Indicator of dissent

Russia’s opposition daily Novaya Gazeta (NG) appears to have collected over 107,000 signatures on a petition for dissolution of the State Duma during only two days of the campaign held under the slogan “Let’s Dissolve It!” on the newspaper’s website. This campaign is a response to the Russian MPs unwillingness to consider the signatures gathered by NG in December 2012, against the Duma’s approval of the bill banning adoption of Russian children [by American nationals]. Further lists of signatures for dissolution of the State Duma will be submitted to the president on February 1 – also to the Central Election Commission – along “with a statement on behalf of those who voted for a referendum,” reads the NG website.

According to the NG editor-in-chief, Dmitri Muratov, Russia’s MPs will be in no position to ignore these lists of signatures: “The signature-collecting campaign will be active on the NG website, also during the Protest March scheduled for January 13 in Moscow.

Radio Ekho Moskvy (EM) reports that the Duma’s Constitutional Legislation Committee (CLC) will deal with the signature-collecting campaign a week later. CLC Chairman Vladimir Pligin is quoted as saying that a stand on the matter will be worked out and submitted to the State Duma; that there are still no legislative procedures that allow to transform a stand taken by a large number of citizens into a law. CLC Deputy Chairman Sergei Ivanov told EM that the Duma would never be dissolved.

The Day asked Semen NOVOPRUDSKY, a Moscow-based independent journalist, to comment on the situation.

“Slogans about dissolution of the State Duma aren’t politically correct in present-day Russia. I guess early presidential elections and the head of state tendering his resignation would be the right moves under the circumstances. This initiative makes clear the number of like-minded people. Naturally, the Internet makes this task easier today than yesterday. Remember that small crowd of dissidents who marched into Red Square to stage a rally of protest against the Soviet invasion of Czechoslovakia? I believe this is an important indicator of dissent; there are quite a few people disillusioned with what is happening, who want to change the situation. This is also important as a political slogan source. As an individual citizen, I joined a campaign aimed at collecting signatures to cancel the ‘Dima Yakovlev Bill.’

“Demands for dissolution of the State Duma are good, but only as a political slogan, considering that [the Russian parliament] has no influence on that country. Duma is nothing more than a political figurehead – a pattern good for bringing forth strong, competent politicians prepared to face and help progressive change, people who are not disillusioned, unlike those who were actively involved in the so-called protest movement. Russia badly needs progress in terms of adequate domestic and foreign politics; it needs quick evolutionary (but never revolutionary) reforms.”

What should happen in Russia to make those “upstairs” hear what those “downstairs” actually need?

“I can’t think of such an occurrence. There are polls focusing on what the people are worried about the most. Utilities and rent. The bills are soaring year in and year out, yet no revolutionary outbursts.

“Polls have been carried across Russia, to the effect that protest moods are present everywhere, regardless of social stratum. Such moods have long ceased to be the prerogative of the creative class or the populace of a couple of big cities. Levada Center’s recent poll demonstrates that 40 percent of the Russian nationals are in favor of such protest actions, and that 10 percent are willing to participate.

“Most likely, the reason is the accumulation of certain events and policy change. The current administration, [Russia’s] highest-ranking bureaucrats are losing [face and] popularity. This is an irreversible process, although it is anyone’s guess how long this process will take, and what its consequences will be like. Russia is in for another coup d’etat, with the elite feeling that the man [i.e., the President of the RF], appointed as the guarantor of its interests and stability, may at any moment fail to guarantee them and make a [political] U-turn. The Magnistky Act was a signal to Russia’s elite that has long become accustomed to residing in two homes [one in Russia and the other one abroad, with all bank accounts safe in Switzerland or in offshore banks].”