WorldWatch:Putin's pyrrhic victory

Lawrence Alfred Powell, Contributor

Vladimir Putin's landslide victory in last week's Russian presidential election has been a cause for both celebration and concern. For his United Russia (UR) party supporters, the 'good news' is that in spite of last December's large Moscow anti-Putin protests, he has nevertheless managed to win 64 per cent of the national vote in one of the most thoroughly monitored elections in history.

The nearest contender, Communist Party candidate Gennady Zyuganov, received an anaemic 17 per cent, with independent Mikhail Prokhorov at eight per cent, Liberal Democrat Vladimir Zhirinovsky at six per cent, and Just Russia candidate Sergey Mironov at four per cent. Owing to the large victory margin, no further run-off election is required.

Putin now finds himself firmly back in the saddle as president for at least the next six years, rather than relegated to the background as shadow prime minister. What the majority of Russians apparently see in Putin and United Russia is continued protection of economic stability and national strength in troubled global times.

Putin, who succeeded 1990s president Boris Yeltsin, had enjoyed wide popularity as president from 2000 to 2008. He then receded to the background role of prime minister over the next four years, while Dmitry Medvedev served as formal president - but with obvious continued behind-the-scenes 'guidance' from Putin.

Now, with Medvedev's constitutional amendment to permit additional presidential terms in place, plus last week's election victory, Putin can presumably look forward to at least one more term in office, possibly two.

The 'bad news' for Putin is that this election victory came at a heavy political cost, including substantial loss of confidence and legitimacy. His four-year 'shadow president' arrangement with Medvedev, plus the further system-rigging to extend presidential tenure, plus his not-so-welcome December announcement that he would return yet again as the candidate on the UR ticket, struck many as blatant, arrogant power hoarding on his part, more reminiscent of past communist dictators and czars than of 21st-century Russian democracy.

Accusations of widespread fraud

In reaction to these blatant power-clinging moves, beginning in December 2011, the opposition parties mobilised a series of large anti-Putin rallies in Moscow, claiming there had been widespread fraud in the parliamentary elections, and demanding that they be rerun.

The United States Department of State and the international media quickly chimed in, fanning the flames of discontent. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton pointed an accusing finger at "troubling practices" during the December parliamentary vote, inveighing that "the Russian people, like people everywhere, deserve the right to have their voices heard and their votes counted".

A scathing report by election monitors from the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), combined with amateur video of alleged election violations posted on the Internet, raised further doubts about fairness of the parliamentary vote. The unfolding scenario began to look a lot like previous 'colour revolutions' attempted in the Ukraine, Georgia, Kyrgyzstan, Iran and, most recently, Libya - thus a potential threat to the regime.

Opposition forces had fully expected Putin to react in a harsh, authoritarian manner, thereby adding fuel to their demands that he was anti-democratic and must go. But to their surprise, the anti-Putin rallies were tolerated as democratic free expression and peaceful assembly. Putin openly embraced the protests and opposition complaints as positive signs Russian democracy was maturing as it should in the post-Soviet era. He encouraged additional reforms to help democratise the system, and proposed that steps be taken to immediately reduce fraud and improve election transparency.

The most important of these transparency steps was a nationwide webcam project, at a cost of US$447 million, which installed two surveillance cameras in each of 91,700 Russian polling stations in order to ensure continuous live online broadcast of voting in the March 2012 presidential contest.

Up and working in time for the election, this effectively transformed Russia's backward election-monitoring system into one that independent observers hailed as the 'best in the world'. On seeing the system, a Bulgarian monitor commented: "Russia has opened a new page in history today; there is a broadcast of the Russian elections all over the world."

Camera Blind spots

Similarly an Italian observer noted: "Judging by the results of our visits to the polling stations, we can make a statement that the Russian video-monitoring system exceeds all international standards. It is wonderful that this complicated election mechanism is working."

Unfortunately, even with this elaborate system in place, old election habits die hard, and not all fraud can be caught on camera. So last week's presidential elections, too, have been marred by further accusations of widespread voting violations, again coming from leaders of the opposition parties and OSCE monitors.

Most pre-election surveys showed 60-plus per cent for Putin, exit polls also had him at that level, and his final tallied vote was in the 60s, with the nearest rival at 17 per cent - so it is unlikely that they can actually uncover massive fraud sufficient to alter the outcome.

But perceptions of impropriety matter, and in the wake of these protracted struggles, Putin has technically won the election, but with weakened legitimacy in the eyes of a significant portion of Russian society.

Lawrence Alfred Powell is anhonorary research fellow at the Centre of Methods and Policy Application in the Social Sciences (COMPASS) at the University of Auckland, New Zealand, and former polling director for the Centre for Leadership and Governance at UWI, Mona. Email feedback to columns@gleanerjm.com and lapowell.auckland@ymail.com.