Barely two years ago, Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine was still new, and sporadic clips of Russian state TV were a burgeoning viral business. On a daily basis, the Western public could take part in videos that purported to show how the Russian political elite saw the truth about Moscow’s failure in the eye of the beholder.
For those who have even sporadically followed the twisted verbal entertainment violence that is Russian talk TV, it became a bit comical. Veterans of Russian liberal opposition could be portrayed as reluctant truth-telling insiders when they were rather invited as chewing resistance in uneven debate dusts with numerically superior Putin loyalists.
A new old hope
A clear example is Boris Nadezhdin. Last September, his criticism of Russian warfare was described as a sign of “cracks in the facade of the Russian regime”.
In fact, Nadezhdin’s career as a liberal politician is long. He was close to Boris Nemtsov, the opposition leader who was assassinated outside the Kremlin walls in 2015. Nadezhdin has hardly ever been in favor of any war, on the contrary, and he can hardly be called part of the Russian regime.
But if Russian state TV’s debates require symbolic resistance, the same can be said when the Russian people go to the polls.
Choice in the broadest sense
In March, Russia holds elections. Few if any had called Russian elections free and fair, but it has been seen as valuable to simulate democracy. The truth is that Putin doesn’t need to cheat to win, but cheating is still happening. The footmen of the power pyramid know what results they are expected to deliver.
This year, no one is reasonably expecting any nail-biters – or even enthusiasm in the theatre. In the heat of war, stability trumps everything. The flimsy real opposition that existed in Russia is shattered, imprisoned, driven into exile.
Even mild criticism is not tolerated except in individual exceptional cases. One such possibility will be if the government allows the same Boris Nadezhdin to stand as a presidential candidate. At the time of writing, he is awaiting word from the electoral authority after submitting over 100,000 signatures required to run.
Advantages and disadvantages
But that’s also where the excitement ends. Nadezhdin does not pose even a minimal threat to Putin, any more than the journalist Yekaterina Duntsova did when she tried to run for office last year.
If his candidacy is nipped in the bud, it is because power cannot tolerate political uncertainty even on the margins. There is no indication that he is a Kremlin puppet, thus by definition he is a potential problem.
At the same time, the “political technologists” in the Kremlin can benefit from releasing a weak symbolic challenger who, through his participation, gives a modicum of legitimacy to an election with a given outcome.
Comrade two percent
Such is the Russian opposition candidate’s dilemma. On the one hand, you can get a little space to at least try to say something. Maybe show people that there is actually criticism? Maybe get some exposure and build a brand, if you ask the cynical.
On the other hand, one participates in a kind of theater whose very purpose is to legitimize Putin’s iron grip on power. With an occasional percentage of the vote, you only exist so that the authorities can show exactly how hard the Russian people appreciate nonsense like liberal democracy.
“Nadezhda” is the Russian word for hope, the root of Nadezhdin’s name. It is said that hope is the last thing that leaves man, but Putin hardly feels threatened when Russia goes to – in the broadest sense – elections this spring.