OPINION> Commentary
|
OPINION> Commentary
|
|
Russia's unique leadership idea
By Yu Sui (China Daily)
Updated: 2008-07-16 07:38
It has been two months since president-turned Prime Minister Vladimir Putin, who is also chairman of the party in power United Russian, and President Dmitry Medvedev formed a "dual-core team" of Russian leadership. Observers worldwide have been watching closely the efficiency and prospects of this team. As the product of an extraordinary time the Medvedev-Putin pairing represents a number of philosophical qualities. The first is unity of oppositeness. With eight years of experience as the Russian head of state and still at his prime, Putin could have won another term had it not been ruled out by the Constitution and he was left with the second best way to ensure he continues to play a special role in state politics. The Medvedev-Putin pairing is the brainchild of Putin's team and Medvedev is in his present position as Putin's double. Their current relationship resembles that between the commander and political commissar in the Soviet military of yesteryear. Medvedev is the bona fide head of state while Putin the "spiritual leader" of the nation. The "dual-core" power structure somehow reminds people of the two-headed eagle featured in the national emblem and the theory of unity of oppositeness. The actual practice today shows that the government is somewhat more powerful than before, including managing some powerful offices and local government officials. This will replace the past particularity of a weak government headed by a super-powerful president with a situation characterized by the "strong combination" of a powerful president and powerful government. It means United Russia is turning from a party of power to a ruling party while the presidency is in a way evolving into a half-president, half-parliament and cabinet system. The second is duality of things. The Medvedev-Putin pairing first accomplished the smooth arrangement of top national leaders according to Putin's design. The second step the new power structure is taking and will maintain in the future is the practice of sustaining the president's authority as prescribed by the Constitution while allowing Putin to play his special role. There has not been much controversy as far as these two steps are concerned.
The third step will be an examination of the results of the first two to see if they will remain stable for a long time, what loopholes they have and what problems they may cause. To this the assessment will differ markedly from one point of view to another. The Medvedev-Putin pairing faces one of three prospects. One is privity and smoothness, which is exactly what they hope for and more likely to realize. Another is reluctance and making do, which cannot be totally ruled out since their cooperation could bring to unforeseen obstacles. Then there is breakdown and breakup, which seems quite impossible. The reason is simple: Putin would not pick and support someone he is prepared to overthrow, because that is not in Russia's national interest. The Medvedev-Putin pairing needs time to fine-tune their teamwork and things can go either way during that time. Everything is either conventional or otherwise, and it is usually the former that counts. The third is necessity and contingency. It is not correct to say that Boris Yeltsin achieved nothing during his eight or nine years as Russian president, but the country's general condition and especially its economy were in really bad shape back then. Someone capable of leading the country out of a slump will emerge from a nation such as Russia when circumstances warrant it, as does the emergence of someone like Putin, though his emergence itself is a contingency. The same can be said of Medvedev as well. Russia's rejuvenation after years of efforts to put things back in order following the period of chaos caused by the breakdown of the Soviet Union was inevitable. Yeltsin "destroyed" the soviet-style socialism and threw the nation into years of "chaos" as a result. His successor Putin spent eight years bringing Russia out of the "mess" and back in "order" and now the country is regaining strength. That has come to be known as the "Putin era" and the Medvedev-Putin pairing will carry on the mission that Putin started. Russia is a nation in transformation, which is inevitable in that it has abandoned the Soviet-style socialism without converting to the European-US-style social model and shares some of China's reform concepts, but its format is different from China's. Putin once said Russia's thinking "combines organically the common values of the humankind with Russia's time-tested traditional values". This is in a way inevitable, too. The fourth is generality and particularity. Russia normally follows a general presidential election process but each winner's background and condition were different. Medvedev succeeded the Russian presidency in a situation totally different from Putin's when he became president of Russia. Where Putin dumped the mess left by Yeltsin and started anew, Medvedev found himself marching ahead with Putin on the path chosen by his predecessor. For Medvedev it is "following Putin's rule" whereas what Putin did is continuation, improvement and completion. Since the previous president could not achieve perfect score and left behind some problems, his successor must make policy adjustments and corrections, which does not mean Medvedev will do anything against Putin personally but that both of them will shoulder the task. The Russian prime minister's first and foremost responsibility is the economy, as is generally the case throughout the world. For Putin, he is also expected to have a bigger say than usual on security strategy and foreign relations because of his experience and international clout. That is something former Russian prime ministers did not have and has been confirmed repeatedly by Putin's frequent trips overseas and the way he spoke about international hot issues. The fifth is commonality and individuality. Putin and Medvedev share something in common - they both shoulder the responsibility of directing Russia's rejuvenation. Meanwhile, they each have his own personal style and character as well, though that does not negate their commonality. It is not hard to understand why some media entities are so obsessed with the differences and disagreements between Putin and Medvedev. For instance, the Associated Press noted that Medvedev mentioned economic and democratic development after he was sworn in, whereas Putin said in his brief statement on the same occasion that Russian people have many opportunities to protect the nation's development path and sovereignty. It sounded as if one of them was soft while the other tough but this "discovery" missed the bull's eye, but actually they go together. If a nation's leaders always sing the same tunes there must be something amiss in their leadership craft. The author is a researcher with the Research Center of Contemporary World (China Daily 07/16/2008 page9) |
