Dmitri Trenin
{
"authors": [
"Dmitri Trenin"
],
"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"
]
}Source: Getty
Putin-Medvedev Double Act is Prelude to Either Reform or Marginalisation
To dismiss Medvedev as a mere Putin puppet would be a mistake; Medvedev was chosen to recruit an internet savvy and generally more liberal Russian constituency to the Kremlin’s program of conservative modernization.
Source: Scotsman.com

They also view Russia in terms of a tradition whereby every new tsar partly repudiates the legacy of his predecessor, creating a political thaw at the beginning of a new reign. Khrushchev's de-Stalinisation is Exhibit A.
Both methods were used to describe the Putin-Medvedev relationship – to understand its nature and dynamic, and what it portends for Russia. But observers remain puzzled.
To dismiss Medvedev as a mere Putin puppet would be both unfair and wrong. Russia's third president has a broader role and a distinct function.
For all the apparent freshness of Mr Medvedev's recent pronouncements, including his now famous article "Go Russia!" – which sounded a clarion call for modernisation and liberalism – he is borrowing massively from Putin's vocabulary of 2000. This suggests that the issue of modernisation, which lay dormant throughout the fat years of high oil prices, is back on the Kremlin agenda.
In 2008, Medvedev was installed in the Kremlin as part of "Putin's plan", the substantive part of which was known as "Strategy 2020", a blueprint for continued economic growth and diversification. The intervening crisis only made the Kremlin modify and sharpen its plan. And Medvedev is a key agent in its execution.
Putin chose Medvedev carefully, and not only for his unquestionable loyalty, vitally important as that is. Putin, among other things, is a combative nationalist, and he wants Russia to succeed in a world of competing powers. He is certainly conservative, but he is also a self-described moderniser.
Putin wants to finish the job, and much works in his favour. He is the tsar. He has both money – the government's budget and the oligarchs' fortunes – and the coercive power of the state in his hands. He is the arbiter at the top and the troubleshooter in social conflicts below. His most precious resource is his personal popularity, which gives a flavour of consent to his regime.
Enter Medvedev. His internet-surfing, compassionate and generally liberal image helps recruit a key constituency – those beyond the reach of Putin – to the Putin plan. Whether the plan succeeds is another matter.
Conservative modernisation is a gamble. To modernise Russia, one must break the stranglehold of corruption, establish accountability and free the media. At some point, Putin and Medvedev will have to decide. Either they give priority to the survival of the current system and accept Russia's steady marginalisation, or they start opening up the system, putting its survival at risk. Given the geopolitical factors in Russian decision-making, it is difficult to predict which they will choose.
About the Author
Former Director, Carnegie Moscow Center
Trenin was director of the Carnegie Moscow Center from 2008 to early 2022.
- Mapping Russia’s New Approach to the Post-Soviet SpaceCommentary
- What a Week of Talks Between Russia and the West RevealedCommentary
Dmitri Trenin
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
- Can Europe Still Matter in Syria?Commentary
Europe’s interests in Syria extend beyond migration management, yet the EU trails behind other players in the country’s post-Assad reconstruction. To boost its influence in Damascus, the union must upgrade its commitment to ensuring regional stability.
Bianka Speidl, Hanga Horváth-Sántha
- Europolis, Where Europe EndsCommentary
A prophetic Romanian novel about a town at the mouth of the Danube carries a warning: Europe decays when it stops looking outward. In a world of increasing insularity, the EU should heed its warning.
Thomas de Waal
- Europe Falls Behind in the South Caucasus Connectivity RaceCommentary
The EU lacks leadership and strategic planning in the South Caucasus, while the United States is leading the charge. To secure its geopolitical interests, Brussels must invest in new connectivity for the region.
Zaur Shiriyev
- Taking the Pulse: What Issue Is Europe Ignoring at Its Peril in 2026?Commentary
2026 has started in crisis, as the actions of unpredictable leaders shape an increasingly volatile global environment. To shift from crisis response to strategic foresight, what under-the-radar issues should the EU prepare for in the coming year?
Thomas de Waal
- Solidarity Is a Must for Europe to Ensure Its Own SecurityCommentary
Europe is designing a new model of collective security that no longer relies on the United States. For this effort to succeed, solidarity between member states that have different threat perceptions is vital.
Erik Jones