Widespread fraud in Russian election leads to protests - Putin blames Clinton

In the weeks leading up to Russia's election, news sources were touting the absolute power Prime Minister Putin held over political power in the country.  The man was touted as invincible, the unquestioned leader that will bring Russia back to its former glory.  Taking into account a history of election fraud and corruption, Mr. Putin's United Russia was expected to have a solid majority after this week's parliamentary elections.  Unfortunately for them, things turned out very differently; the party won only 50% of votes in a RIGGED election!
 The victory was followed by protests outside the Kremlin in opposition to the election's results. What we've seen in Russia over the last week has been easily the most open, widespread opposition to Mr. Putin's choke-hold on the Kremlin since he was first elected president, but wha
t does this mean for Russia, and more importantly the West?

Image via Wikipedia

Leading up to the parliamentary elections, Putin and his United Russia party went on a massive campaign to boost its popular image.  In several interviews, Putin picked up his condemnation of the West, particularly its traditional enemy the U.S., on its new missile defense system in Europe, the NATO aerial mission in Libya, and NATO's western expansion likely attempting to stoke Russian resentment against perceived U.S. intrusion of Russia's region of influence.  He further lambasted the West by calling it leaderless while pointing to himself and a few others as the only strong leaders left.  Harking back to the Cold War-era, Putin has also been touting a plan to create an economic and security union in Central Asia aimed at restoring economic and political power.

Putin's seeming iron grip on Russian politics was proven to be false this week, however, as despite widely recognized election fraud, his United Russia party secured only 50% of the vote, down from
a nearly 2/3 majority it enjoyed in parliament prior to the election.  This would be less surprising had Putin not gone to considerable lengths to rig the election, including pressuring military officers and business executives into forcing subordinates into voting for him.  It's also been reported that opposition watchdogs uncovered an attempt at ballot box stuffing, while others complain of large numbers of absentee-voter fraud and "carousel" voting, where voters are bused to multiple voting locations.  Once the polls closed, it took officials an unusually long time to count the votes, which observers charge was likely caused by Putin's party ensuring enough votes for a majority.

The Prime Minister's unpopularity and struggle to maintain power was no secret, however, as Russian people often associate his party with corruption and "crooks".  Putin's political dominance has also been a source of frustration for citizens currently suffering under increased income inequality and a corrupt, wealthy ruling elite.  After serving his two terms as President, Putin hand-picked his successor, current President Medvedev, who was promised the Prime Minister position in another swap when Putin becomes President, adding to the frustration.  To combat United Russia's unpopularity, the party effectively banned all meaningful political opposition from the election, though other parties were allowed on the ballot.  In addition, in the days leading up to the election, the nation's only independent election watchdog, Golos, was put under and intense intimidation campaign by officials, including cyber attacks and the arrest and jailing of the group's leader.

Image by World Economic Forum via Flickr

Even though United Russia maintained their majority in parliament, the vote is a black eye for Putin and his party.  Only carrying half the vote in the rigged election has taken away some of the party's legitimacy and claim to power, with opposition leaders calling it the beginning of the end for Putin.  In an unprecedented move, opposition leaders and outraged citizens took to the streets of Moscow to protest the election and the fraud, eventually leading to the arrests of hundreds of protesters and opposition leaders. Like the Arab Spring before it, protesters have largely communicated through social media, despite the regime's best efforts at censoring it.  Protests have continued, Thursday being the third day.  Reports claim that today the Kremlin arrested the most prominent opposition leader, Alexei Navalny, along with 400 other protesters as it continues to crack down on the protests.

For his part, Putin started by claiming that loss of support was inevitable, but that the government will remain stable despite his obvious setbacks.  His reaction at the loss of power was nothing compared to his reaction to the protests.  Today, Prime Minister Putin accused U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton of instigating the protests by denouncing the election fraud and calling for Russia to immediately hold a fair, open re-election.  His accusation strikes right to the heart of the situation in Moscow; Putin is losing credibility and control, and therefore like Ghadaffi before him must accuse foreign powers of meddling in domestic affairs.  Its a last grasp at credibility and to remain in power.

Russia is at a crossroads.  The people are obviously fed up with government corruption and fraud.  They are tired of being forced to keep one man in power while the rest of the country suffers.  Putin has finally lost enough power and control over the country that the opposition, and more importantly the people, are ready and willing to take to the streets to demand a fair and open election.  As Putin struggles to keep his monopoly over power, his popularity and credibility will continue to decrease.  This can end one of two ways, neither of which are good for the ruling elites: 1. the protesters and opposition succeed in their demands for an open election and elect a new government or 2. the ruling elite use their control over the military, the internal forces, and the police to crush the protests will mass arrests and possibly violence, leading to condemnation from the international community.  I see the latter as being more likely, as Putin isn't going to go out easy.  That puts it on the international community to respond.

The international community and in particular the West and specifically the U.S. have been handed a golden opportunity gift-wrapped from Putin himself.  If the international community responds with strong, multilateral action against any crushed protests, it can use the opportunity as leverage not only for domestic reform in Russia, but also at ending Russian support for the Iranian's nuclear weapons program and Syrian King Assad's mass killings of civilian protesters.  A Russian president with no credibility or popular support, and facing international isolation and possible sanctions for its crack-down on protests would have no choice but to cave into international pressure.  On the other hand, if the opposition is successful and a new government is elected, the West should make every effort possible to encourage cooperation and friendship between the traditional enemies while aiming for the same results as well as possible economic opportunities.  This may turn out so well that I'm actually wondering if Mrs. Clinton did actually incite the protests!

Related articles

• Putin's party 'rigged election' (argus.ie)
• After Russia's elections, public anger at Putin: Can he fix corruption? (csmonitor.com)
• Political crisis in Russia - The Economist (economist.com)
• Putin Slams Hillary Clinton for Encouraging Protesters (usnews.com)