From Putin with love
Peter Hoskin 2:16pm
So, Putin’s protégé Dmitry Medvedev scored an overwhelming – and very much expected – victory in the Russian Presidential elections. Was it a fair result? It seems unlikely. The chairman of a European delegation sent to observe the contest has already said that: “The results of the presidential elections … are a reflection of the will of an electorate whose democratic potential was, unfortunately, not tapped.”
These concerns have been echoed by the German Chancellor, among others. (No such audacity from Gordon Brown – he’s already dispatched his letter of congratulation).
In the end, though, the protests won’t change a thing. The question now is of whether Medvedev will divert from the Putin school of governance. Will he usher in – as USA Today puts it – “a return of lost democratic freedoms and a dialing back of Putin’s Cold War rhetoric”?
It’s a difficult one to call. That Putin is still heavily involved in Russian politics – in his new role of Prime Minister – doesn’t bode well. And neither does Medvedev’s remark that his policies will be "a direct continuation of that path which is being carried out by President Putin". On the other hand, the new President’s been making use of “liberal language” over the past few weeks.
Maybe we’ll just have to reserve judgement. But – with the dubious way in which he achieved his victory – Medvedev certainly hasn’t got off to a great start.
Previous
Comments
Max Kaye
March 3rd, 2008 5:32pmBrown, not having the guts to stand for election, would hardly criticise a flawed poll.
Oscar Miller
March 3rd, 2008 8:20pmLooks like Brown's Labour party is deeply jealous of Vladimir's control of the Russian media. Apparently they can't stand David Cameron being allowed interviews on the Today programme. Dawn Butler has written a public letter of complaint to the BBC because they think they were too nice to Dave talking about prison reform on today's Today programme. (see Three Line Whip for full story). Labour clearly believes they are entitled to rule the airwaves. This truly is Stalin meets Mr Bean.
Herbert Thornton
March 3rd, 2008 9:46pmCriticisms of the Russian election make very interesting reading.
The election is said to have "more the character of a plebiscite" than a proper democratic election. There are allegations that "bias in the state media made the contest unequal", combined with a grudging acknowledgement that the result did "overall reflect the will of the electorate." There is a complaint that parties or candidates had "uneven access" to the media. And there is an especially circumlocutary assertion that the results "are a reflection of the will of an electorate whose democratic potential was, unfortunately, not tapped." - whatever that means.
Having considered all that, perhaps we should ask ourselves if British elections are now any better. The plebiscite jibe seems a bit inapt, considering that in Britain, even when a plebiscite's promised, as over the E.U., it's not allowed (unless perhaps this week's Commons motion will compel the government to hold one.) And can it be honestly said that Britain has no bias in the media in respect of political parties? Or that Britain gives all parties "equal access" to the media? To answer that, it's necessary only to consider whether there is bias against the BNP and whether the BNP is given equal media access. In the British equivalent of Russian State Broadcasting - i.e. the BBC - there's more than bias - there's constant demonisation of the BNP, and the idea of giving the BNP more media access is treated as unthinkable - and the rest of the media are not much different. (Are you listening, Fraser?)
As for the idea of "tapping the democratic potential of an electorate" I recall reading that in the last election the Labour Party were returned to power on the strength of the votes of - hold your breath - something like 21% of the population that was eligible to vote. If that doesn't "fail to tap democratic potential" then what does? I notice that the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe at least acknowledes that Medvedyev "will have a solid mandate given to him by the majority of Russians". That certainly can't be said of the present British government.
I think that most of the criticism of the Russian elections is hypocritical.