On Monday, at least part of the answer emerged to the question
of what the future holds for Russia. By all appearances, it is
going to become an official energy conglomerate - Goodbye Russia;
Hello, Gazpromia.
Petro-diplomacy has been the prominent feature of Russia's foreign
policy since the rise in oil prices. It looks like any attempt at a
distinction between business and politics will now be lost.
Specifically, the hand-picked successor to Russian President
Vladimir Putin has emerged as the front-runner in the March
presidential elections. The four parties in the Russian Duma that
support Mr. Putin, the largest of which is United Russia, this week
announced their support for Dimitri Medvedev, chairman of the
Russian energy giant Gazprom.
Mr. Putin beamed in support of the choice of his 42-year-old
protege, who also serves as first deputy prime minister in the
Putin government and previously served as Mr. Putin's chief of
staff. Mr. Medvedev also was campaign chairman for the Putin
election campaign in 2000 (not that there was much to campaign
about after the first Putin term in office as he sought
re-election).
Just like his predecessor, Boris Yeltsin, got to choose his
successor, so Mr. Putin now has had the opportunity to choose his.
Mr. Putin, meanwhile, still has the option of moving to the
position of prime minister, from which he could dominate the
political scene. In any event, he undoubtedly will not fade from
politics, and reportedly favors the suggestive title of "national
leader" (although no such office actually exists in the Russian
constitution). It does bring to mind, however, characters like Kim
Jong-il or Ayatollah Khomenei.
Last week's column in this space bemoaned the death knell for
Russian democracy, and Mr. Medvedev's announcement will not do much
to change that sentiment. Russians like strong leaders and they
like predictability. Mr. Putin has offered both. His hand will be
felt for years to come.
It is true, of course, that politicians elsewhere like to pick
their successors, too. In the United States, for instance,
presidents routinely endorse their vice president for the next
election, but after the election, they are expected to fade from
the scene and usually do so scrupulously, as did Ronald Reagan. But
victory is by no means certain. Walter Mondale did not succeed
Jimmy Carter, Dan Quayle did not succeed George H.W. Bush and Al
Gore failed to succeed Bill Clinton.
Mr. Medvedev has not, so far, impressed anyone as the kind of
leader who would strike out on his own. Part of Mr. Putin's St.
Petersburg coterie and a corporate lawyer by profession, he holds
the powerful position of chairman of the Russian energy giant due
to his relationship with Mr. Putin. He does not have an independent
power base, and is not backed by the Russian powerbrokers in the
business community, or, as best is known, by the secret services.
And he is young by the standards of the office he will be ascending
to in March (unless stopped by unforeseen circumstances). If and
when elected, he will be the youngest Russian leader since the
28-year-old Nicholas II's accession to the throne in 1896 - which
may not be a comparison Mr. Medvedev is that keen on given what
happened to Czar Nicholas.
Now, were he able to set an independent course, Mr. Medvedev might
be more amenable to the West than Mr. Putin. Though presiding over
Russia's national energy company, he has at least stated a
preference for private over state ownership. At this year's meeting
in Davos, he gave a speech that was surprisingly pro-market and
conciliatory toward the West. How far he will be able to act on his
own instincts is doubtful though - or indeed how much power the
presidency will retain after Mr. Putin makes his next move.
Whatever the ins and outs of Russian politics, the priorities of
the United States and Europe should remain constant. We should
continue to emphasize the value of democratic institutions and
support those in Russia that continue to believe in them. And as
previously stated, we should deny Russia a seat at the table in
organizations where only genuine democracies meet. Also, it would
be a really good idea for European nations to rethink their energy
dependence on Russian oil and gas. Of course, in the future they
will have just one phone call to make when they want to discuss
energy cutoffs - and that will be to the Kremlin.
Helle Dale is
director of the Douglas and Sarah Allison Center for Foreign Policy
Studies at the Heritage Foundation.
First appeared in the Washington Times