December 8, 2003
PUTIN THE HAMMER:
Communists crushed in Putin's iron grip: Sunday's election saw the squeezing of dissent, great or small, amid the Russian president's desire for total power (Nick Paton Walsh, December 9, 2003, The Guardian)
After nearly a century of dominating Russia, raising the Soviet Union to the status of a world power, the hammer and sickle finally faded into political obsolescence last night. [...]Oksana Gaman-Golutina, professor of the Academy of State Management, said: "The communists were only occasionally voting against the Kremlin's bills, but in the strictly centralised regime being built by President Putin, even such innocent behaviour caused strong irritation. So the Kremlin staged the operation 'End the Communist Party'."
The result of the Kremlin operation was the creation of the overtly nationalist Rodina, or Motherland, party, which took a large part of the communists' agenda. It pledged to raise company taxation and return to the people the fortunes made by the hyper-rich oligarchs in the privatisation deals of the 1990s.
Rodina was founded four months ago by the experienced economist and former communist, Sergei Glazyev, and the Kremlin's rising star, Dmitri Rogozin.
Mr Rogozin, the president's personal envoy to the troublesome former military enclave of Kaliningrad, also headed the international affairs committee in parliament and vociferously defended the need to protect Russian interests abroad, particularly during the Iraq crisis.
Mr Glazyev maintained a heavy presence on state-run television during the final three weeks of the election campaign. The TV rejoiced in telling the electorate how many big businessmen were running for parliament on a communist ticket, juxtaposing this with Rodina's plans for the redistribution of wealth. It brought Rodina 9% of Sunday's vote, mostly taken from the communists.
Mr Glazyev and Mr Rogozin provided a dynamic alternative for voters who were sick of the communists' tired, discredited stance and bored with the crazed nationalist rhetoric of Vladimir Zhirinovsky, the leader of the misleadingly named Liberal Democratic party.
The rest is up to Mr. Putin, he can use his fascist powers for good--as Generals Franco and Pinochet did--or for ill, as is all too common in such regimes. If he seeks to establish order, the rule opf law, property rights and the like, a period of authoritarianism could be quite beneficial for Russia. Posted by Orrin Judd at December 8, 2003 10:11 PM
Putin certainly seems to be using his powers for the good of the mullahs' nuclear weapons program.
Posted by: Barry Meislin at December 9, 2003 3:03 AMCommunists crushed by an authoritarian regime . . . my irony meter is pegged at "off scale - high."
Posted by: Mike Morley at December 9, 2003 6:08 AMBig if. If he leaves the legacy OJ mentioned. The problem with authoritarian leaders is that they might not. Fujimori for instance could have left a great blessing for Peru, but his insistence on remaining in office has severely tarnished his accomplishments.
Will Putin willingly give up power when his term expires?
Will he stop abusing state media to silence critics?
Will he allow a democratic opposition?
Can he end the suicide bombings in Russia?
This election may not be a disaster, but we shouldn't be too ecstatic either. Russia will have stability, but will it have the rule of law?
Posted by: Chris Durnell at December 9, 2003 11:02 AMRussia isn't in the enviable position that Chile and Spain were. That is, situated in an American Sphere of Influence.
Posted by: Matt C at December 9, 2003 11:47 AMEarth is our sphere of influence.
Posted by: oj at December 9, 2003 11:53 AM"Earth is our sphere of influence" - classic!
Posted by: BJW at December 9, 2003 1:07 PMGiven up pretensions to the moon then? I thought America had planted the Stars and Stripes there once. Perhaps it has been bargained away to the Chinese.