Russia’s political trajectory – ‘promising’ or ominous?

Garry Kasparov castigates G8 leaders who denounce Mugabe while indulging Medvedev “whose hold on power is similarly counterfeit”.

The West’s indulgence towards Russian president Dmitri Medvedev ensured he emerged unscathed from the G8 summit, save for a confrontation with the UK’s Gordon Brown. Medvedev refused to rescind the closure of two British Council offices while UK intelligence agencies this week confirmed that the poisoning of former security agent Alexander Litvinenko in London “was a state action“.

Former Czech President Václav Havel recently criticized Western politicians who, he suggested, had been seduced or intimidated by Russia’s energy-based power.  “It would be good if many people could see this film,” he said (referring to a powerful new documentary about Anna Politkovskaya), “especially politicians who kiss and embrace Russian politicians, almost dizzy with the smell of oil and gas.”

Garry Kasparov, head of the Other Russia pro-democracy group, chastised Western commentators like Henry Kissinger for downplaying Russia’s political regression. “We are witnessing one of the most promising periods in Russian history,” Kissinger wrote this week. “Exposure to modern open societies and engagement with them is more prolonged and intense than ever before — even in the face of unfortunate repressive measures. The longer this continues, the more it will impact Russia’s political evolution.”

The challenge for democracies in the West, says Stanford’s Michael McFaul, is to “engage both the state but also societal leaders and organizations advocating democracy, human rights, and the rule of law.”

Russia’s best-educated and most affluent citizens don’t seem to share upbeat assessments of Russia’s evolution, Kasparov suggests. He notes a recent EU-Russia Centre survey which found that 50 per cent of them would like to emigrate, primarily because of instability and danger from law enforcement. Some 83 per cent felt that they were not able to influence the country’s political direction.

Emigration of the country’s most talented is the last thing Russia needs. Its shrinking population already “poses a serious threat to future economic growth and security”, the Moscow Times reports today.

Russians increasingly “feel vulnerable to the arbitrary actions of corrupt state agencies,” The Economist confirms. Rampant inflation is feeding a sense of growing instability and deteriorating living standards, despite rising real incomes. But the state’s “deeper problem is that rising consumer and investment demand cannot be satisfied by an economy that is constrained by corruption, Soviet-era infrastructure and an inadequate and immobile workforce.”

Nevertheless, prominent economic reformer Anatoly Chubais insists Russia is “going in a liberal direction“. He is encouraged by Medvedev’s commitments to improve the rule of law and implement market reforms. Medvedev last week insisted that political pluralism was essential for Russia’s economic development. “To ensure that our country remains competitive on a global scale, we must have political competition” domestically, he said.

Political analyst Yevgeny Kiselyov detects signals that Chubais might be on to something, citing the way in which the “most odious” siloviki officials, including former Federal Security Services director Nikolai Patrushev, were shifted sideways in the new presidential administration, and Medvedev’s proposal that the Duma withdraw a bill making it easier to close media organizations.

Kiselyov is further encouraged by the recent Constitutional Court decision to dismiss charges of currency smuggling made against Manana Aslamazyan, head of Internews Russia’s successor organization, which received foreign funding, support from Mikhail Khodorkovsky’s Open Russia, and assisted independent regional TV operations.

He also cites the “unprecedented” public confirmation by a senior official that the president’s administration had pressured the Supreme Arbitration Court. This highlights an interesting paradox, Kiselyov suggests. “If Medvedev’s pet project — an independent judiciary — were ever to be realized, he would effectively destroy the foundation of Putin’s power vertical, which he worked so hard constructing over the past eight years.”

Such a prospect might hold some optimism for the country’s democrats, currently focused on the more modest goal of simply surviving. “It’s like Soviet times,” says Grigory Yavlinsky, head of the liberal Yabloko party. “You hold on to your principles and your position…and prepare for the day when the situation changes.”