Saturday, May 26, 2012


The Power Vertical

Tandemology 2.0

The tandem attends a meeting of the State Council on December 27
TEXT SIZE - +
Whether they like it or not, Dmitry Medvedev and Vladimir Putin are stuck with each other. And I strongly suspect they are both pretty much OK with that arrangement, even if their respective teams are obviously not.

That is the conclusion I slowly but surely came to as 2010 drew to a close. Once you cut through all the pokazukha and head-spinning tandemology (Look! Medvedev is asserting himself! Oh my! Putin is back and he just showed him who's boss!) and look at the issue logically, it is hard to come to any other conclusion.

Sure, the technocrats surrounding Medvedev, the liberal intelligentsia, and the democratic opposition would love to see Putin ride off (or be pushed) into retirement so they can commence a new wave of reform, modernization, and (dare I say it?) democratization unobstructed by old-style thinking.

But as much as I sympathize with this wing of the Russian elite, I don't see that happening for one simple reason. Without Putin's protection, Russia's various bureaucratic and siloviki clans would quickly emasculate Medvedev and render his presidency powerless. It would mean a return to the chaotic clan warfare and chaos associated with the wild 1990s. Whatever his intentions, Medvedev just doesn't have the muscle on his own to keep these wolves at bay.

And of course Putin's circle of siloviki would like to see their man back in the Kremlin so they can continue reaping energy profits and resume their Andropovian dream of building a centralized, authoritarian, vertically integrated and unitary executive to rule Russia as they please.

Needless to say, I do not sympathize with this vision of Russia. And as likely as this scenario looked back in 2007, I think it would be very difficult for the likes of Igor Sechin and Co. to pull it off today. Russia has changed too much over the past few years.

Yes, oil prices are recovering. But the shocks of 2008-09 seem to have taught a critical mass of the elite that an overreliance on energy and raw materials is a path to periodic crises and instability -- and a road to Brezhnevian stagnation. As much as the period gets romanticized, few really want a return to the Soviet late 1970s. Perestroika, after all, happened for a reason.

Moreover, Russian civil society has truly woken up in the past year or so, and public opposition will not be so easy to manage as it was in the past. 2011 is not 2001, 2004, or even 2007.

Keeping the tandem together (and that means Medvedev must remain president since he would quickly become irrelevant otherwise), addresses several problems at once.

First, as I have blogged here before, it allows for Medvedev to be the public face of a tightly controlled modernization effort under Putin's watchful eye. The specter of how the state disintegrated following perestroika still haunts the elite.

Second, it solves Russia's perennial succession crises that arise whenever a change at the top is in the offing (as it was in 1999 at the end of the Boris Yeltsin era and appeared to be in 2007-08 when Putin's second term was up). With Putin as the constant, the national leader, the boss of the "deep state" of the siloviki, a change at the presidential level is less traumatic. The only question here is what will Putin's formal role be (prime minister, leader of United Russia), but in the end it doesn't really mater.

And finally, maintaining the tandem intact establishes a leadership that can more or less keep a critical mass of citizens, including a reenergized civil society, more or less on board with the regime.

In his thoughtful and provocative review of 2010 in "Yezhednevny zhurnal," Aleksei Makarkin of the Center for Political Technologies notes that Putin and Medvedev are explicitly appealing to two distinct publics, which he playfully dubs "The Folks" and "The Non-Folks."

The folks trust the state and the sovereign, they are sincere, patriotic, modest, sometimes outwardly naive, but inwardly wise. The 'non-folks,' on the contrary, are made up of people who are suspect, who do too much thinking for themselves, who are inclined to finding fault, and are, consequently, unreliable. The task of the sovereign is to rule the folks, by neutralizing the 'non-folks,' who try to confuse these loyal subjects, or even try to rebel.

So in 2011, I guess I expect more of the same as the current system solidifies. Mixed signals -- like allowing Strategy 31 protests and then detaining opposition leaders like Boris Nemtsov -- will continue as the new boundaries of the emerging system are negotiated and come into being.

NOTE TO READERS: I apologize for the light posting in recent weeks. I have been on vacation. In the future, I will try to give ample warning when the blog will lie dormant for such a long stretch. Happy New Year to all.

-- Brian Whitmore
This forum has been closed.
Comment Sorting
Comments
     
by: Mamuka
January 11, 2011 11:56
Insightful analysis as to why Medvedev is the President. Do I understand correctly-- you think he will continue to be President or risk slipping into obscurity?

Dont forget that Deng Xiao Ping was China's strongman for many years yet held no official post other than head of the national youth sports committee or something similarly obscure.

by: Rick from: USA
January 11, 2011 21:08
It would be a very big mistake for Mr. Putin to allow President Medvedev to stay on as President 2012. Medvedev would then have the time and opportunity to undermine Mr. Putin's power over the next 4 years. Medvedev is weak without Putin, but he does'nt know that as power intoxicates. Vladimir Putin is a real man and a real leader unlike Medvedev. Russia needs strong leadership for its continued success and survival. I would like to see Medvedev quietly go away in 2012 as he is strating to believe he is a real leader which will never be the case. He is star struck with Obama and the US in general. Bad mistake!

by: Nina Ivanovna
January 11, 2011 21:37
But wasn't the tandem intended to be a temporary fix? That has always been my impression, at least. I get where you are going with this, and I see your point. They have, perhaps unintentionally, pretty much boxed themselves into this. A continuation of the tandem would be ideal for all sides, though some manoeuvring regarding deals, and money, and who gets what will probably have to take place beforehand.

Did you see Andrei Kolesnikov's piece over at Open Democracy? He is arguing that "a split... is inevitable". http://www.opendemocracy.net/od-russia/andrei-kolesnikov/putin-and-medvedev-split-in-tandem

by: Christian from: St. Petersburg, Russia
January 12, 2011 21:06
Nice post, Brian! I agree that they understand that they are mutually useful to each other. I question that either has any higher goal than to stay in power as long as possible - but I hope that you are right and both have good intentions for improvement of Russia, but different strategies to do so. It is a nice idea and a balance between Chinese style controlled development and whatever it is that Medevedev stands for - (is it really " reform, modernization, and ... democratization"?) - might be a good way forward.
I love the quote from Aleksei Makarkin.
But, as someone living here, I am surprised that people forget to mention the most powerful civil dissent is coming from groups of people that you would never expect... like the automobilists (for lack of a better term) - who actually stood up to the power and made them back down. Very few in Russia fights for something as abstract as democracy but try to take away their cars and they will xhallenge Putin himself.

by: Mark from: Canada
January 13, 2011 20:47
Happy New Year, Brian!

I don't see Putin returning to power as president, although he likely will remain a power in politics for the forseeable future; perhaps continuing in his present appointment, or (as Mamuka mentioned) in some apparently unrelated post. But I think you give Medvedev too little credit, both for individual strength and personal support base. I believe both are greater than you imply.

I also believe the relationship between Medvedev and Putin is more cordial than western reports would have it. All the twaddle about Putin-says-jump, Oh-look-at-Medvedev-trying-to-assert-himself-how-cute is just wishful thinking. If you suggested Putin hand-picked his successor, I wouldn't disagree - precisely as anyone who had been the leader and wished his ideas to continue receiving favourable consideration would do. But if so, why would anyone think someone as sagacious as Putin is supposed to be would pick somebody who would instantly maverick out of the relationship? Doubtful.

I wish people would stop implying Boris Nemtsov was arrested because he's some kind of triple threat to the Kremlin. His popularity figures suggest otherwise, while his recent performance suggests he's getting arrested deliberately to get attention. As usual, western media sources are giving him the sympathetic coverage he isn't getting at home, where his presumed voter base is (unless he's planning to run as governor of California). He was arrested for leaving a sanctioned demonstration for one that had assembled without a permit. The law says no.
In Response

by: Anonymous from: USA
January 14, 2011 16:39
"The law says no."
o dear Canadian friend, Russia doesn't have any rule of law. It is whatever Putin says the law is. Apparently, you have been living under a rock the last 10 years or you are simply an FSB friendly person posing as a Canadian. These kinds of uninformed arguments are getting boring to read....(yawn).

About This Blog

The Power Vertical is a blog written especially for Russia wonks and obsessive Kremlin watchers by Brian Whitmore. It covers emerging and developing trends in Russian politics, shining a spotlight on the high-stakes power struggles, machinations, and clashing interests that shape Kremlin policy today. Check out The Power Vertical Facebook page or

Listen

​​