Paul
Goble
Staunton, September 10 – Even as
Russians debate whether Aleksey Navalny won by losing, it is already clear that
three groups lost the Russian revolution: the KPRF which suffered its worst
defeat ever, the Russian people whose political alienation led to an
extraordinarily low turnout, and the Kremlin itself which demonstrated its
incapacity to mobilize the population.
Given the focus on Navalny,
relatively few people have noticed that the September 8 voting delivered a
crushing defeat to the Communist Party of the Russian Federation (KPRF) which,
outside of the North Caucasus, did far worse than it has ever done since the
end of Soviet times (forum-msk.org/material/politic/10038839.html).
Gennady Zyuganov’s party, the
Forum-MSK.org site pointed out, failed “even in those regions which until relatively
recently had been considered its base,” a development likely to lead to new
challenges to Zyuganov’s team, possible splits in the party more generally, and
a new political alignment altogether.
That is especially likely, the site
continued, because in Moscow, Navalny won more votes than those from the KPRF,
Just Russia, Yabloko and LDPR taken together.
And it notes that “an organization committee of a new (united) communist
party has already been registered” and is preparing to hold a congress.
Zyuganov, who has often proved tone
deaf to political realities, appears to be unintentionally hastening that day
with a series of outrageous comments that only underscore how out of touch he
and his comrades are with those such a party might attract (nakanune.ru/news/2013/9/9/22323151/
and nakanune.ru/news/2013/9/9/22323142/).
The second big loser in these
elections was the Russian people, most of whom showed their alienation from
politics as such by choosing not to vote at all. Had participation been higher and had those
additional voters backed opposition figures, there are very few places in the
country where United Russia, the party of power, would have won.
The most charitable reading of such
high levels of non-participation is that the ordinary people are not unhappy
with what the incumbents are doing, but a more honest one, several commentators
suggest, is that large numbers of Russians do not yet view elections as a means
to express their views (specletter.com/vybory/2013-09-09/chisto-ili-chisto-konkretno.html).
Such widespread attitudes, of
course, provide a real opening for opponents of the regime, but to win over
such Russians, opposition figures – and it will be individuals more than
parties which are largely discredited – will have to demonstrate that they can
deliver the goods in those places where they did win and ensure that other
Russians learn about that.
That struggle, one that is likely to
center on places far from Moscow like Yekaterinburg and Petrozavodsk where the
opposition did win, will not be an easy one.
The powers that be can be expected to try to torpedo efforts by the new
victors and even more to ensure that few beyond those two cities can see what
victorious opposition figures can do.
And the third loser in this week’s
Russian elections was the Kremlin itself.
Despite its deployment of all its political resources, legal and
otherwise, the party of power was not able to ensure that its preferred mayoral
candidate won big in Moscow or that its candidates and the party won convincing
victories everywhere.
United Russia’s “victory” was thus a
hollow one because it showed that even those millions of Russians not attracted
to the current opposition figures are no longer backers of the regime. Valery Morozov, a commentator for Snob.ru, says
they want “new alternatives,” something the opposition might be able to supply
but the Kremlin almost by definition cannot (snob.ru/profile/23916/blog/64929).
In the absence of a new opposition
leader, the Kremlin may be able to coast for a time, but its energy is
dissipating. And Sunday’s elections show
if nothing else that “Russia is waiting for a new force, a new alternative to
power.” What that in turn means is that
the Kremlin at best won a Pyrrhic victory this time around.
No comments:
Post a Comment