I have good news and bad news, but since I don't know which is which, I will convey them in their logical order. First, the name of Russia's next president is now known. Second, his name is Dmitriy Rogozin, the Motherland Party's most famous politician.
Naturally, everything can change in the future, including Russia's constitutional norms. But for now, Rogozin is the only Russian politician who has both genuine prospects of winning and the corresponding, albeit not publicly stated, ambition to do so.
There were many more candidates in 1997, three years before the 2000 presidential election, a veritable parade of names representing different sections of the nomenklatura and political spectrum: Victor Chernomyrdin, Grigoriy Yavlinskiy, Alexander Lebed, Yuri Luzhkov, Boris Nemtsov, Vladimir Zhirinovsky. Not all of them had realistic chances, but every one of them had the backing of a specific political force.
And now? None of these former candidates remains a serious political contender, although some are still quite young. Nor is a presidential candidate likely to be found among the regional governors, or among the leaders of the "old" or "new" parties. Except Rogozin. Why?
Russian voters tend to vote according to three main sentiments: anti-liberal, anti-oligarchic and anti-Western (more precisely, anti-US). It is Rogozin who articulates all three in the most spectacular, persistent, and public manner. In addition, Rogozin is a pro-Putin politician, which is also very important to the bulk of voters, and he has managed to confirm this not only verbally, but also bureaucratically, by his work as the president's special representative for Kaliningrad Oblast affairs.
Prior to Motherland's sensational victory in last year's general election, Rogozin wanted the post of minister of foreign affairs. But now he is playing for higher stakes. He will most likely nominate himself during the 2008 presidential election campaign, even if the Kremlin nominates another successor, although naturally he will try to ensure that he is anointed.
So far, things are going extremely well for Rogozin. He is young, vigorous, charismatic, and educated, a patriot advocating a strong state. His electoral platform will remain the most promising in the immediate future, particularly since United Russia lacks the courage and flexibility to embrace contemporary Russian conservatism. At this point Rogozin is the most freethinking and freedom-loving politician in Russia.
For example, Russia's most urgent foreign policy problems are its relations with the US and the conflict over South Ossetia with neighboring Georgia. Rogozin very clearly articulates his positions on these issues, which are in variance with official policy -- at least the one presented to the public. He reacts to Russia's domestic problems -- widespread poverty, the situation in Chechnya, the fight against oligarchs -- just as clearly, promptly and explicitly, while most other politicians either keep silent or mumble incoherently.
The so-called liberals are entirely invisible, and nobody cares about their opinion anyway. The Communists attract attention only by their internal squabbles. The nationalist warhorse Zhirinovsky looks old and lifeless compared to Rogozin. The United Russia leaders are maneuvering between the president's contradictory remarks.
The problem for United Russia is that Rogozin is already a master at their game. He remains a firm Putin supporter, skillfully combining criticism of virtually all aspects of Russia's foreign and domestic policy with a loyal -- but not glorifying -- attitude toward the president himself.
In essence, Rogozin is currently the only real political orator in Russia -- a highly advantageous position, particularly in an era of mediocrity. People have recently compared him to Georgia's President Mikhail Saakashvili -- whether as an insult or as a compliment. Either intuitively or rationally, people feel that Rogozin, like Saakashvili, wants to assume the main post, is prepared to do so, and would start solving the state's territorial problems immediately.
Parallels between Rogozin and Saakashvili appear even more logical in view of the current situation in the Caucasus. It is increasingly likely that Saakashvili's policy is aimed at instigating bloodshed in South Ossetia or Abkhazia and putting all the blame on Russia -- a strategy that appears designed to bring the US to the region eventually. Against the backdrop of Russia's completely ambiguous policy in the Caucasus, this will give Rogozin an opportunity to remain at the top of public opinion polls.
If the next presidential election in Russia were held this year, and if no decision were made to banish him from Russians' TV screens, there can be little doubt that Rogozin would win. Details will change by 2008, but not trends, and Rogozin has mastered these trends better than anyone else. In fact, he is the only person who has mastered them so far.
It can be dangerous to start one's electoral campaign before other candidates, but sometimes if one starts much earlier than everyone else, serious rivals never appear.
Vitaliy Tretyakov, a Russian political analyst, is a former editor-in-chief of Nezavisimaya Gazeta.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
The gutting of Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) by US President Donald Trump’s administration poses a serious threat to the global voice of freedom, particularly for those living under authoritarian regimes such as China. The US — hailed as the model of liberal democracy — has the moral responsibility to uphold the values it champions. In undermining these institutions, the US risks diminishing its “soft power,” a pivotal pillar of its global influence. VOA Tibetan and RFA Tibetan played an enormous role in promoting the strong image of the US in and outside Tibet. On VOA Tibetan,
Sung Chien-liang (宋建樑), the leader of the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) efforts to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Lee Kun-cheng (李坤城), caused a national outrage and drew diplomatic condemnation on Tuesday after he arrived at the New Taipei City District Prosecutors’ Office dressed in a Nazi uniform. Sung performed a Nazi salute and carried a copy of Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf as he arrived to be questioned over allegations of signature forgery in the recall petition. The KMT’s response to the incident has shown a striking lack of contrition and decency. Rather than apologizing and distancing itself from Sung’s actions,
US President Trump weighed into the state of America’s semiconductor manufacturing when he declared, “They [Taiwan] stole it from us. They took it from us, and I don’t blame them. I give them credit.” At a prior White House event President Trump hosted TSMC chairman C.C. Wei (魏哲家), head of the world’s largest and most advanced chip manufacturer, to announce a commitment to invest US$100 billion in America. The president then shifted his previously critical rhetoric on Taiwan and put off tariffs on its chips. Now we learn that the Trump Administration is conducting a “trade investigation” on semiconductors which
By now, most of Taiwan has heard Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an’s (蔣萬安) threats to initiate a vote of no confidence against the Cabinet. His rationale is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)-led government’s investigation into alleged signature forgery in the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) recall campaign constitutes “political persecution.” I sincerely hope he goes through with it. The opposition currently holds a majority in the Legislative Yuan, so the initiation of a no-confidence motion and its passage should be entirely within reach. If Chiang truly believes that the government is overreaching, abusing its power and targeting political opponents — then