The 25th anniversary issue looks ahead to the next 25 years and, in Russia’s Rotting Empire, Nina L Khrushcheva (yes – before you ask – she’s Nikita Kruschev’s great-granddaughter) has penned a look at Russia’s next quarter century.

It’s an interesting article overall, but there were two things I found particularly interesting.

First – Khrushcheva’s view that political change in Russia is cyclical:

“…periods of ‘remission’ (a retreat from total dictatorship) or reforms, and periods of ‘oppression’ or stability have alternated consistently in the last century…”

I do agree, but wonder – if we accept that Russia is in the early stages of a period of “oppression”, how deep will it go, and how long will it be before the next about turn that leads towards reform. Are we in for many more years of sliding towards authoritarianism and a strong Russian state, or will the more frantic pace of globalisation speed up the Russian political cycle?

The second point, which I found intriguing given the disdain with which many Russians view Ukraine (and the fact that Khrushchev was a Ukrainian), was Khrushcheva’s argument that Ukraine could hold the key to Russia’s future.

“Russians know that Ukrainians are the same as them, a people similar in their culture and mentality. If they have made their choice, why can’t we do the same? Thus, if Ukraine succeeds over the next 25 years, it may herald the political death of Putinism.

[...]The best way to help Russia today is to help Ukraine over the coming decades support its claim that it belongs within the European fold, among European institutions.”

Ukraine is at a bit of a cross roads at the moment, and seems like it could go either way. It is clearly an ideal target for both European / US and Russian foreign policy, and I’d imagine it’s going to be a hell of a cultural and political battleground in the coming years. But I have no idea what direction Ukraine will take.

What do you think? Who will come out on top in Ukraine? Will the next couple of years in Kiev set the tone for the next couple of decades in Moscow?

Does Ukraine hold the key to Russia's future? is a post from: Siberian Light

Am I a ‘pure democrat’? Of course I am, absolutely. But do you know what the problem is? Not even a problem but a real tragedy? The problem is that I’m all alone, the only one of my kind in the whole wide world.  [...]There is no one to talk to since Mahatma Gandhi died.  

When I first read the quote on another blog, I thought it was a hoax, or that Putin had somehow been misquoted or taken out of context.  But a transcript of the entire interviewhas been published on his official Presidential website, for all to see.

I’ve heard a lot in the past about how Putin is a man completely in control of his brief, and never says anything in public without a purpose, but come on, this is just plain daft. 

By claiming he is the world’s sole “pure democrat” in the face of all evidence and then going on to compare himself to Gandhi, all Putin does is portray himself as a deluded nutter. 

Surely?

Putin – I am the world's only "pure democrat" is a post from: Siberian Light

Some key stats:

• 45% think that the election result will not reflect the will of the people
• 39% think local officials will fix election results
• 25% think opposition candidates may be excluded from the election
• 8% think the election will be fair
• 33% will consider the new parliament illegitimate
• 65% want an “against all candidates” option on ballot papers

Interesting results, although one should be careful not to read too much into them.  I suspect that, if you asked a random sample of British voters whether they thought Parliamentary elections in the UK reflected the will of the people, you’d receive a somewhat similar answer.

And electoral fraud isn’t just a problem confined to Russia – take a look at this roundup of electoral fraud (and other problems) from last week’s local elections in the UK.

Almost half of Russians think election will be fixed is a post from: Siberian Light

It probably won’t surprise you to hear that pro-Putin party United Russia came first in 13 of the 14 regions, with around 46% of the vote. Nor will it surprise you to hear that newly formed pro-Putin party A Just Russia won in the 14th region.

RFE/RL reckon that the biggest surprise was the surprisingly strong performance of the Union of Rightist Forces, which won representation in 7 of the 14 regions. The reason?

“Observers tend toward the opinion that access to air time was a kind of payment from the Kremlin for the SPS’s loyalty,” the newspaper added. “We recall that the SPS, unlike Yabloko, did not take part in the ‘March of the Discontented’ that took place at the beginning of March in St. Petersburg, although the rightists condemned the harsh actions of the law-enforcers against the participants in the action.”

Yabloko, of course, were controversially not even registered in some elections, including St Petersburg, as I’ve noted previously

For me, though, I was impressed that the Communist Party managed to hang on to a reasonable share of the vote – finishing second overall, with around 16% of the votes cast.

A few more bits and pieces:

• Dmitri Minaev explains why he voted for the Union of Rightist Forces and notes an election where only two people voted.
• The Communist Party and Union of Rightist Forces are contesting the elections in Dagestan and Moscow respectively.
• The FT say that Russia’s party system isn’t an effective safety valve for social discontent.
• Following the election, Putin dismissed Central Elections Commission chairman Alexander Veshnyakov, who had previously been critical of the growing dominance of United Russia.  He was also one of the few remaining holdouts from the Yeltsin era.

Cheery stuff.

Regional elections – guess who won? is a post from: Siberian Light

He manages to cover a wide spread of issues in just one post including – most impressively – managing to condense Russia’s post-Soviet history into a mere 20 words.  The section which struck me the most, though, was this:

Democracy is not the answer to Russia’s problems, actually in today’s environment it may add to them.  Would Russia would be better if it were democratic is like asking if you prefer peace to war – the answer is axiomatic.  However, democracy is not about voting and the right to vote.  That is purely the symbol.  Real democracy can only happen when rights and responsibilities are balanced.  Russia is not there yet.

I think he’s right – the question is, of course, how does Russia get from here to there?

Is Democracy the answer to Russia's problems? is a post from: Siberian Light

Sergei Ivanov, one of the two leading contenders to replace Vladimir Putin as President in 2008, has been promoted to First Deputy Prime Minister.

The move puts Ivanov on a par with Dmitri Medvedev, the other leading candidate who, until this morning, held a nominally higher government office than Ivanov. Promotion also means that Ivanov can leave behind the post of Defence Minister, and the possibility that further military abuse scandals could damage his political future.

It also means that, rather oddly, Russia now has two First Deputy Prime Ministers. Go figure.

Anyway, moving on – The Times reports that Putin has also promoted Sergei Naryshkin, his former Cabinet Chief of Staff, speculating that he may emerge as a dark horse candidate if Putin loses faith in Medvedev and Ivanov.

Personally, I wonder if Putin is actually trying to set up a close run election between two candidates he has faith in. This would allow Russia to claim that its Presidential election was truly competitive and democratic, unlike the rather one-sided elections of recent years.

Update: Arms Control Wonk has a brief bio of Anatoly Serdyukov, the new Defense Minister.

Government reshuffle may indicate Putin's successor is a post from: Siberian Light

• An anti-Putin dissenters march, which drew about 2,000 demonstrators, including Garry Kasparov.  The were outnumbered four to one by 8,000 police, who earned their money by arresting around 50 of the protestors.
• A demonstration to remember killed Russian journalists, which drew about 250 demonstrators, and hundreds of police
• A demonstration by 70,000 (!) members of the pro-Putin youth group Nashi, to mark the 60th anniversary of the battle of Moscow.  Guess how many police turned up to supervise this rally. 

Global Voices Online has background informtion on the Dissenters March, and links to video of the demonstration can be found here.  (Which I sadly haven’t been able to view, as video isn’t enabled on the PC I’m working on today).   

Demonstrations in Moscow is a post from: Siberian Light

Nagorno Karabah

In Nagorno-Karabakh, an enclave of (mostly) Armenians stuck in the middle of Azerbaijan, they’ve been voting in a referendum on their new constitution.

The constitution, which describes Nagorno-Karabakh as a “sovereign, independent state” is likely to boost hopes of independence from Azerbaijan.

Turnout was apparently above 80%, and the new constitution is expected to be approved by an overwhelming majority.

But, guess who’s unhappy with the election?

[T]he government of Azerbaijan says the referendum is being held under an illegal military occupation of Azeri territory.

This election was observed by monitors from the EU. They thought the election was well organised, free and fair.

Interfax have dug up the following comment though:

Luciano Ardesi, an observer from Italy and head of the International League for the Rights and Liberation of Peoples, said the referendum observed all voting standards.

“What the people of Nagorno Karabakh did today is quite legitimate. The international community must recognize the right of the people of Nagorno Karabakh to either establish its own state or join Armenia,” he said.

From the wording of the Interfax article, it’s not clear if Ardesi is an official spokesman for the EU election monitors, or just some random supporter of independence for Nagorno-Karabakh who happened to be in town while they were holding a referendum. If the former, then the EU are going to have some explaining to do, if the latter then Interfax will be the ones who end up with egg on their faces.

Transdniester

Meanwhile, over in the tiny sliver of Moldvoa that doesn’t really like being a part of Moldova they’ve been electing a President this weekend. Igor Smirnov, the incumbent, is likely to romp home in an election that the cynic in me thinks probably won’t be all that free or all that fair.

Smirnov plans to use his ‘victory’ to push for union with Russia:

“We have defined a scheme: at first, this is referendum, then elections and later the achievement of the goal set at the referendum – integration with Russia. This shows once again that we are building our own state. Democracy is not drawn, it can be born,” he said.

Russia likes Transdniester’s pro-Russian government, but enough to contemplate a formal union? Fat chance.

The Moldovan government, as you’d imagine, isn’t all that impressed with the democratic credentials of Transdniester’s election:

Moldova’s Foreign Ministry has called the election in Trans-Dniester “illegal,” and has asked other countries not to send international monitors. The ballot was observed, however, by dozens of Russian and Ukrainian lawmakers.

No idea what the Ukrainians thought of the election. But the Russian observers thought it was magnificent.

Two post-Soviet elections is a post from: Siberian Light

There are moves afoot in the former Soviet Union. Quite what moves, I have no idea. But keep your eyes open…

I couldn’t agree more. Moves are indeed afoot.

Viktor Yanukovich was installed as Prime Minister quite smoothly, which bodes well for Ukrainian democracy. It demonstrates that Ukraine can handle conflict democratically, without resorting to renewed dictatorship.

But, at the same time, he is far more pro-Russian than Ukraine’s President, Viktor Yuschenko. And, given Russia’s increasingly pro-active approach towards rolling back the development of democratic governance in its near abroad, that scares me.

If present trends continue (and it is by no means certain that they will), it’s difficult to see Ukrainian democracy continuing to flourish.

Oh – before I go – here’s a great roundup of recent developments in Ukrainian politics by Dan McMinn.

Ukraine, two years on is a post from: Siberian Light

The Russian government’s verdict is that the election was quite clearly a success.

“The elections to the parliament of the Chechen republic being held today are smoother than ever. The voting process has been organized properly,” [Federation Council Deputy Speaker Alexander] Torshin said.

On the other hand, this quote from the European Union pretty much encapsulates the way the rest of the world feels about this election – we all know it’s corrupt, but don’t think Chechnya is worth upsetting Russia over, so will find something blandly concilliatory to say:

“We welcome the fact that the elections took place without violence and we hope it will be a step toward a peaceful political process in the future,” said Emma Udwin, spokeswoman on external affairs at the EU’s executive body.

“That’s what we want to see,” she added.

“There hasn’t been much information on the way this election was conducted,” Udwin said, adding that neither the EU nor Europe’s OSCE security organization had sent monitors to the conflict-torn Caucasus region.

She is right, though, when she says the elections were peaceful. Which is progress of a sort.

Chechen elections is a post from: Siberian Light