It's been a long while since good news for democracy has come out of Russia. Last week, however, brought two interesting developments. First, Garry Kasparov – a charismatic and popular former chess champion – decided to stand as the opposition candidate in the upcoming Presidential elections. Then, Vladimir Putin – Russia's cold and stern, yet eerily even more popular President – implied that he may seek to become Prime Minister when he has to step down from his current post.
In my view, only one of these decisions has real potential to be good for civic freedoms in Russia. Which? Counterintuitively, it is Putin's self-serving political calculation, not Kasparov's well-meaning idealism, which gives me hope.
Don't get me wrong. Obviously, I'd prefer to see Kasparov, rather than Putin, at the helm of the Russian state. Hailing from two unpopular minorities – his mother is Azerbaijani and his father Jewish – Kasparov understands the need to contain Russia's resurgent nationalism and xenophobia. With roots in the Soviet dissident movement and an extensive appreciation of what is good in Western liberal democracy, he is also one of a dwindling group of Russian intellectuals firmly committed to political pluralism.
But at the Presidential elections, despite his personal popularity in chess-crazed Russia, he does not have the slightest chance of making significant inroads (if, indeed he will be allowed to stand at all). With the Russian economy profiting from skyrocketing oil and gas prices, and the media under the Kremlin's firm control, Kasparov's candidature will hardly be noticed. Its only effect is likely to be counterproductive: by giving the impression that political opposition is possible in Russia, it will serve as a figleaf for Putin's authoritarianism.
Putin, unlike Kasparov, has no desire for democracy. Yet, it is his strategy which gives me hope.
Until now, there seemed only two options. Either Putin would get his unthinking allies in the Duma, Russia's lacklustre parliament, to rubberstamp constitutional changes which would allow him to serve a third Presidential term. This would be catastrophic, for even the carefully maintained semblance of legality, which by the force even of its hallow rhetoric has so far guaranteed at least some observance of due process, would thereby be given up.
Or he would seek to get an uncharismatic ally elected as President, in the hope that he would continue to serve the economic interests of Putin and his ex-KGB buddies. This latter strategy has considerable risks for Putin – let's not forget that he himself was made President as Yeltsin's uncharismatic puppet, a strategy which failed abysmally. But it does not hold any corresponding opportunities for democratisation. For even if a power struggle among Putin and his successor ensued, it would be based outside of legitimate political institutions and the public arena. Democracy will not return to Russia through a showdown between an oligarch who used to be President and a self-serving President who wants to become an oligarch.
The situation would be different, however, if Putin was to stay in politics as Prime Minister. If – and this remains a big if – his puppet-President, after initial hesitation, was to develop some independence of mind (or interest), parliamentary democracy might be restored. For Putin, in his role as Prime Minister, would now have a vested interest in strengthening parliament and, given his popularity, might succeed in doing so.
Basically, even if Putin remains the strong man of Russian politics, there is justified hope that a change in his role would necessitate changing Russia's overall institutional structure. This would shift some power away from the Presidency – which, at the moment, is the seat of unrivalled and uncontrollable authority.
The freak outcome might be the development of a mixed Presidential / Prime Ministerial system, perhaps not unlike the French model, in which centres of power would, for the first time in Russian history, be genuinely split.
Don't bait your breath, however – this scenario, I admit, is extremely unlikely. Yet, it is not unprecedented that a clash of the worst of self-serving interests should, unexpectedly, bring about the best of changes. With Putin as Prime Minister, a clash of interests might reinvigorate democratic competition, not back-room dealing between oligarchs. It's not much of a hope, but it may just be the best we've got.
Printer-friendly version