New configuration of Russian power

Yesterday the Russian prime minister Dmitry Medvedev presented to President Putin suggestion on the structure and the team of a new ministers cabinet. Today Putin starts consultations with candidates for ministers’ positions. Experts think that the government will be renewed radically, while political scientists try to predict new ministers and further Russian policy.

Mikhail Delyagin, Director of the Institute for Problems of Globalization

It was said that the government will be appointed before the inauguration. Then it was said that it would happen right after the inauguration. Then May 15 was mentioned as the deadline. Now May 22-23 is mentioned. Slippages of this kind seem to be a sign of a rather serious and tough internal struggle. We thought that everything was fine, that we have an autocracy. But in fact there is nothing of the kind, a serious struggle is going on. The fact that Putin did not go to the G8 summit, a very significant and almost fateful summit, since it will define the actual agenda of the summit of the G20 and adopt important decisions, not to mention his love of summits themselves. And this one is more important than the G20 summit. The fact that he did not go and that it was very unexpected and sudden should, in my opinion, make us believe that he did not go for the reason he had mentioned: he has to appoint the new government. Historically in our government we have two clans: the "liberal" and the "law-enforcing." After Putin became president everyone perceived the victory of the law-enforcing clan as evident. However, now we notice that he is starting to lose in small things and great. First of all, the liberal part of the opposition is an inalienable part of the liberal clan. To put it simply, the liberal clan is inseparable and its part in the government and the part of it which is marching with flags in streets are the left and right fists of the same clan, of the same assault infantry of global business. In my opinion, Putin has definitely been scared by the mass rallies. He has been scared by the consequences of the police provocation which took place on May 6 and which is unquestionable and the existence of which has been proven. However, the results of it for the governing structure as well as for him were unexpected.

Secondly, a sign that the liberal clan is acting quite forcefully is the possible retention of Shuvalov. Everyone became used to the fact that a datum change is taking place, that there will be no people like Igor Ivanovich. It seemed that everything was clear and obvious, but now it turns out that Shuvalov will not deal with the exploration of the Siberia and Far East but will control the enforcement of the president's orders. At least, this is very likely. Shuvalov is one of the key elements of the liberal clan. A
ddressing substantial thoughts, probably in the government people close to Medvedev will be appointed as ministers, meaning Timakova and Dvorkovich. This only leaves us guessing which offices they will be appointed to. I cannot repeat Bismarck's line that one has to find a place which one can spare, since one cannot spare any of the ministers. It is clear that Dvorkovich will be either the head of the apparatus, or minister of the economy – functions that he is not well adapted to. And Timakova will become minister of culture, minister of communication or perhaps press-secretary in the rank of minister. Perhaps, Rogozin will become the minister of defense. Perhaps, Fursenko will leave; he has already said his goodbyes to everyone. There will most probably be some changes in the future, but there is a fundamentally important issue: nothing is going to change, and this is fundamentally important. I believe that this is the main result of what we hear and what we see. Independent of whether there will be Putin 2.0 or Putin 3.0, and how it is going to be played with by the state propaganda, there is a strategy which is evident.

From July 1 the law on budget organizations will eliminate the existence of the budgetary sphere. Putin mentioned twice in his articles that it was a very good law without any provocation. We are joining the WTO, so along with social expenses we are depriving society of industrial expenditure, because the WTO is not very compatible with the non-energy sector. So the same liberal politics that for the last twenty five years have been destroying our country will continue.

Regarding the promises of the president, certainly officially they will be realized fully and on time; but in reality, for instance in the field of defense, since they will be executed by Dmitry Olegovich Rogozin, I think that generally we can forget about them. We have already been told about how social promises are going to be realized. The promises of the president will be realized and they will be financed due to the reduction of social expenditure, which the president has forgotten to mention.
The key element is the changes in the opposition, since the fluctuating society is the opposition. We have already seen on May 6 in Yakimanka Street that the process is becoming left-patriotic and that liberals are maintaining only an external control over the process. Liberals are being expelled to the civil sphere. The possible repressions that we are going to see now will not change the situation. The main question is: when will the destruction of the socio-economic sphere conducted by the leadership of the country cause the spread of discontent from the metropolises to the industrial zone of Russia. I believe that it will not happen this autumn. In my opinion this autumn will still be a time of stability when Russia will still be controllable. I think it will happen next spring. This autumn Vladimir Vladimirovich will be able to once again visit "Uralvagonzavod."

…The church, due to its very nature, as it seems to be, should be the stabilizer of a society, a type of a collective, excuse me for this notion, psychoanalyst that helps people to cope with existing problems. The most important function of the church is to be the stabilizer of society. Since Russian culture according to its roots and origins is an Orthodox culture, and one can see it even in the example of atheists and Russians converted to Islam, the Russian Orthodox Church plays here the role of a stabilizer. Recent events, starting with the fact that Church representatives enthusiastically reacted to the provocations and ending with the picket against the forthcoming "Golden Cockerel" in the Bolshoi Theatre, gives us every reason to be very apprehensive about the fact that the Russian Orthodox Church is switching from the role of society's stabilizer to the role of society's destabilizer. And this is very troubling. No less than the "wonderful" policies of our so-far formally lay government, although we all see them all holding candles at each Church holiday.

Dmitry Zhuravlyov, director general of the Institute of Regional Problems

For the first time in the past 100 years someone participated in elections in Russia with a particular program. A very simple question arises: why? In my opinion, because for the first time in many years people appeared who wanted to read the program of the candidate and ask him about his plans. Due to my personal history, I have participated in a number of political processes and I remember that in the 1990s there were written programs, but no one ever expected that they would be read. For the first time there are readers and people who are actually interested in what is going to be done and not only in who is going to become the head. In my opinion this factor will largely define the configuration of power, personal as well as administrative. Regarding some substantial elements, and I agree with my colleague Delyagin on this, the substantial elements will remain the same, although we perceive them differently: he puts a distinctive minus next to it, while I am convinced that no changes lead to anything good in Russia. At least the last seventy or eighty years show us that this is true. Even after Konstantin Chernenko, whom we remember in songs and whom we were recently reminiscenting about, it seemed to us that no one worse was possible. But we have managed to find a person who was capable of doing even worse. So I would not be so happy about changes. Changes in Russia are not something very joyful. So it is more an advantage. It means that there will be a basis of stability.

Where did the readers come from? In my opinion it is the result of stability. Why were political documents not read in the politicized 1990s? Because everyone was very hungry. 99% were hungry, while the remaining 1% wanted to gather all that was left in order not to be part of those 99%. Now people have resources and time to read it all. In my opinion this is good.

Will the promises be realized? I am convinced that they will be. One can argue about the percentage of realization of promises, since it is well known that the coefficient of efficiency of the state apparatus in Russia has never been close to 100%. However, everything that can be done with the system of administration for the realization of these projects is done: there are published documents and administrative efforts. What will it give us? This is a more difficult question. The main road leads us to the West, but there are enough problems there. If we attach our heated freight car to their train, there is a big question of how it is going to end. However, we have to at least organize and decorate the heated freight car.

Regarding the opposition, in my opinion it is the first real opposition which is taking the word: Bolotnaya Square and other locations. But it is the reaction of the same readers. I agree that the opposition and its leaders are two different elements. The left spectrum of the opposition was the only spectrum in the provinces even before that, because there was no right-wing opposition in the provinces before. But what is the main component of the opposition? The majority of it is students. Students, young people who have read or heard something and have decided for themselves, sometimes in a very naïve way in my opinion, but they have made certain decisions. Sociologists will correct me if I am wrong. In my opinion, on the one hand, it is good that it exists. But to think that this opposition will play a decisive role, not like an image – look, we have opposition, and we have to think about it - but as a certain political force, we probably cannot. The "Abay" expeditions are a great example. Why? Because the opposition has no leader. The opposition has no tomorrow. The Russian opposition has no tomorrow. You can gather five or ten times – there is something to criticize in Russia, very sincerely. But the opposition has no plan. So if one does not bother with the opposition, it will just lose its energy. There are social protests in Russia and they are unavoidable amidst our social stratification. Fortunately for society, and I am convinced that it is fortunately, the social protests have not allied with the political protests. In these circumstances, the opposition as a direct political factor is impossible.

Vsevolod Chaplin, head of the Synodal Department for External Church Relations of the Moscow Patriarchate

Provincialism might become the main problem of Russia at the moment, which is being imposed on it from outside and which it is starting to adopt for some reason. Russia happens to have will and meaning only when it is trying to solve global problems. It is the only and ultimate truth. When today all the forces of Russian politics are trying to be redirected to a discussion of yesterday's walk along the boulevard ring, it is not only ridiculous, it is also dangerous. At the moment Russia can withdraw from the internal "loopback" only by means of active and key participation in global affairs. What do I mean by key participation? It is the ability to open certain new doors which cannot be opened just by force or by a decision that they should not be opened. Today in the global economy and politics there is a great number of examples of the first and second methods of solution: opening doors by force or imagining that you do not need to open these doors. In fact, the number of challenges which have been piling up in the world economy and politics dictate that there are doors which should be opened and which cannot be opened by force. Therefore, there is a need for keys. And we are the ones who have the keys. We are one of the civilizations which do not need to follow the West, which has lost its will, or the intellectually impotent East, because we have our own recipes for uniting the will and intellect, the spiritual and the so-called profane – but there is nothing profane, since certainly everything is spiritual, as all the problems in the world have spiritual origins, but I will talk about this later. Referencing certain speeches, I would say that we have immense historical experience, which in fact could become the key which will allow us to open the doors which remain closed to everyone who is trying to solve global controversies. We have to finally set for ourselves serious global objectives, which many do not want to set because some people are not used to strategic thinking and in the past twenty years have been dealing only with small, basically provincial issues. We have to not only join the WTO, but from the very beginning try to think about how to participate in the distribution of power in the WTO. It is an old question, in which many expect the word "Russia". The opportunities for influencing the decision-making process, which has been usurped by the dollar countries. Of course, I am talking about the Western countries. One has to try to challenge this system together with the majority of world's population. Decision-making in world organizations regarding parameters of the interference of foreign countries in life, including military interference, legitimacy of interference and its ideological roots – this is a sphere in which potential Russian influence is expected today. We must not be afraid of noting this influence. We must not be afraid of becoming the center of Eurasia, which was mentioned in the speech of the president during his inauguration. We should not be afraid to challenge Western Europe and tell it that Europe today is not London, Paris and Brussels, but Moscow, Kiev and Minsk. They will be the heirs of the tradition which has been created by Europe – the tradition of a union of Roman Law and Christian moral traditions – the tradition of Justinian and Constantine, without which Europe will lose itself. So we should try to move the center of Europe from a self-proclaimed center to a center that has a certain potential of legitimacy.

All of that can sound like an abstract idea, but once they are manifested in concrete political actions, everything will change in Russia. It will gain a certain will, which it lacks today due to the absence of real objectives. The struggle between "Bolotnaya" and "Poklonnaya" is not a real objective, just like the struggle with the famous group which organized a performance in the Christ the Savior Cathedral is not. I understand that the religious and political discourse as well as political debates are in fact centered on absurd themes which are clearly imposed. But this does not mean that we have to abandon these topics. We have been offered to speak out loud, let us then speak out loud and try to turn a non-serious talk into a serious discussion in which many of us will have a lot to say.

The church in its majority is not about priests, but about lay people: countries' leaderships not only of Russia, politicians, businessmen, editors, intellectuals, workers and peasants. In fact the Church is not the city of Kitezh, which as many would say should not appear from the water, or which should appear from the water and make itself useful someday, as others would say. Of course it's a place where people are consoled. But it is at the same time a place where people's consciousness and will for life and actions are inspired. You are a bad Christian if you only pray – that is the path of the chosen ones, monks and hermits. Having chosen this path, at the end of their lives they would still enter the path of teaching, of explaining to people how to live. You are a bad Christian if you only contemplate. You should pray, contemplate and be active. That is why a church composed not only of monks and priests but also lay people should be everywhere, should talk about everything. And this should be its natural role. It should not be an organ of power and I have been principally against it all the twenty years that I have been working for the Russian Orthodox Church. The Church should not be part of the state body, it should not have power structures, it should not have its own enforcement structures, but it should also not be encompassed into a ghetto in which people are talking about something different than what troubles society. Therefore, the Church will certainly talk about the state of society, about societal morals, about laws assessing their moral component, about economics and politics.

Daria Mitina, Russian political activist

The government will be technological and not political. This can be understood already today on the basis of the appointment of a technological prime minister. Regarding this issue, I do not agree with many of my fellow-thinkers, who tend to regard Medvedev as a liberal leader. I believe that the government under his control will be extremely technological and weak. There is a great chance that several departments will be divided, which at the moment are being represented by supra-, mega- and giga-departments. It is very likely that many current ministers will either retain their offices, or head parts of the divided ministries, including those badly perceived in society – all the surnames are clear, I will not elaborate on them. There are the so-called allergenic ministers, and I suppose that they will remain in the future government in one way or another. So I do not expect any particularly political news. That is why it would be interesting to talk not about surnames or personal appointments, but about the tendencies awaiting us. First of all, the weaknesses of the coming government will be related to the internal as well as external factors, because we will face a new curve in the world economic crisis which will fall in the autumn and winter periods. Regarding the development of our internal economic situation, in the summer there will be an increase in tariffs and a change of conjuncture in this direction. Already the first steps of the new government tell us that there will be no conceptual rethinking of the economic policy: the crackdown on the social sphere and liquidation of social achievements will continue.

Oleg Solodukhin, coordinator of Association of Political Experts and Consultants

The main problem which remained intact and has been intact already for a very long time is the fact that the authorities are not solving long-term problems and are not aiming at them. Solutions are found to short-term, strategic tasks. There is no ideology, apart from the ideology of enrichment. There is no political line which would determine a particular strategic course. In this regard, there is an evident situation which will remain the same in Russia. This illness in fact became characteristic of the opposition as well. The opposition, liberal and non-liberal, does not propose any strategic objectives either. That is why, in my opinion, the opposition which is presented today at Chistye Prudy is enclosing itself in a certain ethno-cultural reserve. It is not showing any political will, not showing any political action, not defining a certain political agenda and not imposing it on the authorities, but occupying the position of a certain co-existence with the current regime – it is an analogue of the hippie movement. It is a certain subject of an ethno-cultural reserve, but not an active subject of political action. It seems that the opposition is being successfully expelled in this sphere.

Mikhail Delyagin, Director of the Institute for Problems of Globalization

Three fundamental issues, three fundamental changes took place and defined the events of December, current and future events.

First, the oil model of the economy has stopped working. The price of oil grew 40% in the last year, economic growth has not accelerated, the real income of the population according to official statistics has decreased, including the richest elements of Russian society which are integrally counted.

Secondly, the so-called middle class which began to consume, which bought simple household appliances after bread and circuses, desired justice. Since the "Bobik" of the oil economy died, they cannot be offered anything but riot police batons. This is the second issue: society started to demand more from the government for objective reasons, while the government, due to the crisis of the oil economy, cannot give it what it used to provide it with back in 2010.

Thirdly, the inner crisis of the government structure, when officials, having rightly adopted the idea that they are only required to enrich themselves, have stopped working. After the "oil rain" we can see it in every spot. In this situation certainly the protest is indeed very miserable and ridiculous. If repressions take place and real sentences will be given, it will become diminished. But we have seen deepest discord in the government structures themselves. What happened on Bolotnaya Square: the riot police squadrons were moved 200m forwards. The space for conducting demonstrations was decreased fivefold, although the authorities were well aware of the fact that ten times more people came than had been expected. That is it. Who were provocateurs in the mob? Taking into consideration the total filming of each other, if they are still not found a week later, then they are representatives of certain special structures. If they were people whom someone wanted to find, they would have been found immediately. It is a deep inner crisis of the power structures, with the opposition playing the role of a crowd scene which at some moment can be eliminated by the director.