Water flows down from Russia’s mountains
COLUMN
|
|
|
By Mikael Pentikäinen
Shortly before the Russian elections last week, a Russian author in Moscow described the situation in the country by saying that “the waters have started flowing down from the mountains”.
The writer was thinking that an unpredictable change was taking place, whose outcome was difficult to anticipate.
The author’s prophecy was partly realised in the elections of the Duma on Sunday, and appears to be continuing in demonstrations in different parts of the country.
Despite considerable preparations, the United Russia party of Prime Minister Vladimir Putin and President Dmitri Medvedev – a political apparatus built for the elections and for ruling the country – suffered a defeat.
Officially, United Russia certainly did get half of the vote. However, the result cannot be seen as good in a country in which the electoral system favours those in power, and where especially the television is in the hands of the Kremlin, where there is election fraud, and where voters are guided and pressured.
In areas near the Finnish border, in St. Petersburg – Putin’s home city – and in Karelia, United Russia won just a third of the vote.
The message from the Russians to Putin and his partners in politics and business was clear: irritation has increased, and there is a desire for change in Russia’s political life.
The movement of water is a good description of an episode at Moscow’s Olympic Stadium on November 20th. At the stadium, Putin faced unprecedented demonstrations.
Putin was congratulating heavyweight fighter Fedor Emelianenko who had defeated the American Jeff Monson. Putin addressed the audience after the match, and the people started protesting.
Three different kinds of spin were put on the episode in Moscow last week. One explanation was biological. Putin’s security personnel had held some large men in the crowd, preventing them from going to the toilet, even though they would have needed to. When Putin showed up, the discomfort found its release in booing the Prime Minister.
Another explanation was athletic. According to that theory, the people had come to watch a sporting event, and not to listen to a political speech. Everyone staging something additional got booed.
The third explanation was political. According to this one, people wanted to tell Putin that people had enough of the machinations of his machinery.
The real explanation could be a combination of these, but it doesn’t actually matter, because the episode has become a political symbol. Respect for those in power has decreased.
The election result and the catcalls at the stadium showed that many Russians had had their fill of Putin and the political and economic structure of those close to him. In it, politics has been harnessed as a tool for personal enrichment, and the country’s riches have been taken by a small group of people for their own use. This method has made many, Putin included, very rich.
The structure is characterized, depending on how diplomatic the person making the analysis is, as either thoroughly rotten, or flexible.
Many feel that Putin has become a prisoner of his own structure. He cannot relinquish power, because it would topple the whole system, and could lead to a situation in which those benefitting from it, Putin included, might be held to account.
Where do the waters flowing from the mountains go? What can be expected from Russia? Many expect a change, and many expect that change to come from the Kremlin, in spite of everything.
In the Kremlin, the wise political operatives can see that a precondition of the function of their structure is that Putin – today’s Tsar – should enjoy a sufficient amount of popularity.
It is no coincidence that Putin flies fire-fighting planes, tames tigers, and finds sunken treasure in the sea. All acts of heroism have the aim to make the Russian leader sufficiently beloved.
Medvedev was never up to this, even though the West likes him. In Moscow, Medvedev is primarily the butt of jokes – after the elections, more than ever.
Many believe that if he actually becomes the prime minister, his period in office will be short, because Medvedev’s managerial skills are not sufficient for the prime minister’s post.
The setup can make it necessary to weed out the extensive corruption which angers the people. The setup can also deepen Russia’s economic difficulties, because the Kremlin is afraid to implement necessary, but politically difficult reforms out of fear that Putin might lose popularity.
Before the elections there was another interesting series of events seen in Russia. A relic claimed to be the belt of the Virgin Mary made a tour of the country awakening great interest from the public.
The holy belt brought from Greece was viewed by as many as three million Russians.
In Moscow the most enthusiastic stood in line for 24 hours just to see the relic. The line in front of the Church of Christ the Saviour was eight kilometres long at one point.
The popularity of the holy object shows the power of the Orthodox Church and religion in Russia. The Church is one of the few factors that can unite modern Russia. It is a strong, but conservative and nationalist force that can get people on the move.
Compared with many ecclesiastical figures, Putin is a great liberal. The leader of the Russian Church, the Patriarch Cyril, is characterised as a brilliant politician. The Patriarch has an office in the Kremlin, and Putin listens to him.
The waters may well flow from the mountains toward nationalism and the Church. A union between a stronger new Tsar and the Patriarch of the old church is not an impossible vision in the Russia of the new decade.
It is good to reflect on how the unexpected change in Russia will affect Finland.
Relations between Finland and Russia are good at the moment. Presidents Tarja Halonen and Dmitri Medvedev are leaving a good legacy for their successors.
If instability grows in Russia, as might be expected, it will inevitably have an impact on Finland, even if it does not cause problems for our bilateral relations. That is something that needs to be kept in mind.
Helsingin Sanomat / First published in print 11.12.2011
The writer is the Editor-in-Chief of Helsingin Sanomat
MIKAEL PENTIKÄINEN / Helsingin Sanomat
mikael.pentikainen@hs.fi
|
| 13.12.2011 - THIS WEEK |
 Water flows down from Russia’s mountains |
|
