Opinion - Leader Page Articles   

Medvedev-Putin duo: reality check

The tandem of President Dmitry Medvedev and his predecessor-turned-Prime Minister Vladimir Putin performed remarkably well during its first year in power, but the current economic crisis may put it to serious test.

The duo demonstrated good teamwork and ensured stability and continuity, which were the main slogans when Mr. Putin promoted his disciple and ally to presidency and when the President appointed Mr. Putin Prime Minister after taking oath in May 2008. The duumvirate steered Russia confidently through a major military and political crisis — the war against Georgia and the subsequent showdown with the West — and kept the country on course when the global financial meltdown struck it.

Mr. Putin has been playing the lead role even though the President has far more constitutional powers than the Prime Minister. The Russian Constitution empowers the President to define foreign and domestic policies and gives him direct responsibility over the security and defence establishments. However, Mr. Putin, whose authority as Prime Minister is largely confined to the economy, still has a say on foreign policy and retains effective control over the security services and the military. He also controls Parliament through his leadership of the dominant party, United Russia.

Nevertheless, the duumvirate has established a credible division of authority, ending a long tradition of concentration of power in the hands of one ruler in the Kremlin that has hampered effective government. The emergence of two centres of power also helps to create checks and balances that have been conspicuously absent in the Russian system.

“Perhaps for the first time in a thousand years Russia lives and functions — and this is not considered something exotic — in a situation of a real separation of powers,” political scientist Dmitry Oreshkin observed.

While Mr. Putin is primarily responsible for the economy, Mr. Medvedev has focussed on foreign policy and issues that would make a transformational impact on the Russian state and society: combating corruption, enhancing public accountability of government officials, and strengthening the rule of law and independence of courts.

The President has been gradually firming up his hold on power and has taken steps to form his own team, announcing the recruitment of a 1,000-strong presidential reserve of candidates to fill top government positions.

Mr. Medvedev has proved himself very good at learning the art of the top job — almost as good as Mr. Putin was when he, much like Mr. Medvedev, was plucked from relative obscurity to succeed his ailing boss, Boris Yeltsin. When he took office a year ago, Mr. Medvedev was often seen imitating Mr. Putin’s manners, even gait; today he has acquired a style of his own. He is more tolerant, more prepared to listen to others, and more willing to compromise. At the same time, he can be as tough as Mr. Putin, as his handling of the conflict with Georgia showed.

Eighty per cent of Russians think that Mr. Medvedev is continuing in the path of Mr. Putin. But at the same time, Mr. Medvedev has charted his own course towards greater political and economic freedom. He has asserted his democratic credentials by giving his first interview to a fiercely critical paper, Novaya Gazeta, and started a monthly blog on LiveJournal to promote direct communication with the common people. He has also reached out to the opposition parties and urged a bigger role for non-governmental organisations. One of Mr. Medvedev’s most resonant reformist moves was to order top officials publicly to disclose their family assets.

Some analysts have even compared Mr. Medvedev’s quest for reform with that of the former Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev, who promoted his “glasnost” and “perestroika” 20 years ago.

Opinion polls show that Russians see Mr. Medvedev, 43, and Mr. Putin, 56, as one team. Both enjoy high approval ratings — Mr. Medvedev 68 per cent and Mr. Putin 76 per cent. According to a survey in April, 48 per cent of Russians believe that the two leaders share power equally. Thirty per cent say Mr. Putin wields more power, while 12 per cent have placed Mr. Medvedev in the lead.

The global economic crisis is likely to speed up Mr. Medvedev’s emergence from Mr. Putin’s shadow. The crisis has highlighted the need to change the economic strategy Russia followed during Mr. Putin’s eight-year presidency, when the government prioritised export-oriented commodity industries to the detriment of high-tech and manufacturing sectors. When the global demand for oil, gas and metals slumped last year, the Russian economy nosedived. After a decade of average annual growth of 7 per cent, the economy is heading for an 8-per cent fall this year, the government predicts. Unemployment has already crossed 10 per cent, the highest in eight years. People’s real incomes, which grew at 10 per cent a year in recent years, have slumped by 40 per cent in the past six months.

Mr. Medvedev has been increasingly critical of the government’s slow and ineffective response to the crisis. Last week, he rapped senior Ministers for failing to diversify the economy away from oil and gas production. He lamented the absence of “any marked progress” towards technological modernisation, which is the government’s top priority, stating technological parks, venture projects and special economic zones “exist only on paper.” The President described Russian companies’ investment in innovation — 6 per cent of their total spending — as “shockingly low,” and recalled that labour productivity was just a quarter of levels in the United States. Mr. Medvedev called for ridding the government of “irresponsible, weak and incompetent” managers.

Asked about Mr. Medvedev’s criticism, Mr. Putin said it was an “absolutely normal thing,” adding he too was often unhappy with his Ministers. However, Mr. Medvedev went farther than criticising the government, announcing the establishment of a Kremlin commission on “modernisation and technological development.” The decision indicated his determination to take personal charge of economic reforms even if it meant stepping on Mr. Putin’s turf.

There are no signs that Mr. Medvedev’s growing assertiveness has strained his relations with Mr. Putin. In a recent interview, Mr. Putin said he was “on very good terms” with Mr. Medvedev. “Each of us does his own job. Each has his own responsibilities,” he said adding “over more than 17 years of working together, we have developed a mechanism for hammering out a common position” when differences arise.

Mr. Putin indicated that Mr. Medvedev’s initiatives reflected their shared vision of reforms. “Everything we had agreed upon at the start of our joint journey is being implemented and is working effectively,” he said.

However, the situation in Russia has changed dramatically since they agreed on tandem rule. The global crisis dictates the need for speeding up reforms to create a science-based economy and to tap the creative energies of the people.

Many analysts have faulted Mr. Medvedev for going too slow on his election promise of pushing for more political and economic freedoms and curbing corruption. It is no secret though that the reforms meet with stiff resistance from the powerful “siloviki” security establishment, which has been Mr. Putin’s major power base. For example, it took Mr. Medvedev nearly a year to get the “siloviki”-linked Moscow Arbitration Court Chairwoman Lyudmila Maikova sacked despite strong evidence of corruption against her.

Mr. Gorbachev, who previously supported Mr. Putin, last week hit out at the “managed democracy” set up during the latter’s presidency and accused the United Russia party of a “step-by-step monopolisation of the political system.” To cope with the economic crisis, he said, the government needed “a reliable system of feedback, which can be provided only by the democratic institutions.”

Mr. Gorbachev mentioned no names but his criticism of Russia’s political system was a clear gesture of support to Mr. Medvedev and an attempt to impress on Mr. Putin the need for reforms. Even as Mr. Putin insists that he and Mr. Medvedev are in step and in tune, the Prime Minister is yet to publicly endorse the President’s pro-democracy initiatives.

Psychologically, it may be difficult for Mr. Putin to support the dismantling of some of his own reforms, such as the creation of an over-centralised system of government, the scrapping of elections of regional governors and the raising of the parliamentary elections threshold for small parties. But his support is crucial if the governance is to succeed in putting Russia on the road to modernisation.

Printer friendly page  
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Stories in this Section

Blend of youth and experience
State-sponsored vigilantism
Medvedev-Putin duo: reality check
Cities the target of asymmetrical warfare
U.S. town bids to be new Gitmo
Containing the Taliban: 3 factors
Complexities of nuclear risk reduction in South Asia
Israel: 80 per cent of West Bank water for Israelis
Corrections and clarifications
Jumbo ministry
Punjab violence
Ajmal’s trial
Terror and torture
Deplorable

Copyright © 2009, The Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of The Hindu