Nikolay Petrov
{
"authors": [
"Nikolay Petrov"
],
"type": "legacyinthemedia",
"centerAffiliationAll": "",
"centers": [
"Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center"
],
"collections": [],
"englishNewsletterAll": "",
"nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
"primaryCenter": "Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center",
"programAffiliation": "",
"programs": [],
"projects": [],
"regions": [
"Caucasus",
"Russia"
],
"topics": [
"Political Reform",
"Democracy"
]
}Source: Getty
The Virtual President
Under Russian President Medvedev, the Kremlin’s efforts to develop and execute concrete solutions to Russia’s many challenges have been replaced by a constant stream of polemical sound bites and vague slogans.
Source: The Moscow Times

This deluge of polemical sound bites has underscored the fact that Medvedev has not offered concrete solutions for the most difficult challenges facing Russia today. Instead, he only offers vague slogans while proposing overly ambitious projects in areas that would ordinarily fall under the authority of Prime Minister Vladimir Putin.
The country’s numerous political analysts compete with one another to come up with accurate interpretations of what this or that statement by the president and prime minister means for Russian and world politics. A perfect example is the Valdai Club, designed to give our top leaders the opportunity to make seemingly meaningful — but in reality very empty — statements for consumption by the international community.
I don’t want to become just one more observer giving his opinion of Medvedev’s curious statement that the system of appointing governors is democratic, that it is appropriate for Russia and that it will remain in place for the next 100 years. Instead, I will risk making a diagnosis of the country’s political system.
I think these signs indicate that the Kremlin is both nervous and uncertain. The Kremlin realizes that it must finally do something to correct the situation but is unable and unwilling to do so. This realization is a break from its former state of self-complacency.
Two factors are compounding the problem — the desire of the authorities to preserve their high popularity ratings at any cost, and the paralysis of government officials who cannot take action without approval from the top.
When Putin moved from the Kremlin to the White House, he took all of the authority with him. The result is that while something is being accomplished in the economic sphere, the political work of the Kremlin has ground to a halt.
Medvedev has said the country is so burdened by bureaucracy that nobody lifts a finger until he gives the order to act. But at the same time, he draws the surprising conclusion that the political system is functioning well.
The hyperactivity on the analyst front is nothing but a meaningless jumble of empty political signals, proposals and conjecture issuing from the ever-shifting political landscape. It represents a crippled system in which idle boyars and economically crippled, servile oligarchs kowtow to their powerless and passive king.
This is Russia’s latest risky experiment: the attempt to carry out Medvedev’s transition from a relatively unknown political figure to the country’s chief executive. Were it not for the crisis, the experiment might even be amusing. Under the current circumstances, however, it is a disaster waiting to happen.
About the Author
Former Scholar-in-Residence, Society and Regions Program, Moscow Center
Nikolay Petrov was the chair of the Carnegie Moscow Center’s Society and Regions Program. Until 2006, he also worked at the Institute of Geography at the Russian Academy of Sciences, where he started to work in 1982.
- Moscow Elections: Winners and LosersCommentary
- September 8 Election As a New Phase of the Society and Authorities' CoevolutionCommentary
Nikolay Petrov
Recent Work
Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.
More Work from Carnegie Europe
- Russia’s Imperial Retreat Is Europe’s Strategic OpportunityCommentary
The war in Ukraine is costing Russia its leverage overseas. Across the South Caucasus and Middle East, this presents an opportunity for Europe to pick up the pieces and claim its own sphere of influence.
William Dixon, Maksym Beznosiuk
- Is the Radical-Right Threat Existential or Overstated?Commentary
Amid increased polarization and the influence of disinformation, radical-right parties are once again gaining traction across Europe. With landmark elections on the horizon in several countries, are the EU’s geostrategic vision and fundamental values under existential threat?
Catherine Fieschi, Cas Mudde
- Taking the Pulse: Is France’s New Nuclear Doctrine Ambitious Enough?Commentary
French President Emmanuel Macron has unveiled his country’s new nuclear doctrine. Are the changes he has made enough to reassure France’s European partners in the current geopolitical context?
Rym Momtaz, ed.
- The EU Needs a Third Way in IranCommentary
European reactions to the war in Iran have lost sight of wider political dynamics. The EU must position itself for the next phase of the crisis without giving up on its principles.
Richard Youngs
- New Approaches to Defending Global Civil SocietyResearch
New thinking is needed on how global civil society can be protected. In an era of major-power rivalry, competitive geopolitics, and security primacy, civil society is in danger of getting squeezed – in some countries, almost entirely out of existence.
Richard Youngs, ed., Elene Panchulidze, ed.