It is a busy year for presidential elections. While there will be hotly contested battles for the presidencies of France and the United States, only in my home country, Russia, does the outcome of the presidential election seem a foregone conclusion. But whereas we might be reasonably sure of the result, we should not assume that there is little at stake.
For Western eyes, the neat swap of titles from Prime Minister to President Vladimir Putin — suitably circumventing Russia’s maximum-two-consecutive-term rule — may appear to suggest business as usual in the closed world of Kremlin politics.
But that was not the view taken by many Russians who were insulted by the self-asserting proclamation of immovable presidential power stretching over the next decade and more. The poor, the middle classes and the wealthy filled the streets, incensed over allegations of vote rigging and dirty tricks in the Duma elections in December. This movement has changed the equation and exploded the long-held myth that the people want to stick with Putin just for the sake of stability.
Putin responded to the demonstrators with mockery and chauvinism, saying he mistook the white ribbon they wore for the condoms of safe-sex campaigners. But the authorities also responded — quietly — with reform, permitting the registration of new political parties for future Duma elections, and the election rather than appointment of regional governors. These steps are capable of changing much in Russia — a catalyst, perhaps unintended, for a more fundamental transformation.
They give hope that the seeds of modernity can be planted across the Russian Federation, with the brightest and best coming forward as candidates for public office.
Meanwhile the opposition will have to consolidate into two or three new parties, with the capacity and strength to challenge the status quo, and avoiding the Kremlin trap of divide-and-rule among myriad rival groups.
But if that is the vision for the future, what are the prospects for the presidential elections next week?
It is my hope that we will see a large turnout, with my fellow citizens taking a long hard look at the four “candidates” who appear on the ballot, even if many voters would have preferred other candidates, who were not allowed to run.
The last time Putin ran for president he won resoundingly in the first round. We will have to wait to see what happens this time. But let’s be clear: If Putin is forced into a runoff, it will be an altogether different situation. A second round would confirm that the change we all seek is on its way; that an evolutionary and not a revolutionary approach can be the way forward. We do not want the bloodshed on our streets that we have seen elsewhere, but we do want things to be different. It must be the role of our generation to change the paradigm in Russia without a civil war.
Abuse of power in Russian politics has been allowed to flourish for too long. We need to modernize our economy, to build a genuine civil society, to end legal nihilism and to stamp out corruption. We need to do this to build a better life for our children and our children’s children. We also need to do this for the country we love to prosper and to be engaged usefully in a changed and changing world.
We have only to reflect on the Arab Spring to recognize the transformation taking place in the compact between the rulers and the ruled. While there are certainly many differences between those countries and Russia, there are some fundamental similarities.
First, from Cairo to Damascus, from Moscow to Magadan, people the world over want to be treated with dignity and respect. Second, the Arab Spring has showed us that nobody can hold back the power of modern technology to inform and to mobilize. Technology has empowered the people.
Meanwhile, Russia’s educated middle classes are growing and should comprise a majority in just 10 years’ time. They will continue to demand a real seat at the table in a system of democracy and pluralism and they will not take “no” for an answer.
Nobody expects this to happen overnight, but next Sunday’s vote holds out the chance to end the would-be president’s monopoly of power.
We should not be afraid. By forcing a second round we will push our country down the path of positive change. Presidential power that previously answered to no one would have to start listening to the people it serves. The state that until now took the monopolistic presidential power for granted would be more wary of its hold and start moderating its behavior.
The politicians who gathered the opposition votes could become a force to be reckoned with, a voice for articulating the thoughts and views that have been ignored. The establishment would have to start negotiating with the opposition and an evolutionary transition could begin.
I would also welcome a change of position from Western countries. They should stop dancing to the whistle of the gas pipe. They need to speak loud and clear with one voice about real democratic reforms, recognizing that the only way to secure our mutual interests in the long term is for governments to stop hiding behind the stability myth, legitimizing a regime deceiving its own people — the people who are starting to wake up.
And so I ask you to watch with interest the results of this year’s election. In France and in the United States, the presidential vote is about choosing between differing political visions. In my country, the electoral calculus is a little simpler: choose Putin in the first round or in the second round. But do not be fooled: “President” Putin’s return to the Kremlin, after either manipulating the first round or being forced into a second round, puts the world on notice that real political change in Russia is unavoidable. It will be welcomed.
By Mikhail Khodorkovsky, an inmate of a prison colony in northern Karelia. Prior to his arrest in 2003, he was head of Yukos.