Ever More in Russian Elites Want Collective Leadership instead of Personalist Dictatorship, Gallyamov Says

Paul Goble

            Staunton, Aug. 14 – Abbas Gallyamov, a former Putin speechwriter who is now a fierce critic of the Russian president, says that ever more members of Russian elites and maybe eventually even Putin himself would like to see the country move toward a Politburo-style of collective leadership in place of the current personalist dictatorship.

            According to the commentator, “the problem for Russian elites is no longer so much whether they like Putin or not but rather whether it is possible to allow one individual to make decisions on his own if he is seen to be taking steps that threaten the system’s structure” and thus survival (pointmedia.io/story/6a7ed07e75d0d3346a25cb74).

Until recently, Gallyamov continues, “Putin’s monopoly on power provided elites with stability, but now that very monopoly is becoming the main source of risk.” And they are looking to what China has done to avoid the problems that can arise and share decision-making power among members of the top elite.

“After Mao’s death,” he argues, “his successors came to the conclusion that the country could no longer depend on the mental and physical condition of one person,” with “Deng Xiaoping convinced that “the source of the disasters of the Great Leap Forward and the Cultural Revolution lay not just in the personality of Mao but in the excessive concentration of power.”

            Russian elites, many of whom admire China and consider it worthy of emulation, are now thinking the same thing and want to see their country evolve in a similar direction. Among ideas circulating, Gallyamov suggests, is the notion of “merging all ‘patriotic parties’ into a single national party and creating a politburo officially.”

            With such an arrangement, the members of this body would “try to balance Putin” who “of course would remain first among equals but cease being the only indisputable master of the country. Major decisions would collective, literally through official voting. Let Putin have two votes instead of one but the rest should have a vote,” Gallyamov says.

            According to the commentator, Putin likely “will agree to this at some point” because he recognizes that a dead end is approaching. His departure from power is too radical a move, but shifting part of the responsibility for what should be done next can serve as a way out” for Putin.

            As an example of how this would work, Gallyamov says that it is likely that “Putin can’t stop the war by himself, so there must be an arrangement under which others can do it. If that happens, Putin’s pride will suffer less” as he can say he wanted to go on but others around him in the Politburo didn’t agree.