After four presidential terms and one term as prime minister (2008-2012), this Sunday Vladimir Putin will secure his fifth presidential term and will remain on the Kremlin throne at least until 2030. Considering that he will be 78 years old by then - and if his health serves him at least as well as the first Slovenian son-in-law Trump's -, it is not excluded that he might want to extend his rule for another six years. If there will even be "elections" in Russia by then.

‍

The latter is by no means a given. If we look at the history of Russian presidential elections in the new millennium, we see that from the realm of real, somewhat free, and fair elections, very little or almost nothing remains. In 2000, alongside Putin, there were ten other candidates, including several prominent politicians. And even Putin's victory at that time, despite the already existing strong media support, was not predetermined. He won in the first round with 53% of the vote, with the communist Zyuganov receiving almost a third of the votes. Yeltsin, the then Russian oligarchy, and the West collectively breathed a sigh of relief; our man had won, there was no turning back to the USSR anymore. Oh, how wrong they were.

‍

But who is Vladimir Putin really? In recent years (most intensively, of course, since February 2022), many "Kremlinologists" around the world have been shouting: "We tried to tell you, but you didn't listen."

‍

Today it's completely different: serious opposition politicians have long been liquidated (including Alexei Navalny), imprisoned, or in exile. Besides Putin, there will be three other names on the ballot papers, but this is just a formality with no significance. Putin's victory is assured in today's circumstances; the administrative machinery will ensure the right (sufficiently high) percentage, similar to how it has been done in neighboring Belarus for decades. With almost no civilian oversight of the voting and counting process (which will also take place electronically this time), these are no longer elections but rather a party mandate affirmation.

‍

However, there are internal frictions, different currents, and internal opposition within the party, at least in the Soviet one after Stalin's death. This ultimately led to the removal of Nikita Khrushchev in 1964. But today in Russia, it's not 1964; we are closer to Orwell's 1984. Therefore, reporting on Putin's new term as a "electoral victory" is at least cynical if not outright inappropriate. Putin still needs such "elections" for the legitimacy of his own dictatorship, primarily in the international arena; domestically, generations have already been voting who have never heard anything other than "Putin is Russia!" But the question is, how long will Putin still need such "elections"? Perhaps until the next term in 2030, when he will surpass Stalin in length of rule. Putin diligently follows in Stalin's footsteps, not only in terms of the duration of his rule...

‍

‍

Putin has transformed Russia into a completely different country than it was at the beginning of the 21st century. At the expense of political and economic stability, he has completely consolidated power and turned it into a dictatorship, something many in the West, interestingly, still do not want to or refuse to see. Especially in the context of American hegemony and all the brutal misconduct that the Americans have been doing around the world since World War II, they see Putin primarily as a man who has decided to oppose this decisively. And in doing so, they conveniently overlook how Putin is doing exactly that in Ukraine. He is implementing a brutal imperialist policy of the so-called Great Russia, where there is no room, of course, for many (mostly East Slavic) peoples who have gained independence in the last century.

‍

In Russia, things cannot be better, of course: state censorship and propaganda are almost ubiquitous, repression against civil society is at the level of Soviet times after Stalin, democratic institutions still exist only on paper, but have long served their purpose to the master in the Kremlin. Apathy within society is great, as is fear. So it's not surprising that when an average Russian from an urban environment responds to a public opinion question, "Do you support (this or that) government policy or the direction of the state?" their first consideration is whether there is an alternative to Putin or not. And since the regime has managed to convince the people that there is no alternative, it is then most logical and safe to answer in the affirmative. The authorities know what's best for the people, so there's no need to question it... welcome to the modern-day servitude.

‍

But who is Vladimir Putin really? In recent years (most intensively, of course, since February 2022), many "Kremlinologists" around the world have been shouting: "We tried to tell you, but you didn't listen." They point out that it was clear from the very beginning what kind of person came to the Kremlin in 2000. Russia's fate (and perhaps Europe's) was allegedly sealed back then. A KGB man will remain a KGB man. However, such assessments are at least subjectively biased, if not consciously selective in memory. This same Putin was a star of world politics in the first years of his term, the man of the year according to Time magazine, at least from the perspective of economic policy, a true liberal. He also gathered numerous liberal economists and ministers around him, not only speaking the things expected of him abroad (continuing the liberal reforms of the 90s) but also implementing them. In 2001, after the terrorist attacks of September 11 in the US, Russia supported the American intervention in Afghanistan and allowed NATO military flights over its airspace. Unimaginable in today's reality.

‍

Read the rest of the text (in Slovene) here.

The column was originally published in the newspaper Večer, March 16, 2024.

‍

You might also want to read "Why trust in politics is crucial and what we have learned from it".