How Russian elections became a futile exercise for Putin’s opposition

|
Alexander Zemlianichenko/AP
Yekaterina Duntsova speaks to journalists after filing to run in Russia's presidential election as an anti-war candidate, in Moscow, Dec. 20, 2023.
  • Quick Read
  • Deep Read ( 4 Min. )

Russians will go to the polls this weekend, nominally to select the country’s next president. But the outcome is already a foregone conclusion: another term for Vladimir Putin.

Officially there are three candidates running against Mr. Putin, each from a loyal opposition party. Each may differ with the Kremlin on a variety of issues, but never on vital foreign policy or the war in Ukraine.

Why We Wrote This

A story focused on

Russia’s presidential election appears largely a rote exercise, as a popular, unchallengeable leader faces only nominal competition from three “systemic” opponents. The Kremlin has worked for years to make it this way.

“Unlike the last presidential election in 2018, the number of candidates is small and the differences between what they say is negligible,” says Nikolai Petrov, an expert with Chatham House in London. “Now we see, step by step, the Kremlin attacks all places where some kind of political life was going on.”

At one time, some believed that the system of “managed democracy” set up under Mr. Putin might become more representative of Russian society. But now, amid war and confrontation with the West, the political options available to Russians who wish to express dissatisfaction have narrowed drastically.

Yet Mr. Putin has gained in popularity, says Denis Volkov, director of Russia’s only independent opinion agency. The war “has put the lack of alternatives into the background. Now the majority thinks Putin is the person who can protect them against the West.”

Last November, Yekaterina Duntsova announced that she would run for Russia’s presidency as a peace candidate. A month later, the small-town journalist, mother, and former municipal deputy was barred from the ballot by the electoral commission.

Undeterred, Ms. Duntsova decided to start a new party to address what she describes as the “vacuum of political choices” for Russians.

“Something is wrong in the country; people can feel it,” she says. “I have been shown a lot of support from many around me, people who want to see alternatives to the tough politics of today. This energy should be channeled into creative activities.”

Why We Wrote This

A story focused on

Russia’s presidential election appears largely a rote exercise, as a popular, unchallengeable leader faces only nominal competition from three “systemic” opponents. The Kremlin has worked for years to make it this way.

But while no one appears to be overtly trying to stop Ms. Duntsova from starting her grassroots party, it is telling that both she and another more serious anti-war candidate, Boris Nadezhdin, were prevented last month from running in this weekend’s presidential polls.

The system of “managed democracy” erected under Vladimir Putin used to offer plenty of opportunities for people to participate as members of various “loyal opposition” parties, and often get elected to local legislatures and even to the State Duma. At one time, some believed that this system might eventually grow into a more representative Russian democracy.

But now, under the impact of war, sanctions, and confrontation with the West, the range of political options available to Russians who wish to express dissatisfaction with the status quo has narrowed drastically. And Mr. Putin’s rule is protected from any challenge.

Ms. Duntsova nonetheless retains hope that elections can make a difference.

“People should all go out and vote” this weekend “for any candidate other than the present president,” she says, voicing an idea promoted by the late Alexei Navalny after he’d been barred from the last presidential election six years ago. Even a symbolic vote against Mr. Putin would be heard as a statement of discontent, she says. “People need to see results.”

Putin above the fray

Polling by Russia’s only independent opinion agency, the Levada Center, shows that the war has rallied the public behind Mr. Putin, making it difficult to discern any difference between those who enthusiastically support him and those who just believe there’s no viable alternative.

“Since the beginning of the war, Putin’s electoral rating has doubled in size,” says Denis Volkov, director of the Levada Center. “The situation of an external conflict has put the lack of alternatives into the background. Now the majority thinks Putin is the person who can protect them against the West.”

Gavriil Grigorov/Sputnik/Kremlin/AP
Russian President Vladimir Putin (left) is interviewed by TV presenter Dmitry Kiselyov, in Moscow, March 12, 2024.

Officially there are three candidates running against Mr. Putin in the March 15-17 election, each from a “systemic” or loyal opposition party. Each may differ with the Kremlin on a variety of issues, but never on vital foreign policy or the war in Ukraine. They represent a spectrum that once showed promise of possibly expanding into a more competitive democracy, but now appear little more than window dressing for Mr. Putin’s ceremonial return to power.

None of the permitted candidates seem to be campaigning very hard, and Mr. Putin not at all. He traditionally positions himself above the fray, suggesting that people should know him by his works.

“Unlike the last presidential election in 2018, the number of candidates is small and the differences between what they say is negligible,” says Nikolai Petrov, an expert with Chatham House in London. “Now we see, step by step, the Kremlin attacks all places where some kind of political life was going on, such as municipal politics. ... If there are no real institutions, how can you expect political culture to develop?”

No room for real debate

The outlook for the nonsystemic opposition – those who refuse to compromise or work with the Kremlin – is far worse. For more than a decade, Russian authorities have cracked down on politically active and foreign-funded civil society groups, labeling them “foreign agents” and driving them out of legal existence.

Two years of war have created a martial law-like situation, in which any expression deemed disloyal can result in arrest and, often, imprisonment. Almost any criticism of the war, even in private conversation or uttered in a spirit of loyalty to Russia, can now land a person in serious trouble.

The best-known practitioner of nonsystemic opposition was Mr. Navalny, who, after being prohibited from taking part in electoral politics, turned to street protests. His death last month in prison leaves that opposition – who came out in large numbers to mourn at his funeral early this month – without any unifying figure to rally around.

“Navalny was unique in the sense that he became a well-known politician in the absence of public politics,” says Mr. Petrov. “He established a network that’s since been dismantled, and he himself wasn’t able to play much of a role from prison.”

Another factor limiting the possibilities for the opposition is that many of its strongest voices, along with thousands of well-educated opposition supporters, have gone abroad over the past couple of years. Unlike the former Soviet regime, Mr. Putin’s government leaves the door open for those who are dissatisfied to go. They may return as well, though that involves at least implicit acceptance of the status quo.

“The idea of letting all these people leave is to isolate them outside the country. It works,” says Mr. Petrov. “Being abroad, you lose touch; you can’t participate in Russian politics or influence the situation. That’s why Navalny chose to return to Russia [after recovering from poisoning abroad], even though he paid a terrible personal price: because he didn’t want to lose his place as a Russian politician.”

Editor's note: This story has been updated to correct the dates of the presidential election.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

QR Code to How Russian elections became a futile exercise for Putin’s opposition
Read this article in
https://www.csmonitor.com/World/Europe/2024/0313/How-Russian-elections-became-a-futile-exercise-for-Putin-s-opposition
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today
https://www.csmonitor.com/subscribe