Despite the assurances of the Kremlin spin doctors, if the Russian President goes, the world will not collapse and the country will fall into hell.
We are trying hard to accustom to thought that “no Putin — no Russia”. However, twenty years of stay in power the current President makes you wonder: is it really?
Maybe we can go a day without it?
I understand that at these words many covers disturbing chills. In fact, how we will be without him who is our all, our everywhere, our always; no one who raised the country from its knees, made her a great power, showed the world, primarily the West that Russia is not a cat sneezed, and hoo? And anyway, if Putin, God forbid, of course, will go, the whole world will immediately collapse, and Russia will fall apart.
Or is it and the world did not collapse and the country will not fail?
Let’s try to understand.
For a start, do we need Putin now?
Here, in my opinion, everything is quite simple.
Every President (Prime Minister, Governor General, even authoritarian) has a clearly defined functionality — a task he must accomplish. This can be the development of already defined coordinates, overcoming the crisis or transformation of the country in accordance with the challenges of the new era.
Putin’s task at the time of his arrival to power in 2000 was absolutely clear. He had to minimize the chaos caused by more reforms, to stop universal disintegration, to stabilize the state, social relations, economy, to create a reality where there would be clear new rules of life.
By 2008, this task was basically solved. A new “Putin’s” Russia, quite acceptable to most Russians. Not that she so loved all, but compared to the Bedlam of 1990-ies looked very attractive: the relative order, a decent standard of living, the hope that it will be even better.
This functional stabilization was completed. At the forefront of advanced functionality development.
And here it turned out that the President of Russia, in which “the country has risen from its knees”, this functionality does not understand. It may have played a role known psychological stupor: development requires change, and why change something if everything is fine. At least from the point of view of the President and his entourage.
Moreover, because the reality of it seems to confirm: the financial crisis of 2008, Russia has successfully overcome, the war with Georgia quickly won that demonstrated the growing combat capability of the army, then they formed a common economic space with Belarus and Kazakhstan joined the world trade organization… Putin’s Electoral rating naturally grew, reaching back to 2009 solid 60%.
Really, why was it necessary to change something?
Gradually, however, began to show itself, and another phenomenon: over the impact of the reforms and economies that do not receive new incentives for development, began to slow down. In 2010 Russia’s GDP growth amounted to 4.5% in 2011 and 4.3%, in 2012 this figure was 3.3% and in 2013 only 1.8%. And this at fantastically high at the time oil prices. That is, even the petrodollars no longer helped. Well, after the fall in oil prices and the imposition of sanctions due to the annexation of Crimea, the Russian economy is completely immersed in stagnant, barely five years after rising to 2.3%. Unless, of course, according to Rosstat.
“Stagnation” has now become the most popular word in Russia — whether it is about politics, about Economics, about the actions of the President or Prime Minister. The same faces, the same promises, the same hot air, but in fact nothing changes.
Actually, it feels and Putin himself. He’s already two or three times strongly stated that we need “breakthroughs in all spheres of life.” However, as these breakthroughs to realize, the President is not properly explained. In the end his appeals only responded consumer prices, housing prices, retirement age and the taxes that have indeed made a breakthrough.
Now the President as a “stabilizer” can still maintain the current situation, but unable to translate it into development mode. Its activity capacity is exhausted. You want another politician focused on the future, not maintaining a rotting present.
And now the other side of the same question: will collapse or not collapse?
In the Russian political circles it is popular opinion that Putin maintains a balance between various Kremlin clans. If he goes, will start a “clan war”, which will tear apart the entire country.
It seems to me that this danger is greatly exaggerated. The war between Kremlin clans, of course, is and will be for a long time. However, over the last decade these clans, in a sense, the civilized: they have developed the instinct of self-preservation. No one will heat the other, knowing that it will choke itself. Russian “klenovichi”, of course, selfish, but not stupid. The main bout will still happen “under the carpet”, and everyone, who will encroach on the “common good”, there, under the carpet, and strangle.
It is also suggested that the weakening of the Central government of the national Republic, many of which the Russian population has become a minority can demand independence and Russia will suffer the fate of the Soviet Union.
In my opinion, and this danger is greatly exaggerated. Of course, there are probably such a the head of the national Republic, who would not dream to become a President — to visit the to another country met orchestra and a platoon of honor. And most importantly — to be able to cut the national budget, not looking back on Moscow and did not fear that Putin will remove him from his post as “untrustworthy”.
But now, again, not the 1990-ies. In the national republics it is well understood that today Russia has a strong army, Regardie, FSB. The fee for attempting secession can be very high. No one is inspired by the example of Chechnya or the then current Donbass. So the heads of the republics devote themselves to their dreams, probably, only at night, hiding her face with her blanket so no one thought does not leak out.
And in General we should not think that if Putin leaves, the government in Russia immediately weakened sharply. We have long formed a “collective Putin” in the face of the ruling elite and the middle layer of the bureaucracy. And he was guided by the same instinct of self-preservation would not allow any war, “the Kremlin towers”, or any separatism: reducing the country faces a reduction of income.
By the way, notice that the same “collective Putin” is likely not eager to see him stood still and Putin is a real. The elite seem to begin to guess that without the current President, they will be much better. First, there is no risk of “losing credibility”, which is valuable in itself, and secondly, there is a good chance for the easing of sanctions. And this does not need to abandon the Crimea or the Donbass to take. After all, the conflict between the West and Russia is largely a struggle officious ambitions. None of the parties can not retreat a single step, because they will lose political face. Or that politicians are the same, the electoral rating. But with a new head of state, it will be possible to make some symbolic concessions, settle the conflict — and each of the parties will be able to present it as a victory.
“Collective Putin” such an outcome would suit perfectly. Could again easily “work” in Russia, and to settle in the West, not fearing for their holdings.
Here is the answer to the question, why do we need Putin.
There is no need to Russia and then headed it.
In General, on this platform “power” and “the people” Russia could come to an agreement. To thank the President for his selfless work to give him the order “For merits before Fatherland” the first degree, to put the bust in the courtyard of the house where Putin lived in his childhood, to hang the plaque, you can even rename Baskov lane to the lane of President Putin. And if he wants something in his honor — please, we do not mind.
But all this is purely theoretical arguments.
Vladimir Putin himself to the question, not bothered if he is to be President, clearly said, “No. Otherwise, I would not run this time.”