Opinion One man,one vote?

While the choice between Medvedev,45,and Putin,58,may affect the career paths of individual ministers,it won’t change anything for ordinary Russians. For one,the two leaders themselves have repeatedly rejected the notion that there are significant differences between them. More importantly,it’s a foregone conclusion that the candidate with Putin’s name — or endorsement — will win. The top-down “power vertical” that Putin built endures,guaranteeing election results and locking out genuine opponents. Of Russia’s more than 100 million eligible voters,Putin has essentially become the only one whose voice counts.

Not even Medvedev,officially Putin’s boss,has much say. Plucked from obscurity,he owes his current job entirely to Putin. Although he made modernisation of Russia’s corrupt,oil-based economy the catchword of his presidency,he has little to show for it. More than once he has presided over tragicomic government meetings complaining that ministers ignore his orders. If Medvedev vanished from the political scene tomorrow,he wouldn’t leave a trace. He is a president without ambition,a power base or an electorate.

Russians expected more of democracy when they flocked to their first presidential elections 20 years ago this summer and overwhelmingly elected Boris Yeltsin. While Yeltsin tolerated political opponents and media criticism,he also did not hesitate to use force against rebel legislators or to tap into “administrative resources” to get re-elected in 1996. As his second term drew to a close,Yeltsin designated Putin,then a little-known Kremlin official,to preserve his legacy. The transfer of power from one generation to the next has been a factor of instability throughout Russian history.

For now,Putin is focusing on December’s parliamentary elections. In May he seized the initiative with the creation of a “People’s Front,” an amorphous umbrella group that would merge his United Russia party with hundreds of professional and civic organisations. In a single move,Putin widened his base while acknowledging that the governing party — a growing target of scorn — is no longer capable of delivering a resounding victory on its own.

The predictability of his political machine has effectively disenfranchised voters,depriving Russia of elections as a gauge of popular will. The leadership can never be sure of its true level of support,since its hold on power is premised on the passivity of the population rather than on the backing of an active citizenry.

The tandem is likely to announce its presidential candidate only after the parliamentary election has been squared away,as Putin did four years ago when he nominated Medvedev. Then,if all goes according to plan,the Kremlin candidate will sweep the election as the standard-bearer of strength and stability. Whatever the next president’s name,the winner will be Putin.

The greatest failure of Russia’s experiment with democracy is that no institutions have taken root that can check executive power and ensure continuity during times of political change. As recent history has demonstrated,political systems centered on personalities are inherently fragile,no matter how durable they may appear from the outside. Lucian Kim