RUSSIA: Putin gang consolidates control of Duma

January 14, 2004
Issue 

Boris Kagarlitsky, Moscow

With more than 36% of votes the pro-Kremlin United Russia party looks like the only real winner in Russia's parliamentary elections, held on December 7. It also succeeded in getting a massive victory in single-member constituencies.

Together with some independents who differ with United Russia in nothing but name, openly pro-Kremlin forces have won about 240-280 seats. With Vladimir Zhirinovsky's Liberal Democrats (LDPR), who will vote for anything if properly paid, and the Rodina bloc which claims to be a force "opposing the government but supporting the president", things are very much under control for the Kremlin puppet-masters.

An alternative vote count organised by the Communists could be seen online on election night at <http://www.fairgaime.ru>. It clearly gives a different picture, putting United Russia first, but with only 32% instead of 36% of the vote and showing that the liberal Yabloko Party actually passed the 5% threshold and should have been allowed to have representatives in the Duma. However, even this vote count can leave no doubt that United Russia won the election.

Ironically, the alternative vote count gives the Communist Party of the Russian Federation (KPRF) even less votes than the official count (12.6% instead 12.7%).

While the liberal media is mostly interested in the failure of liberal parties (Yabloko and the Union of Right-Wing Forces, neither of which will be represented in the Duma), the real key event in these elections, which will most likely influence the development of politics in the near future, is the demise of the Communists. Of course, the Communists blame everything on hostile media coverage. Butthis factor is not new. In fact, in previous elections they have done much better, even in circumstances that were objectively worse.

There has always been anti-Communist propaganda in the post-Soviet media, but the difference this time was that quite a few KPRF voters actually believed it; and they did so because the negative coverage in the media confirmed their own experience with the party. That is why it is clear that this year, the KPRF's disastrous performance is of its own making.

The KPRF has always been an eclectic coalition of groups held together not by ideology, but rather by "clientelist" ties and a bureaucratic apparatus. This coalition cannot last forever, and now it is in the process of "decomposing". Traditionalist, conservative voters are moving to United Russia, nationalist voters are moving to Rodina and the LDPR; and quite a lot of left-wing voters are so frustrated with the KPRF that they preferred not to vote at all, or to vote "against all". Now the KPRF is struggling for survival — following the December 7 election, it has only 53 MPs, and even these are moving in different directions.

Some are ready to join Rodina. Others are calling for reform in the party. Some are pretending that nothing happened. Regional organisations are insisting on changing the leadership and it seems that current party boss Gennady Zuganov has little chance of staying after the next party congress, which was initially planned for December 12 but is now postponed until January.

Defeat for democracy

Of course, the outcome of this election is a defeat for the democratic process in Russia, but it also has a positive aspect because our political system has never really been democratic. Today, the authoritarian character of the political system has simply been exposed. In the long run, it will probably have an illuminating and invigorating effect on society as a whole — spurring people to action and self-organisation.

The 1999 election demonstrated that the ruling elite leaves nothing to chance or to democracy, which amount to the same thing. The succession crisis that year revealed the extent to which a change of president causes problems for the entire ruling elite. After taking over the Kremlin with the backing of the Yeltsin-era family, Vladimir Putin's gang gradually began to force their predecessors out of key posts in politics and the economy.

Nothing was done to solve any of strategic problems facing the country. What is more important, however, is that even the real priority of Putin's gang — replacing old oligarchs with new ones — was not achieved. This is a slow process and even in the best-case scenario the new oligarchs will just be coming into their own in 2007 and 2008.

The closely controlled transfer of power in 1999 and 2000 ensured that the first wave of oligarchs enjoyed a lengthy grace period. But even that sort of grace won't be enough to help the second wave.

Now Putin is launching his campaign for his second presidential term. After wasting a first term, four more years is clearly not enough. The only thing to do is to prevent another transfer of power — at least not in 2008, and by no means via the ballot box.

On December 7, revision of the constitution became inevitable because voters in Komi-Permyatsky and Perm approved a referendum on merging the two regions. Such a merger would require a constitutional amendment.

United Russia and its new comrades have enough votes to amend the constitution and extend the presidential term or remove the limit on the number of terms a president may serve. If all goes as planned, Putin will again be installed as president in 2008 — and in 2015 as well.

We are witnessing the progression from "managed democracy" to an authoritarian regime with a democratic facade. The KPRF, which provided the ideal opposition in the old system, must be replaced with a new lapdog opposition. The Rodina bloc, with 9.1% of the votes, fits the bill. It has no organisation to speak of, and its political viability will last only so long as its leaders are allowed to appear on state television.

The liberal parties called for capitalism and liberal democracy, but unfortunately the two only go together in wealthy countries. In a country where 80% of the population is shut out of consumer society and live in poverty, real democracy — rule of the majority — inevitably turns into an attack on private property.

Prospects for opposition

Is there a future for political opposition in Russia? Yabloko is no longer in parliament, and the KPRF has lost forever the conservative, nationalist voter, who has gone over to Rodina, LDPR and United Russia. The Communists' notion of a "red-white union" is no longer viable. Internecine squabbles within the party are heating up.

The Kremlin's main goal in the December 7 election was to eliminate parliamentary opposition as a political institution. In this it was successful, though the downfall of the KPRF and Yabloko could give rise to a new, non-parliamentary, radical political resistance and a new left. The widespread refusal of people to vote speaks for itself. We did not stay home because we're lazy; I say this as someone who has avoided taking part in our farcical electoral process for a decade now. We vote with our feet. And this is the last democratic right that hasn't been taken away from us.

Candidate "none of the above" is already raking in 20-25% of the vote in the single-mandate districts. In some constituencies, the election failed to attract the necessary minimum of votes and there will be additional elections organised later.

This is a symptom of the changing political reality. There is no point in trying to build a political campaign on this discontent, however. People who don't vote will not unite without a positive ideology.

It will probably also be good for the left in helping it to overcome the impasse symbolised by the ineffectiveness, opportunism and nationalism of KPRF. Political defeats can have a stimulating effect, but much will depend on the people themselves and the lessons they draw from what has happened.

Chances of forming a new left party are now discussed not only by disaffected Communists and radical intellectuals, but also by left liberals who earlier voted for Yabloko.

The new opposition will arise not from parliamentary intrigues and petty politicking. It will only emerge when Russians refuse to play by the rules imposed on us by the current system. Sooner or later democratic longings will fuse with social protest. The finale will be extremely interesting. But how long will this take?

From Green Left Weekly, January 14, 2004.
Visit the Green Left Weekly home page.


You need Green Left, and we need you!

Green Left is funded by contributions from readers and supporters. Help us reach our funding target.

Make a One-off Donation or choose from one of our Monthly Donation options.

Become a supporter to get the digital edition for $5 per month or the print edition for $10 per month. One-time payment options are available.

You can also call 1800 634 206 to make a donation or to become a supporter. Thank you.