Thanks to the Institute of Contemporary Development’s report on Russia’s future and President Dmitry Medvedev’s deputy chief of staff Vladislav Surkov’s interview to Vedomosti, we are enjoying a high-level debate over a chicken-and-egg problem. Is political freedom a prerequisite for technological innovation, or can an innovative economy be built under a tightly controlled political system? History tells us that both approaches can work. The trick is to find the right fit for Russia.

The institute’s report makes the case that restoring political competition is the only answer to Russia’s “innovation gap” with leading global powers. Competition leads to better governance, which allows private businesses to innovate.

Surkov’s strong argument to that is that Russia may not be around as a country if we just wait for this “spontaneous modernization” to happen.

We need to start innovating now, using the power of “a consolidated state” to encourage, nudge and cajole private businesses to invest in innovation and create an internal demand for Russian-made innovative products. Political freedom and competition will expand simultaneously, but slowly. Democratic institutions and procedures will have to be adapted to the new demographic, social and cultural realities of an innovation-based economy.

The institute’s report is tone-death on the “culture factor.” It views Russia as another Western state. Surkov overuses this argument to strengthen his case for maintaining tight political control. His distrust for political culture is understandable, but he identifies no Russia-specific cultural booster to foster innovation and winds up with a whimpish appeal to U.S. values: “The first billion rubles, dollars, euros earned … will make it unstoppable.”

The institute’s time horizon is midterm with an emphasis on rebuilding Russia’s dilapidated industrial base and infrastructure, as well as modernizing social services.

Surkov is long-term focused on innovation only — creating the environment for products that people do not know yet they will want to buy. But who will make these great innovative products if Russia does not have a modern industrial base? China? India? Surkov doesn’t say.

Presidents choosing a strategy are like venture capitalists — they bet their own political capital on it. Medvedev has placed his bet on Surkov’s approach. It is a huge gamble for both men. But, hey, isn’t that what venture capitalism is all about?

Vladimir Frolov is president of LEFF Group, a government-relations and PR company.