Posted on 09/14/2004 9:47:41 AM PDT by Luis Gonzalez
President Vladimir Putin has announced radical changes to Russia's democratic institutions that will give the Kremlin greater power than at any time since the fall of the Soviet Union.
Mr Putin effectively negated the right of citizens to elect a regional representative. Instead, he will propose the country's 89 regional governors.
He also announced on Monday that seats in the Duma allocated to single-member constituencies will be replaced with a fully proportional system.
Mr Putin said the changes were vital to boost state authority after the Beslan tragedy, in which hostages were killed when Chechen rebels raided a school.
The move will accord even greater control to his United Russia party, which already has the backing of about two-thirds of the deputies in the Duma.
The announcement, made in an address to regional governors, follows the school siege in southern Russia, which ended with the deaths of more than 300 people, half of them children.
Unfinished security checks have delayed the reopening of the Beslan school. Children had been due to resume classes yesterday, but police had not completed checking security using sniffer dogs and bomb experts. Radio and TV said all Beslan schools should reopen today.
Mr Putin said his initiatives would make Russia safer and easier to govern. Critics said the proposals were further proof that Mr Putin, who has muzzled independent media and turned parliament and government into Kremlin rubber stamps, was rolling back post-Soviet democracy.
"The last link in the system of checks and balances, which has prevented an excessive concentration of power in one pair of hands, is being abolished," the opposition party Yabloko said.
Since coming to power five years ago, Mr Putin has made no secret of his admiration for many aspects of the Soviet system. While he has pursued a pro-Western foreign policy, he has curbed media freedoms and brought down big businessmen who challenged the Kremlin.
He has also set out to curb regional autonomy, a reversal of Boris Yeltsin's policy of giving the regions as much sovereignty "as they could swallow".
If, as seems certain, Mr Putin's measures are passed, the Kremlin will propose regional governors whose appointments will be voted on by regional legislatures. It is unclear what will happen if a Kremlin candidate is rejected.
Few dispute that many regional governors in Russia are corrupt and allied to crooked businessmen and gangsters who helped them win their positions.
Most Russians are unlikely to complain about the changes. But past moves to curb regional power have done little to raise standards. United Russia has a record of ignoring corrupt, even criminal, activity providing the representative is loyal to the Kremlin.
Dmitry Oreshkin, head of the Mercator analytical group, said: "In reality the governors are not very well controlled by the electorate. But it is counter-productive to take the initiative away from the people. The first shoots of democracy are being trampled on. This is a move towards Soviet times."
Vladimir Rimsky, an analyst with the Indem think tank, said it was all part of Mr Putin's policy of strengthening central bureaucracy at the expense of local control. But he doubted whether the moves would make events such as the school attack less likely.
"The administration in Moscow is unable to see all that is happening in the regions. The Beslan events prove that," he said. "Such a vertical power structure cannot be effective in fighting terrorism because it removes all local initiative and requires a long chain of approvals for any decision."
Other initiatives include creating a unified anti-terrorism agency and appointing associate Dmitry Kozak to oversee the northern Caucasus, which covers Chechnya, Ingushetia and Northern Ossetia.
- Telegraph, Reuters
What in blazes is going on here? APole has one take, CWOJackson has another.
Yeah, BUT---
What about the theory that 'the lowest possible unit of governance should resolve problems,' which would seem to imply a localized control system is ideal?
Are you saying that Russia (old Soviet Union) is incapable of operating under that theory?
Lincoln certainly didn't bother too much with Constitutional restrictions in prosecuting the Civil War--and in illegally jailing certain critics of same.
Wilson ignored the hoi polloi when he marched the doughboys off to the European slaughterhouse in WWI.
And FDR didn't mind a few large lies which were helpful in bringing the USA into WWII. Although they didn't work, it is STILL speculated that the Pearl Harbor thing was 'benignly neglected' by FDR's White House while it was still preventable.
The law applies perfectly - most of functions can be done best locally, some at higher level and some in the center. In case of Russia some powers were too local and Putin is moving them to the optimum level.
What is "the lowest possible unit of governance" depends on circumstances, national culture and nature of problems. Putin initiative to arm local people for self-defense (not much mentioned in Western media) is moving some functions of government down to the governed. Teachers and parents carying concealed weapons will be much harder to victimize.
But is Vladimir Putin a Fidel Castro or is he an Augusto Pinochet?
From what I can see, things are pointing more to the latter than they are to the former - reference his economic moves (flat tax among them). Yeltsin did some good things, but he also had some serious problems, and I think his drinking DID interfere with his ability to govern - his only saving grace being he was better than the Communists on the one hand and folks like Zhirinovsky on the other.
Putin's not an ideal option, and things bear watching, but I do not think the Soviet Union is making a comeback. I think the comparisons to Pinochet are more accurate and will proceed on that assumption.
I think that Putin is much closer to De Gaulle than Pinochet.
De Gaulle's far more socialist than Putin. I don't recall de Gaulle passing a flat tax or anything of that nature.
The Russian version of the "Patriot" act is a tad more "in your face" than the American version. They lack that finesse that the pols in this country have.
A "tad" more?
This is to the Patriot Act what cannibalism is to sushi.
I said a "tad" tongue in cheek. The Patroit act is just one more step in a long journey toward tyranny.
Jefferson foretold it. Nothing historically catastrophic has happened.
Some places it happens slowly, (here) some places it happens quickly, Russia. In Germany and Japan in the 20s and 30s it went the whole distance in one generation.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.