Support The Moscow Times!

Russia Rotting

In many autocratic countries, the opposition's goal is to shake down the political institutions that the ruling elite have constructed to maintain their control. In Russia, it would seem that the opposite is true.

Take, for example, the opposition Party of People's Freedom. Despite almost universal predictions that the authorities would never register the Party of People's Freedom, the party's leaders — Mikhail Kasyanov, Vladimir Milov, Boris Nemtsov and Vladimir Ryzhkov — went out of their way to fulfill every requirement of the election law.

Even after the Party of People's Freedom included language from United Russia's charter in its own charter to make sure it was in compliance with election law, the Justice Ministry still found that the party's charter did not meet election law requirements.

Meanwhile, Prime Minister Vladimir Putin is building the All-Russia People's Front, which is trying to recruit new members en masse not only from Putin's own United Russia party, but from Russian Railways, the Russian Post, the Union of Composers and hundreds of other organizations.

The very existence of such a political structure not only makes a mockery of the Constitution and election laws, but it also destroys the political institutions that were constructed by the political leaders who initiated the front.

Take United Russia. For years, Putin tried to make it the ruling party of Russia, a modern version of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union. This is not an efficient system of governance. Almost all developed countries use competitive elections to provide their leaders with proper incentives. This is the most advanced technology to provide effective government.

Nonetheless, some countries use more backward political systems, such as a one-party state. Post-World War II Mexico and China since 1976 are good examples. Although these are one-party autocracies, they rotate the top leaders. It is the party, not an individual leader, who makes most of important decisions.

Although these are a less advanced form of government than an electoral democracy, this system is much more efficient than dictatorships such as Libya, North Korea and Zimbabwe, which are centered on the personalities of their leaders.

A modern one-party state is also better than the Soviet and or fascist types of totalitarian dictatorships, in which a leader's personality cult dominates. The creation of the All-Russia People's Front built around the popularity of Putin is a step backward from the one-party state.

The current state of Russia's presidency is a good example of how the country's institutions have rotted. It is clear that the current president does not hold the power that is provided to him by the Constitution. President Dmitry Medvedev has on multiple occasions floated ideas that he could have enacted by simply signing an order; the Constitution gives him this power.

At the same time, some of Medvedev's powers that are granted to him by the Constitution have been co-opted by Putin — for example, in areas concerning foreign policy. Other presidential powers have not been transferred to Putin but have simply vanished into thin air.

In the end, Putin has weakened a strong presidency — an institution he spent so many years building up.

Konstantin Sonin is a professor at the New Economic School in Moscow and a columnist for Vedomosti.

The views expressed in opinion pieces do not necessarily reflect the position of The Moscow Times.

Sign up for our free weekly newsletter

Our weekly newsletter contains a hand-picked selection of news, features, analysis and more from The Moscow Times. You will receive it in your mailbox every Friday. Never miss the latest news from Russia. Preview
Subscribers agree to the Privacy Policy

A Message from The Moscow Times:

Dear readers,

We are facing unprecedented challenges. Russia's Prosecutor General's Office has designated The Moscow Times as an "undesirable" organization, criminalizing our work and putting our staff at risk of prosecution. This follows our earlier unjust labeling as a "foreign agent."

These actions are direct attempts to silence independent journalism in Russia. The authorities claim our work "discredits the decisions of the Russian leadership." We see things differently: we strive to provide accurate, unbiased reporting on Russia.

We, the journalists of The Moscow Times, refuse to be silenced. But to continue our work, we need your help.

Your support, no matter how small, makes a world of difference. If you can, please support us monthly starting from just $2. It's quick to set up, and every contribution makes a significant impact.

By supporting The Moscow Times, you're defending open, independent journalism in the face of repression. Thank you for standing with us.

Once
Monthly
Annual
Continue
paiment methods
Not ready to support today?
Remind me later.

Read more