OP-ED: Vladimir Putin

Under the chaotic but liberating rule of Boris Yeltsin, the oligarchs made hay. Under Vladimir Putin, a former KGB official, it has been the bureaucrats’ turn to plunder the state. Executive power prevails. Parliament is supine, the judiciary is a political tool and the media is cowed. Business depends on the Kremlin’s favor and the regions have been brought to heel. After his erratic predecessor, Putin offered stability founded on authoritarian rule. His personal popularity and high oil and gas prices left that contract intact for over a decade.

Over the weekend, however, it was fatally undermined by demonstrations across the country. Unchallenged rule had made Putin arrogant. First, he announced in September that an agreement for him to return to the presidency next year, succeeding his puppet, Dmitry Medvedev, had been reached long ago. Second, last week’s parliamentary elections were rigged in favor of the prime minister’s rubber-stamp creation, United Russia. That assumption of impunity led to Saturday’s nationwide protests, the biggest of which, in Moscow, attracted around 50,000 people. Putin’s popularity is falling and, in the current global economic climate, the high petroleum prices on which his corrupt polity relies look under threat.

The tsar is not about to fall, but his legitimacy has been dented — not least by the Internet. Further demonstrations have been called for Christmas Eve and there is talk of boycotting the presidential election next March. Putin’s reaction has been to blame foreign powers. Tighter political control and increased public spending may follow. But to win back opponents he must do better than that. Failure to liberalize what has been called his "soft Bonapartism” will leave Russia even more sullen — and less stable. Saturday marked the end of an era.