Putin equals anything but democracy

If democracy is indeed even present in Russian politics, then it is at least a joke. In a country plagued throughout modern history with economic and political crisis, and now with a former KGB leader as their prime minister it is safe to say that democracy in this post-soviet country will inevitably fail. However, I am judging the democracy of a country where a system so idealistic as Soviet Communism once reigned. To expect Russian leaders to become democratic suddenly or even to assume that the people of Russia understand the fundamental principles of democracy is absurd. Russia may be moving closer to following the will of the people, but definitely not towards a democracy by traditional Western Standards. However, prime minister Vladimir Putin has made some attempts at giving the power of the state to the people while still maintaining authoritarian outcomes and supreme power.

Putin does have public support. After eight years of former prime minister Yeltsin's rule, the country of Russia was a tremendously sorrowful sight. It was a totally decentralized state. Every subject of the Federation was living according to its own laws, there was a deep rift in the political elite and the population was apathetic and no longer believed in democracy or a market economy. Since Putin's election into prime minister status in 2001, most Russian citizens have been much more favorable towards their new leader. Polls in 2002, such as done by the Public Opinion Foundation, show that the people continue to regard Putin as they did in 2000, to be a new start and a distinct change from the chaos and corruption that accompanied the Yeltsin era. However, almost any leader would seem an improvement to the alcoholic Yeltsin.

Although Putin seemed to start of his reign very slowly in order to retain his popularity, he has slowly been proposing reforms to the country. However, his slow uptake on reforms to this wreckage of a country also perpetuates the idea of low democracy standard in that his neglect of action may be attributed to the sinking of the Russian Kursk submarine, which killed 116 crewmen in Sept. 2000. It was Putin and his government who tried to seal the incident and Putin himself took a vacation. Surely, Putin did not show proper concern for the needs and right of the Russian citizens to learn of the incident. He, as learned by his experience in the KGB covered up the incident, but in doing so also created a huge hiatus where many reforms could have been made.

Nonetheless, this does not prove that Putin himself is an authoritarian ruler. One of Putin's many achievements has been his stabilization in domestic politics by creating a State Duma loyal to the federal authority that started to pass laws that the Kremlin was interested in. Furthermore, the Unity bloc, or the party of Putin in the parliamentary elections won the majority in the Duma. While it can be said that the Duma and the parliamentary branch has been strengthened, it is nowhere equal in authority to the presidential position. The president has his own party in the Duma supporting him, and obviously, they are bound to pass laws that he dictates. The Duma itself apparently takes more seriously the idea that its function is to legislate rather than agitate and obstruct. Putin does not merely act as prime minister, but also leader of the parliament.

As if two branches of government were not enough power for Putin to uphold, he has insisted on making preparations to create a long overdue judicial branch. While the judicial branch is definitely a great idea and much needed to enforce laws, it's legitimacy will be doubtful. If this branch is anything like the Duma that Putin "strengthened" it can be guaranteed that the judiciaries elected will be in direct support of Putin. But the most evident federal attempt at a change in the balance of power within the regions of Russia came with Putin's efforts to alter the way the upper house of the Russian parliament, the Federation Council, is constituted. The previous practice of sending the top legislative and executive figures from each region ex officio to the Federation Council theoretically ended in 2002 when Putin decided that one elected official would be appointed by the regional governor and the other would be filled by the regional legislature itself. Putin is reorganizing the government based on his own will, not on democratic elections.

Mr. Putin's "goals and the means he chooses to achieve them are clear enough", said Boris Pankin, the liberal former ambassador in London. "He has known what he wants right from the start; Soviet power without communists."The Putin agenda is being dubbed "controlled democracy." This, however, does not appear to be an unattractive agenda in retrospect to old communism, in theory at least, to most Russians. Oleg Rumyantsev, a constitutional lawyer who spent the early 1990s trying and failing to draft a new democratic basic law for Russia, stated "the parliament is powerless. Putin is about power, order, a strong state." Yet despite the lack of confidence of a strong democracy, Putin declared that, "It is our common task to prove that democracy in Russia is not a temporary phenomenon or something that lasts one presidential term and then is over. We have to prove it is here for good." A rather ironic statement coming from a man who is in direct power in almost every aspect of Russian politics. Absolute power does not constitute a democracy.

SOURCES:

Nichols, Thomas M. "Putin's First Two Years: Democracy or Authoritarianism?" Russia Weekly. Oct. 2002.

"Vladimir Putin: Democracy in Russia Established Forever." Pravda.ru. June 12, 2001.