Russian political scientist - about Ulyukaev's hope, Kadyrov's pacification and Putin's pause

For some six months, the main memes on the Russian political agenda have become “request for change” and “image of the future”, which were well known before only to readers of the Zavtra newspaper. The well-known historian, political scientist and publicist Valery Solovey spoke in an interview with Realnoe Vremya about what fills these memes with content, namely about the increasing political activity of citizens, the confusion of the elites, and the hidden function of Ramzan Kadyrov.

Appeals from the regions were left to chance: react as you wish

Valery Dmitrievich, you recently wrote on your Twitter that the situation in the country is being shaken up not by a conspiracy, but by “stupidity and methodologists.” Apparently, they meant the "Shchedrovites" and their main public representative Sergei Kiriyenko? What exactly were the mistakes made by the presidential administration under him?

Yes, they meant advisers close to Kiriyenko from the group of “methodologists”. According to the general opinion (by the general opinion I mean the opinion of Moscow political experts and people close to the administration of the President of the Russian Federation), they failed to determine the correct political line of conduct and made a number of missteps. Associated, for example, with the reaction to the events of March 26 and June 12 and, in general, the reaction to the Navalny phenomenon. Do you remember, say, a video in which Navalny is compared to Hitler, or a song by Alice Vox, in which an appeal is made to schoolchildren not to go to rallies, but “start with yourself”. It is clear that the legs in this case grew out of the administration. And all this worked to the benefit of Alexei Anatolyevich. I'm not talking about more serious things, when requests from the regions with a request to suggest how they should react to Navalny's upcoming actions were actually left to chance: react as you wish. This is despite the fact that the vast majority of Russian regions (Tatarstan is an exception in this case) need an understanding of the Kremlin's position and clear instructions.

This is one part of the problem. The second is that people who are tightly integrated into the presidential administration are giving a lower and lower estimate of its ability to solve problems that confront the country and specifically the Kremlin. And there is some contradiction here, because personally they rate Sergei Kiriyenko quite highly. But at the same time, they note that, at least until the summer of this year, he was not able to establish an effective work of the administration. Perhaps this was due to internal opposition. Not everything was fine there, he had conflicts with other prominent apparatchiks. Either he took a long time to get used to, or the point is that when he agreed to go into administration, there was one situation in the country, and now, starting from the early spring of this year, there has been a political revival. That is, a different situation has developed, and it was still necessary to comprehend it, understand what was happening, and propose how to deal with it.

"It was an 'offer you can't refuse', but Kiriyenko was probably promised a reward if he did his job effectively, that is, successfully ran the presidential campaign." Photo kremlin.ru

- So, Kiriyenko was invited to this position? Didn't he really want her?

It was "an offer you can't refuse," but Kiriyenko was probably promised a reward if he did his job effectively, that is, successfully ran the presidential campaign. What kind of reward, I do not know, but you can guess that we are talking about a post in the government. Maybe about the position of the head of the cabinet. Indeed, for the head of Rosatom, the transition to the position of deputy head of the presidential administration is a loss of status, independence and a significant complication of life.

The elite is accumulating tension, discontent and fear

The trial of the former Minister of Economic Development of Russia Alexei Ulyukaev has begun, in which the defendant has already accused the head of Rosneft, Igor Sechin, of provoking a bribe. What else do you think we can hear about this trial?

In fact, we haven't heard anything interesting yet. For political Moscow, Ulyukaev's statement is no secret - this scenario was discussed long before the trial. More precisely, not a script, but the background of events.

And I think that nothing else awaits us. Ulyukaev, of course, will not reveal any Kremlin secrets, because for him this is fraught with a worsening of the situation. I think he still hopes that his article will be reclassified to a less serious one, and he will receive a suspended sentence. Or it will be released under the planned amnesty on the occasion of the centenary of the October Revolution. But the fact that there will be no acquittal is absolutely certain.

- It will be a great irony of fate if it comes out on the occasion of the centenary of October.

Well, in Russia everything is already permeated not even with irony, but with the grotesque. Look at the story of Poklonskaya - it's something Kafkaesque. Or rather, Gogol, Saltykov-Shchedrin.

“I think that nothing else awaits us. Ulyukayev, of course, will not reveal any Kremlin secrets, because for him this is fraught with a worsening of the situation. Photo iz.ru

How would you comment on Aleksey Venediktov's suggestion that Sergey Chemezov is behind Ulyukaev's statement?

Yes, anyone can stand. In general, Alexei Alekseevich has a sound idea. Chemezov and Sechin are opponents. And if they are opponents, then Chemezov, as an influential person, can somehow support Ulyukaev so that life does not seem like honey to Igor Ivanovich. But even if Chemezov is behind Ulyukaev's statement, this does not mean that the verdict will be acquittal. The prosecution will get its way, there is no doubt about it. Ulyukaev will definitely not be able to leave the courtroom with a clean, unsullied reputation. It is quite possible to write over the Russian court, as over Dante's hell: "Abandon hope, everyone who enters here." This is just such a hopeless place.

All the fuss will be around what exactly Ulyukaev will receive - imprisonment, a suspended sentence or an amnesty.

That is, about some tectonic shifts, about the "split of the elites", as Dmitry Gudkov suggested, this court does not tell us?

There is no split. A split in the elites is when different groups of the elite see differently how to build a strategy for the development of the country and society, and not when they fight for resources. A split in the Russian elite will arise in one single case - when very powerful pressure will be exerted on the central government from below in the form of popular demonstrations. That's when the elite will have doubts about its political future and there will be different options for this future.

- Can foreign political pressure split it?

No, he can not. It can cause - and is already causing - growing tension. But this does not mean that any of them, let alone any group, will dare to openly oppose Putin if he decides to go to the polls. This is absolutely out of the question.

So far, quantitative rather than qualitative changes are taking place in the Russian elite. There is an accumulation of tension, discontent and fear. The latter is caused by the clause in the US sanctions law, which involves investigating the connections of parastatal structures of oligarchs with the Kremlin. And there, not only the oligarchs themselves, but also members of their families fall under the law. This is what they are very afraid of. But these are moods, emotions. There are no actions.

“It does two things. The first is to maintain stability in Chechnya and maintain stability in the North Caucasus. He is the personal guarantor of stability in this region. And the second is to act as a support for the regime in the event of mass unrest.” Photo kremlin.ru

“We will face many local protests that will gradually merge into a nationwide one”

- What role does Ramzan Kadyrov play in the Russian elite, who is already there was a lot, and recently it has become even more?

It performs two functions. First, maintain stability in Chechnya and maintain stability in the North Caucasus. He is the personal guarantor of stability in this region. And the second is to act as a support for the regime in the event of mass unrest.

- Unrest in Moscow, you mean?

If the unrest begins, they are likely to take on a nationwide character. That is, they can cover several cities.

When he, say, talks about his key role in the "Crimean Spring" (as it is claimed in social networks), is this agreed with the Kremlin?

Hardly. He considers himself a strong independent figure. Kadyrov is by far the most powerful regional leader in the Russian Federation, far more powerful than anyone else. Accordingly, he allows himself what no one, including major federal figures, can afford.

What is the reason for the statement of the head of the VTsIOM, Valery Fedorov, that the request for stability in Russian society has been replaced by a request for change? Especially in light of the fact that Fedorov considers this phase dangerous, I quote: "Revolutionary moods appear not in a situation of crisis, but when the crisis is over."

The very request for change after a twenty-year, if not more, request for stability is a very serious, almost tectonic shift. But what consequences it will lead to, we will find out not immediately, but within two to three years. Because it is not enough to change people's minds - it is much more important that their political behavior change. We have signs of such political novelty - this is the participation of people in unauthorized actions, and the phenomenon of Navalny. This is what Gleb Pavlovsky called politicization.

“It is not enough to change people's minds - it is much more important that their political behavior change. We have signs of such political novelty - this is the participation of people in unauthorized actions, and the phenomenon of Navalny. Photo by Oleg Tikhonov

Only we must be aware that the mass dynamics is absolutely and fundamentally unpredictable. We do not know how political activity will develop. I am inclined to believe that it will go on increasing, that is, we will face many local protests that will gradually merge into a nationwide one. And I do not rule out that the beginning of this will be laid next fall.

And the political crisis itself, if we enter into it, and it seems that we are slowly drawn into it, will last at least two years, more likely even three years. But this is still under a big question mark. Because a change in behavior does not automatically follow from a change in the mood of citizens.

Perhaps the very appearance of such a statement from the head of a pro-government sociological structure suggests that the authorities themselves are trying to ride this wave?

No, the authorities are trying to protect themselves from it. She just understands that this is a threat. Saddle - how is it?

- Lead the renovation process yourself.

This could be done if a new person with a fundamentally new national agenda ran in the elections. Which would offer an image of the future. Or if Putin suggested it. That is, if we saw the new Putin. Practically it is impossible, but theoretically it cannot be ruled out.

That is, do you think that Putin will still go to the polls, but will arm himself with some kind of vague agenda?

You know, we'll know for sure whether he goes or not, not until October. Until now, there are doubts, albeit microscopic ones. Although everything he does is very reminiscent of an election campaign. However, until he personally announces that he is going to the polls, doubts will persist.

“You know, we will know for sure whether he will go or not, not earlier than October. Until now, there are doubts, albeit microscopic ones. Although everything he does is very reminiscent of an election campaign.” Photo kremlin.ru

In the meantime, he says: “I think. I have not decided yet". Maybe he did, but he hides it. Or maybe he didn't really decide. I can only say that this pause causes some confusion among the political elite. She would have preferred certainty, and the sooner the better.

"Then why do you think he won't announce it before October?"

It's not my opinion, it's what they think, as far as is known, in the inner circle. But again, these are all rumors. He did not announce this during the "straight line". They say that in October it will become clear that Putin has promised to introduce it. Or maybe he will bring it in November.

Ending to be

Rustem Shakirov

The “liberal” party (to avoid misunderstandings, it should be noted that this community has the same relation to liberalism as Zh.’s business project called the Liberal Democratic Party) has a new idol - the former head of the department of public relations at MGIMO Valery Solovey. His insights from the “corridors of the Kremlin power” made him a welcome guest on Ekho Moskvy, Dozhd, RBC, Republic.ru and other media, the constant presence in which forms the community of the “liberal” party, and fiery criticism of the authorities and decisive forecasts Valery Dmitrievich was promoted to the rank of guru. The recent departure from MGIMO, which, according to the professor himself, was due to “political pressure”, created an halo of persecution around him and gave him a chance to move from the status of a guru to the rank of a civil and political leader. What Valery Solovey did not fail to take advantage of, announcing the formation of a certain "civil coalition".

And everything would be fine, but every time Valery Dmitrievich delivered his rebellious speeches, shattering the Kremlin from liberal positions, some bad people sent a video from his speech in Vladimir Solovyov’s program “Duel”, in which the professor spoke in the team of Zyuganov and defended Stalin from the "liberal" Gozman.

In this speech, Valery Dmitrievich explained to Leonid Yakovlevich that they live “in different countries” with him, because, “in the country of gentlemen of the gozmans, it is customary to spit on mass graves.” In addition, Professor Solovey said that "the consequences of the liberal reforms that took place in the 90s are comparable in their losses to what happened in the 30s and is attributed to Stalin."

In this two-minute fragment of his speech, Valery Dmitrievich included so many markers that characterize his political and human face that it is somehow embarrassing to decipher and comment on them. “Gentlemen gozmans”, “spitting on mass graves”… “The losses from the liberal reforms of the 90s are comparable to the losses of the 30s”… Put the caveman Stalinists Starikov or Prokhanov in the place of Professor Nightingale and you will hear exactly the same rhetoric.

Last week, Nightingale, speaking on "Echo", decided to explain himself, after which he and Leonid Gozman had an exchange of open letters. First, Valery Solovey explained that all discussions about Stalin are beneficial to the Kremlin, since they form a “false agenda”: has nothing to do with the present." End of quote.

To the reasonable question of the presenter, why did he himself take part in the creation of the “false agenda”, participating in this discussion about Stalin, Nightingale answered with a disarming smile: “a person is weak and conceited.” When the presenter began to inquire why Nightingale, who today criticizes the authorities from liberal positions, took part in the discussion precisely on the side of Zyuganov, defending Stalin, Valery Dmitrievich at first tried to deny, they say, he “did not defend” either Zyuganov or Stalin, and then, apparently, realizing the absurdity of denying the obvious, he referred to the "evolution of views."

The "evolution of views" of Professor Nightingale deserves special attention. During that memorable speech on the side of Zyuganov and in defense of Stalin, Valery Dmitrievich tried to ideologically lead the Russian nationalists, created the New Force nationalist party for this purpose, and became its chairman. In those days, this is the period of 2011-2013, Valery Solovey spoke mainly from the stands of the nationalist and Stalinist media in company with such people as Vitaly Tretyakov, Alexander Dugin, Mikhail Delyagin, etc. Evolution and even a revolutionary change of views is a completely normal thing, the whole question is when and under the influence of what reasons it occurs.

In the late 80s and early 90s, the views of many people changed under the influence of a huge amount of new information, including about the past of our country. In 2013, Nightingale sided with Zyuganov and defended Stalin from "liberals" and "gozmans". And in 2017, he was included in the campaign headquarters of presidential candidate Titov as an ideology curator and declared that it would be the ideology of “right-wing liberalism.” It is difficult to assume that between 2013 and 2017, Valery Dmitrievich learned something new about Stalinism or liberalism. The reason for the “evolution of views” of Professor Soloviev is approximately the same as that during the years of Soviet power made people like him vacillate along with the party line, and after the collapse of the USSR led former specialists in scientific atheism to stand in church with candles.

Professor Solovey headed the department of public relations at MGIMO, that is, he is a PR specialist. This profession has its own rules, the main of which is the priority of the interests of the customer. Valery Dmitrievich contracted to defend the positions of Zyuganov and Stalin - he explains about the "inseparability" of Stalin from the Victory. He received an order to create a nationalist party - he will justify the priority of the Russian people and the harmfulness of the "gozmans". Instructed to oversee the ideology for the "Party of Growth" of Boris Titov, Professor Nightingale will hit the ground and instantly turn into a right-wing liberal, defending the freedom of small business and the charms of a competitive economy.

Professor Nightingale has no views, and their "evolution" depends solely on the change in the situation. And further. Regarding the insides and forecasts of Professor Nightingale. On the Russian Platform website, where Valery Solovey regularly spoke with nationalists Yegor Kholmogorov, Konstantin Krylov and his student, Vladimir Tor, on May 8, 2012, his article was published entitled “Vladimir Putin’s Bloody Sunday,” in which Professor Solovey prophesies: “ Putin will not see the end of his presidential term. Now it's obvious." Further, Professor Nightingale indicates a specific period for the death of the Putin regime - about six months. “Very soon we will see thousands and tens of thousands crushing police cordons in their path,” the rebellious professor broadcasts.

All this, according to Professor Nightingale, should happen in a matter of months. "This autumn - a new rise!" - predicts Professor Nightingale. I remind you that it was in May 2012. Seven (7) years have passed. Putin is still in the Kremlin, and Professor Nightingale is now wailing as if nothing had happened: “In 2020, Russia will face a revolution, a nationwide crisis and regime change. Putin won't make it to the end of his presidential term."

I know quite a few opponents of the Putin regime who are trying to see in the country and in power some signs of the approaching end of this new type of fascism, and impatiently make such forecasts, every time they are wrong. But Professor Nightingale is a different case. A public relations specialist must radiate optimism in communicating with the customer. Yesterday, Professor Nightingale served the Stalinists and nationalists and "made them beautiful." Today he serves the “liberal” crowd and “does it beautifully” for her.

The “liberal” party and the liberal public of Russia led by it, like a herd of sheep, all the time follow the “goats-provocateurs” who have left the Kremlin. Whether it's "Kashin-guru", or Ksenia Sobchak, or Belkovsky with Pavlovsky, or Prokhorov with his sister, or even Medvedev with freedom, which is "better than lack of freedom." According to recent studies, aquarium fish do not have such a bad memory that they can be compared with people who make the same mistakes all the time. So, Russian liberals will have to find other analogies...

Valery Solovey: by 2024 Russia will have 15-20 regions and state ideology

Political scientist, MGIMO professor Valery Solovey expressed his opinion on the rumors about the imminent constitutional reform in Russia.

The other day, the chairman of the constitutional court, Valery Zorkin, spoke about the need to change the Constitution of the country.

According to Professor Soloviy, by 2024 the number of subjects of the federation will be reduced in Russia through unification and state ideology will be introduced.

Valery Solovey:

I have already had to write and speak on this topic, and I will repeat with pleasure.

1. The preparation of a constitutional reform, or rather fundamental changes in a wide range of constitutional laws, was launched in the fall of 2017.

2. Changes were developed in the following areas:

a) formation of a new configuration of state power and administration;

b) a radical reduction in the number of subjects of the federation (up to 15-20) by combining them in order to facilitate management, equalize levels of development and neutralize ethno-separatist tendencies;

c) resolute amendment of the laws on elections and political parties (by no means in the sense of liberalization);

d) the introduction of state ideology.
Well, and one more thing.

3. Initially, it was not clear which of the changes and to what extent would be given a green light, and which would not.

But in any case, they were not supposed to be implemented all at the same time due to the predicted strong negative reaction.

4. Sine qua non - reconfiguration of state power and administration, which should provide an institutional and legal framework for the transit of the system.

There are several options here too.

From the well-known model with the establishment of the State Council as an analogue of the Politburo and the reduction of the role of the president to representative and symbolic functions, to, on the contrary, the strengthening and expansion of presidential powers and the establishment of the post of vice president. (There are several more options.)

5. The transit of the system must be carried out before 2024 in order to surprise the enemies of external and internal. It was assumed that 2020-2021 could be decisive.

6. There is only one reason why these dates could be moved down.

And this reason has nothing to do with politics and declining ratings. The situation is assessed as worrying but not critical and under control.

7. And even more so, there was no talk of any early elections and could not be. A cardinal change in the organization of state power and administration is not carried out in order to hold elections and subject the system to extreme stress.

8. Among the key beneficiaries of the reform, the authorities name three people who are already in the top ten of the elite in terms of their political and bureaucratic weight.

On the failure of United Russia

- The fact that United Russia will perform worse than usual in these elections was predictable. However, no one expected that so. This was not expected by either the experts, or the staff of the presidential administration, or the candidates themselves. Moreover, according to my information, during the counting of votes in many regions, the voting results were corrected. And even despite this, the United Russia candidates received much fewer votes than in previous years. Of course, in yesterday's elections, the "party of power" was defeated.

What happened is connected, first of all, with the fact that the change in public sentiment began to turn into a change in political behavior. People who are dissatisfied, for example, with the pension reform, began to vote against those who are implementing this reform - the current authorities. Previously, dissatisfaction with specific phenomena or processes did not grow into dissatisfaction with those who are behind it.

On the prospects for electoral protest

“Very soon, those who voted against United Russia may take to the streets to express their dissatisfaction. So far, they do not do this, because the social reasons are not clear enough. However, it is already clear that the street protest in the regions has a core, even though it often has a spontaneous character. In my opinion, the electoral protest may turn into a street protest in a year. He needs time to mature. Life is deteriorating, the pressure on citizens is increasing, and very soon the Russians will think about participating in rallies. Yesterday, for the first time, many of them voted not for United Russia, and in a year they may take to the square demanding the resignation of the authorities. To provoke mass participation in rallies, for example, the disconnection of the Russian Internet from the world one, which, according to my information, is planned by the authorities for the end of 2019.

About the conclusions that the government will make

“The main thing that the elections showed is that the state machine is working worse and worse, its effectiveness is declining. Whether the results of the elections will change anything, I think not. It is unlikely that the authorities will listen to changes in the assessments of their actions by society. In general, elections in Russia have long been a formality that does not seriously affect anything. I also do not think that there will be any serious reshuffles in the Kremlin in connection with the failed outcome of the elections. However, it is clear that the protest potential is growing and will continue to grow, which means that people will use other means to inform the authorities about their discontent.