"The prospect of a second chance for democratization for Russia is negligible."
Political scientist Alexander Morozov on what Russia should be like after Putin
Even after Vladimir Fishing season Russia could continue its downward spiral toward dictatorship and remain so until the end of the century. The choice of direction will be influenced, among other things, by the high level of regional centralization, which arose not only through the Kremlin's ill will, as well as their dependence on rents from mineral extraction.
Political scientist Oleksandr Morozov He believes that elections to a body similar to a constitutional assembly are essential for a democratic transition in the country. But this is unlikely until the elites with the power and economic resources reach an agreement.
Alexander Morozov is a political scientist and journalist. From 2011 to 2014, he served as editor-in-chief of the Russian Journal, and from 2015 to 2016, he worked at Deutsche Welle. He is currently a research fellow at the Boris Nemtsov Center for Russian Studies at Charles University in Prague.
What will Russia's government structure be like after Putin?
"I don't expect any major changes immediately after his departure. In the near future, the state structure will remain the same as it was under Putin."
It's difficult to even guess at the time when these large-scale changes will occur. Everything depends on the configuration of social forces in Russia. After all, for change to occur, a large informal coalition must be formed. And this isn't just about parliamentary parties. It's about major players and institutions in general, which will have the resources when, after Putin's departure, the question arises of the future form of the state, its domestic and foreign policies.
As I have already said, everything depends on the configuration of social forces, which we do not know today.
Will Russia survive as a unified state or not? And what's best, in your opinion?
"I think Russia will survive. Even if it undergoes some changes on its outskirts, its core will remain. And everyone will have to deal with that."
Territorial changes in Russia are only possible if diverse movements awaken in the regions, pushing for changes to the federal structure. And for this, in my opinion, some new global process is needed. Similar, for example, to the one that resulted in the formation of the Russian Federation within its 1991 borders.
It is important to understand that the current structure of the Russian Federation contains many vestiges left over from the collapse of the Soviet Union.
Moreover, Putin's rule, especially the second half, has blurred the borders of the Russian Federation, making them contested.
These two important factors call into question the future of Russia within the borders within which it exists.
Is there a model to follow? Or does Russia have its own path?
— Russia does not have any unique special path that provides any preferences or advantages.
Yes, Russia is a large country. But, like other countries, it is developing, responding to global, universal challenges alongside the rest of humanity. And, like other countries, it is creating something unique, something internal. In this sense, Turkey, Brazil, Indonesia, and every other country have their own "special path."
Which model is preferable for Russia is a difficult question.
Some argue that democracy is unacceptable for governing such a vast territory—only a highly centralized government is required. But this isn't entirely true. There are countries with large populations and vast territories that currently have at least the hallmarks of democracy: genuine competitive elections, freedom of speech, and so on.
It's important to remember that Russia isn't centralized solely by the Kremlin's malicious intent. It's been centralized throughout its historical development. We observe a high level of centralization both before 1917 and in the Soviet Union. It persists in modern Russia, as a remnant of the Soviet empire.
The high level of centralization is partly due to the fact that Russia is built around resource extraction and the distribution of rents from them. And the development of any national or local identity is hampered by the fact that the funding of many regions is entirely dependent on the sale of these natural resources.
What is What is the desired model of transition for post-Putin Russia? And what is it? most likelyth?
— Russia's fundamental transition to a different form of government, or the so-called democratic transition, must inevitably include two stages.
The first stage will require holding elections to a constitutional assembly and deciding on the country's future.
And in the second stage, this elected body will begin reforms of the Constitution, the criminal code, electoral laws, and so on.
No transfer and no second chance for democracy are possible without this link. It is precisely during the formation of this constitutional assembly that political forces will be identified and their coalition formed. In fact, this process itself will signify a return to free debate and an end to political persecution.
Must Will Russia become smaller in a territorial sense?
"Russia could certainly be smaller. But the question here isn't whether it owes anything to anyone or not."
Russia's territorial structure depends entirely on whether there are active political groups in the regions capable of achieving results.
Currently, such groups do not exist. All ethnic, resource, and other influential regional groups are centralized around the state budget. And at this historical moment, no one can imagine any prospect of existence separate from Russia. After all, that would mean creating its own currency, banking, tax, and security systems to maintain internal order.
Perhaps only the Chechen Republic possesses some of these capabilities at the moment. We see that it has its own army, police, and so on. But even it has not yet expressed a desire to secede.
Frankly, I can't imagine any regional or ethnic elite in Russia wanting to secede from the ruble. That would mean creating an extremely weak, unbacked currency, and would only spell trouble for the seceding territory.
However, I want to emphasize that this is difficult to contemplate right now. But in a situation of some kind of global shift, many regions could take on a completely different tone and begin to think differently about their autonomy, sovereignty, and so on.
Еif Russia remains a single state, кWhat should be the distribution of powers between regions?ами and the centerоm? And what, in your opinion, сWhat's the most important thing that needs to be changed?
— We will be able to hear the answers to these questions only after the start of a real political struggle, most likely quite fierce.
It seems to me that this will be something similar to the mid-1980s, when Mikhail Gorbachev fought for the Union Treaty, while the national elites of various Soviet territories, on the contrary, moved in the direction of very great autonomy or relied on the concept of restored statehood.
It's impossible to predict the outcome of this struggle. But even if such a process were to begin, Russia would likely retain very strong centripetal sentiments associated with preserving the country within its current borders.
In particular, it seems to me that the same sentiments will persist within ethnic and territorial entities.
How, in your opinion, should power be structured during a period of transition? И What institution can be the authority during this period?
"In order to achieve a constitutional transition, some degree of stability must be maintained. Therefore, I don't rule out the possibility of a ruling group comprising people with sufficient security and economic resources capable of maintaining control over the situation in the country."
I hope that these leaders will be able to reach some kind of consensus and begin moving towards constitutional reform through one of the three structures enshrined in the Constitution: the Government, the Security Council, or the State Council.
At the same time, I believe that at the moment, the prospect of a second chance for democratization in Russia is negligible. It does not exist, and perhaps never will.
It's possible that the Russian Federation will remain one of the few countries without democracy, in the full sense of the word, by the end of the century. There are many such countries on our planet.
МCan Russia avoid гcivil war after the fall of the current regime?
— I don’t see any signs of a civil war yet.
Even though under Putin, Freikorps in the form of the Wagner Group and even less visible paramilitary groups have emerged, which are very visible on the media stage, from a political perspective, the security agencies represented by the FSB, the Federal Protective Service, the Russian National Guard, and the Russian Army still constitute a powerful and irresistible instrument.
We can imagine some outbreaks of violence and chaos, especially territorial ones. For example, in the south of Russia, which has been embroiled in various forms of militarization since 2014. There are many people in this region who have held weapons or are associated with combat units. It's possible that they might engage in violence. But in my view, this wouldn't be a civil war, but rather outbreaks of violence suppressed by security forces.
Are there any useful Russian experiences that are worth carrying forward into the future?
— Russia has two very important experiences that need to be remembered.
The first is the experience of the transition from monarchy to republic, which begins with the first State Duma in 1906 and ends with the October Revolution of 1917. Even though it ended with the victory of the Bolsheviks, its content is very useful.
The second is the experience of a global historical chance for democratization, which began in 1987 and ended in 1993.
Once Russia begins moving towards a new Constitution and gets a second chance at democratization, both of these experiences should be taken into account.
Photo: archive from Alexander Morozov's personal Facebook page