The United States general in charge of Norad, the North American aerospace defence command, unwittingly gave a clue this week as to why President Vladimir Putin is so popular.
The resumption this year of unannounced sorties close to US and Nato airspace by Russia’s strategic bombers were becoming a real worry, said General Gene Renuart. “If the Russians would file a flight plan just to state their intent and general routing, that would ease our concerns,” he said. “It reduces tension as you’re out chasing around after unknown aircraft.”
The general should not hold his breath waiting for a call from Moscow. In Putin’s brash, new Russia rattling the Americans’ cage has become a favourite pastime in reaction to the humiliations of the post-Soviet collapse. Bearding the US and Nato, be it in Alaska, Ukraine or the Gulf of Finland, or obstructing its policies on Burma and Iran, is official policy now. The bombers’ antics are a deliberate reminder that Russia is back in business as a global player — and for that perceived achievement Putin is increasingly lauded at home as a national saviour.
“In Russia, as before, a regime of personal power has been established,” said Alexei Venediktov, of Ekho Moskvy radio. “Whether he is called president or prime minister is meaningless.”
Even given the historical legacy of god-like tsars and omnipotent communist chiefs, Putin’s ability to dictate the terms of Russia’s political discourse, achieved in only eight years, is remarkable. Polls regularly indicate an approval rating of around 70%. It is as though he can do no wrong.
As a result, Putin’s novel plan to continue as prime minister after his presidency ends next year is all but certain to be enacted. Power will simply flow to him in his new incarnation, according to Jorg Himmel-reich, of the German Marshall Fund. “It’s a smart step to stay in charge. Some people say it will make Russia more democratic by shifting power to the Duma [Parliament]. Don’t believe it. It’s a good marketing move … the new president, whoever that is, will dance to Putin’s tune.”
Being beastly to the Americans apart, Putin’s popularity stems primarily from eight years of straight economic growth, fuelled by record energy receipts. His carefully cultivated image — of a fit, tough judo black-belt willing to use coarse language and flex his muscles — has also played well after the intellectual and physical flabbiness of his predecessor, Boris Yeltsin.
Putin’s much criticised restrictions on free media and free expression, and his crackdown on political dissent, do not seem to worry the mass of Russians.
“We’re trying to force the regime to accept our rights to participate in free and fair elections, to agitate the Russian public to support our ideas,” said Garry Kasparov, named this week as the leader of an opposition coalition. But few are listening, and the likely prospect that Kasparov’s candidacy will be officially blocked elicits little surprise.
Grigory Yavlinsky, of the Russian Democratic Party Yabloko, another veteran opponent regularly steamrollered by the Putin juggernaut, said Putin’s move towards the premiership (a job without term limits) was one more proof that Russia was returning to a one-party system. Mikhail Kasyanov, a former prime minister, agreed. “Things remain as they are … It means the current political course, which in my view is leading our country to collapse, will continue.”
All the same, there are powerful reasons to believe Putin will not have things his own way indefinitely. David Clark, chairperson of the independent Russia Foundation, said that while the “cult of Putin” was in full flow, fatal flaws were apparent.
Clark said: “Putin has been genuinely successful in responding to the disappointment and frustration felt by many Russians during the transition from the Soviet era. But he has manipulated the political system so that criticism of him is not heard. Russians have formed their opinions of him without free and open access to information.
“His image of strong man is built on clay. It is very fragile. Likewise, Russia’s strength is built entirely on energy, on oil and gas, nothing else. And that’s all going to unravel in the coming years.”
Like other analysts, Clark and Himmelreich predicted that a lack of investment, development and forward planning, coupled with over-centralised control and corruption, would conspire to undercut Russia’s energy bonanza, beginning with looming internal delivery problems as early as 2010.
“Right now, they [the Russians] say the West is weak, the West is lame, we are great,” Himmelreich said. But the ongoing failure to use windfall profits to develop the country’s infrastructure, industry and institutions, meant Russians might one day come to view the heady days of the Putin era as a Siberian-sized missed opportunity. — Â