Publius Pundit

« Previous · Home · Next »

Surprise, Surprise: He's Not Going Anywhere

Filed under: Russia

So now it's official. Russian "President" Vladimir Putin will not give up power. He will clutch it to his breast until he breathes his pathetic last, just like every other ruler of Russia (except Boris Yeltsin) has always done. He will remain ruler of Russia, merely exchanging the title "president" for the title "prime minister" and retaining all the aspects of power while technically obeying, and simultaneously defiling, the constitution. Or maybe you think Russia's next president will be able to fire Putin if he decides he doesn't like him? Putin will transform the nature of national power by personal decree and for his own convenience, just as he has done by summarily abolishing the election of governors at the local level and appointing them instead. Hey, presto, the presidency is now the prime ministry, the real power, and vice versa. The presidency becomes a figurehead. Once more, the malignant little troll spits his poison on the withered soul of Russian democracy.

This might be great news! If Putin were willing to stand down, it would mean he believes the country can be controlled and manipulated without his physical presence in the formal corridors of power, and that would imply his grip on the nation is perhaps unbreakable. But he's worried! He's scared to step aside, so he's just moving some chairs around. This means he's vulnerable, and the chance for democratic reform persists.

Of course, it could simply mean he's a greedy megalomaniac who can't surrender power no matter how insignificantly and no matter how firm his proxy's grip on the nation's throat might be, who will destroy Russia with his monstrous lust for power just as every other ruler of that benighted land has done (except Boris Yeltsin). And it certainly does not mean we will see courageous action by the people of Russia to pull their nation back from the brink of destruction even if he is vulnerable, and courageous action is necessary to confront the whims of an autocrat.

Social Bookmarking:
Del.icio.us this del.icio.us | digg this digg | Add to Technorati technorati | StumbleUpon Toolbar stumble upon | Furl this furl | Reddit this reddit

Comments


Clifton says:

On a related subject, what has happened to Elena Tregubova??
Cheers


Robert Mayer says:

It's been a good news week for you, Kim! And the sun is only rising on Tuesday!


armchair pessimist says:

A very interesting column by Anne Applebaum today in the Washington Post:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/01/AR2007100101331.html?nav=rss_opinion/columns

The EU, NATO, our allies, whatever term you prefer, are incapable of opposing Russia because of the oil. But this article makes me suspect that they wouldn't want to anyway. Maybe they actually like a decisive Russia better than a bungling USA. No, the article isn't saying this, I am.

So, despite its best intentions, it may be the USA, not Russia, that becomes the world's pariah.

And should Russia someday declare their version of the Monroe Doctrine, with nations like Ukraine and Georgia falling under it, who will object? Who except the leper country? And who will care what the leper country thinks?


La Russophobe says:

ROBERT:

Hi! LTNS! Julia was certainly an early Chistmas present, that's for sure! The rest is too I guess, but as if it came from the Grinch. I think maybe I'd rather have a Russian George Washington take power and then have a nice lay out on the beach in Bermuda. But c'est la vie.

ARMCHAIR:

France didn't stand up to Hitler, they surrendered. Does that mean we should have made common cause with the Nazis? I think you misread Anne if you think she's suggesting that.


armchair pessimist says:

Didn't mean to imply she did say that; she didn't at all. But I am speculating, all on my own, that this time we may be the Nazis, with the whole world against us! Boy, would the joke ever be on us!


elmer says:

Somehow, armchair, I really don't see the US as being Nazis.

All you have to do is to look at all the people who have voted with their feet to come to the US.

And by the way, that includes all sorts of, and huge numbers of, lovely dolls from Russia, who are more than ready, willing and EAGER to leave Russia with anything that breathes and wears a pair of pants, to come to the US.

I can show you the "Love Me" Tours, with pictures, which are conducted every year.

Other russkies leave by claiming religious discrimination, or by other means.

The Russian dream is: "I want to see my neighbor's barn burn down."

They are more than willing to take what you have.

But they don't want to build it themselves.

It takes more than just moaning and groaning about "poor me" to build a democracy.

The russkies would rather love their misery, than build a democracy.

Misery makes them happy.


Pedro Martinez says:

Either on Publius or LaR someone replied to a Kim post recently with something like: "No, Kim, Russia isn't making the same mistake as it did early in W.W. II by appeasing the Nazis. Because in this confrontation it has not and it's not going to appease America (who are the modern-day Nazis)." The forces of good are Russia, China, India (and much of Old Europe) and they are sticking together, letting America know that it can't have a global empire.

I agree with Armchair in that we (well, the neocons) are the Nazis.


elmer says:

America has a global empire?

America wants a global empire?

When did that occur?


Pedro Martinez says:

Umm, military bases every other country. Shoving our culture down everyone's throat. Meddling in the internal affairs of sovereign nations. Military invasions. Claiming "dominance of space." Economic imperialism through our multinationals and the "global" financial institutions.

Elmer, the United States is the most imperialistic regime in the world and everyone knows so (it is also obnoxious and bound to collapse). Who are you kidding saying otherwise?


armchair pessimist says:

I think the resemblance the US has with Nazi Germany is being the world's most disliked nation. I don't think we deserve this, but that's beside the point.

So, we have many enemies and few friends. Some dislike us on account of their own imperial ambitions, some because we are rich and they're has-beens, some because they have a grudge to satisfy, some, and this I do take from Applebaum's article, because we're inept losers.

Concerning this coalition of the ill-willing, it's been a running consersation between LaR and me about whether Russia is a total rat or whether it can be made to see its own longterm interests and stand with the USA.

Russia's got attitude and I wish she were on our side.


elmer says:

Pedro, you are way off base, sir.

armchair -

Russia's got attitude? Beating your own people over the head is attitude? Having thugs and Russian mafia controlling your country is attitude? Corporatization of government is attitude? Needlessly wasting fuel on mindless "bombing runs" for no apparent reason other than penis envy is attitude?

I don't call that attitude - I call it viciousness, stupidity and thuggery.






Post a comment


(will not be published)



Remember Me?

(you may use HTML tags for style)




TrackBack

TrackBack URL: http://publiuspundit.com/mt/contages.cgi/404