February 6, 2012 7:31 pm
The ice is cracking under PutinGideon Rachman By Gideon Rachman
Pinn illustration
A banner at the protests in Moscow on Saturday carried a stark message: “Mubarak, Gaddafi, Putin”. Mingling with the crowds, it was clear that what began in December as protests against rigged elections has become much more personal. The diverse group of liberals, nationalists and communists that tramped through the frozen streets is united by its loathing for Vladimir Putin, Russia’s prime minister and would-be president.The political link between Mr Putin and the Arab autocrats was strengthened over the weekend, as Russia vetoed a UN resolution calling for the end of the Assad regime in Syria. Those who expect Mr Putin to join Mubarak and Gaddafi on the trash heap of history within weeks are liable to be disappointed. He will almost certainly emerge from next month’s presidential elections as the winner.
Nonetheless, the opposition demonstrations have utterly changed the political atmosphere in Russia. Two months ago it was assumed that the country was probably facing 12 more years of Vladimir Putin in the Kremlin. Now, the end of the Putin era is in sight.
No one is yet talking of a “Moscow spring”. With the weekend’s temperature at minus 20C, that would be the wrong metaphor. But there is definitely a Moscow thaw.
After a long period of close political control in Russia, the ice is cracking. The intoxicating sense that taboos are being broken is reminiscent of the outbreak of glasnost under Mikhail Gorbachev, which signalled the beginning of the end of the Soviet era.
The insults hurled at Mr Putin from the crowd on Saturday are just the most obvious sign of the new atmosphere. Perhaps more telling is what is happening in arenas that are usually controlled by the powers that be.[/size]
At the Russia Forum last week – a big bash for investors, sponsored by the country’s largest banks – official corruption was repeatedly discussed. At the opening session one participant called for the release of Mikhail Khodorkovsky, a former oligarch, whose imprisonment has become a symbol of the abuse of the law for political purposes. The demand for Khodorkovsky’s release was met with sustained applause from the audience. Meanwhile, opposition politicians such as Boris Nemtsov, who have been kept off the mainstream television channels for many years, are suddenly being invited on.
Mr Putin’s reaction to all this has been uncertain. His campaign team has organised pro-Putin demonstrations but many in the crowds will openly admit (with the cameras rolling) that they oppose him and have been instructed to attend. Opinion surveys show a very sharp drop in support for Mr Putin. It is not just the middle classes. Former Putin loyalists – pensioners, factory workers – seem to be disillusioned by official corruption and stagnating living standards.
Mr Putin has tried to meet the demonstrators half-way. After the first protests in December he said he was proud that Putin’s Russia had produced a middle class that was willing to stand up for itself – glossing over the fact that loathing for Mr Putin himself was what united the opposition.
In an article last week, Mr Putin also condemned “system-wide corruption” in Russia – adopting one of the protesters’ main complaints as his own cause. But the system he is condemning is the one he created. Even one of his close political allies comments: “Putin says the system is corrupt, in the same way that he might say it’s snowing outside. Like it has nothing to do with him.”This contradiction points to a larger flaw in the Putin project. The prime minister and his allies insist that they want to reinvigorate and diversify the Russian economy – and acknowledge that this must mean strengthening the rule of law and less state interference. But a weaker state and the rule of law would threaten not just a few rotten apples but the people at the very top of Russian politics and business, including the prime minister himself.
Mr Putin must know this and he could react in one of two ways. The most obvious would be to secure his election – by fair means or foul – and then to crack down. But now that he knows that many thousands of people will demonstrate against him, he must also realise that a really tough crackdown would only increase the risk that he goes the way of the Arab autocrats.
The alternative choice is that – even as he secures his re-election – he and his allies begin to prepare for a post-Putin era. This could happen in a number of ways. One possibility is that Mr Putin heeds the calls for a rerun of the parliamentary elections of last December. Genuinely free elections would lead to a Duma with a real opposition that would be able to challenge the Kremlin rather than simply acting as its echo chamber.
Another possibility is to repeat the procedure that ended the presidency of Boris Yeltsin at the end of 1999. Mr Yeltsin was persuaded to step down, in favour of Mr Putin, in return for guarantees that he, his family and his business cronies would not be pursued for corrupt practices. Many of the people who made fortunes in the Putin era will be worrying about what the future might hold for them. They might be amenable to some kind of amnesty deal – if the offer were made.
These scenarios may sound far-fetched. But
in Moscow at the moment, the most far-fetched idea of all is the notion that President Putin will still be running Russia in 2024. The Moscow river was frozen over last week but listen carefully and you could hear the sound of the ice cracking beneath the surface.
