Governor who has agreed to stand as the emergency reserve candidate in the event that no-one else is eligible, isn’t actually going to appear on the ballot.)

Small candidates get kicked out

As was also expected, the fringe candidates are being rejected on technical grounds, one by one. Eduard Lminov, head of the Other Russia party is one notable victim – he was denied registration because he didn’t have the right papers, despite his novel approach of collecting signatures on the bus. Nikolai Levashov – the faith healer who cures people over the phone – was knocked back because he didn’t meet residency requirements, and Boris Mironov bit the dust because of a prior criminal conviction for extremism.

Looking on the bright side, each of these candidates has had their day or two in the media spotlight, and they’ve been saved the hassle of having to spend months on the buses trying to do the impossible and collect two million signatures. On balance, I suspect they’re rather glad the way things have turned out.

Russian Presidential Elections Roundup is a post from: Siberian Light