This article was downloaded by: 10.3.98.104 On: 01 Oct 2021 Access details: subscription number Publisher: Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG, UK

Routledge Handbook of Russian Politics and Society

Graeme Gill, James Young

The Medvedev Presidency

Publication details https://www.routledgehandbooks.com/doi/10.4324/9780203804490.ch3 Graeme Gill Published online on: 26 Oct 2011

How to cite :- Graeme Gill. 26 Oct 2011, The Medvedev Presidency from: Routledge Handbook of Russian Politics and Society Routledge Accessed on: 01 Oct 2021 https://www.routledgehandbooks.com/doi/10.4324/9780203804490.ch3

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR DOCUMENT

Full terms and conditions of use: https://www.routledgehandbooks.com/legal-notices/terms

This Document PDF may be used for research, teaching and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproductions, re-distribution, re-selling, loan or sub-licensing, systematic supply or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden.

The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The publisher shall not be liable for an loss, actions, claims, proceedings, demand or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material. Downloaded By: 10.3.98.104 At: 06:17 01 Oct 2021; For: 9780203804490, chapter3, 10.4324/9780203804490.ch3 aeRsi nadsicl ifrn,ls uhrtra,drcinta hto i mentor. his might of he that that than many direction to authoritarian, suggested Soviet less training the different, legal to distinctly his exposure a and less in textbook. background consequently Russia security legal from (and take a popular age of Also his a although lack So Putin, written his Moscow. president. to to system), had him advancement elected brought and career had latter his PhD, when the owed and a Petersburg the he 42 with St in into lawyer Putin being with then trained served had fall), younger, a He its was much he brought of being Petersburg, was time before St the Sobchak Medvedev Anatoly at Petersburg Moscow. Germany St East of to mayor in democratic serving the May. of in KGB, administration inauguration (the his as services following Putin kept security appoint he the promise to a undertaken was had This was and elected. he was successor that he was preferred if emergence his minister his national as in prime the important Putin more for by was designated responsibility what but publicly with exposure, public minister, some prime him Putin’ admin- gave to presidential deputy central the first became of that became head projects 2005 with priority he to minister, 2005 2003 prime became from In Putin then istration. when and Putin head by deputy Moscow becoming to Medvedev brought been been had latter had the He when campaign. the Petersburg city’ with St association in the his Putin for by with buoyed working worked doubtless and was had young the he Medvedev quite but in Putin. president. still arena, vote popular was public the as very the 42 of in at elected time cent who little per someone was so for 70.3 spent Medvedev, remarkable winning had seem election, Dmitry may run-off popularity successor, Putin a His But to round. his go first term. 2008 to third required he March a not that seek 2 was assertions to Medvedev on frequent him his and encouraged Despite many firm, again. Constitution, the stood once the change by office or strictly for terms, abide stand consecutive would to two him only term allow allowing another to provision seek president, Constitution constitutional as the down of stand violation would he in whether about discussion considerable was hogotmc ftescn afo ldmrPutin’ Vladimir of half second the of much Throughout hrymnh noMedvedev into months Thirty tandem? A bu hc hr a infcn ulcdsuso.Wieaayt oe vrtersece and speeches their over pored analysts While one discussion. remained public minister significant to prime was Putin and there allow president to which between aside relationship about step the would presidency, he the whether for or again term run second a for run would Medvedev whether evdvwsavr ifrn yeo oiiint ui.Ptnhdgn rmuiest into university from gone had Putin Putin. to politician of type different very a was Medvedev eoms ao ntl oca,adh a u Putin run had he and Sobchak, Anatoly mayor reformist s h evdvpresidency Medvedev The ’ em ywihtm pclto a led apn about rampant already was speculation time which by term, s rgam uighsscn em hsposition This term. second his during programme s eodpeieta em(2004– term presidential second s reeGill Graeme ’ 00election 2000 s ) there 8), 3 27 Downloaded By: 10.3.98.104 At: 06:17 01 Oct 2021; For: 9780203804490, chapter3, 10.4324/9780203804490.ch3 soitdwt i u h a evdi h euiysrie.These services. security the in served personally had only not who were who but been people has many him Attention Moscow with to base. brought power minister associated Putin personal which own prime in his way up the build as to to drawn president predecessors new the his by attempt that any for ways in West the on to the outspoken been relation with not. also in were has relationship participant generally He active Georgia. the with an relationship of of as whole conduct appeared questions the the and in clearly was conflict Putin predecessors role the 2008. his leading of a than in conduct playing more Georgia his abroad with of instance travelled war striking has the most He the perhaps affairs. but foreign did, of ever issues in 2008 involved of directly crisis financial global the largely working policy were they possible that and assume a saying to called seem been were has Russians they what most in what men, together two between the differences between discern conflicts to trying statements, Gill Graeme 28 Russia selling publicly and the shaping in onto part his ventured matters; rarely economic in ministers involved prime been has but urge, the felt involved president became they presidents whenever minister successive matters absolute; prime been economic the never and in has defence distinction and had This affairs economy. which foreign the for for equal. that responsible his than is but president minister president, the the prime constitutionally of the subordinate for the as profile appear different him not for very does change a He a not before. was been prevailed it has so sort 2000, the it in is president but This became crisis. he personally, the since about projected practical has seen something Putin was do that while Putin to image 2010: fires, trying of firefighters the of the of summer with suppression the field the the in about in Russia orders their out issuing central in Moscow somewhat of evident in much seems was shown gripped contrast was he that The Medvedev presidents, fires minister. former the prime during his the of images with public profile concern compared a public evinces heightened But and the people. country by the his reduced of of parts problems different visits the he out for predecessors demon- reaches his initiative, and like speeches shows populace; gives who too the politician Medvedev to someone a popularity. than widespread as Rather enjoys fashion. appears and effective he leadership an president, strates in the out from them direction sort making to for goes only tries who waiting case and politician not the no-nonsense are the minister, hands-on, problems been prime a the figure, activist as not where shown an to political being has been also That has but leading gatherings Putin stage. major the power. at political in speeches became the been has dominated minister tandem who the prime leader while distinctly in the the and, a always vice-president, ill was was was a Yeltsin president when minister of Except direction minister. public prime absence prime the his giving the the to leader, leadership dominant Putin, direct the specifically, was and of more who each and, president Yeltsin of the competence was presidents of It spheres figure. both the subordinate of Under terms in general offices. and the president these the infect vis-à-vis and minister up prime the build of public. both in thereby out and played another they get (i.e. not to bounds do area within they policy kept and are one agree. relationship) disagreements always from must those seep they disagree, that not they mean when do necessarily that, there not is that does means mean tandem not it a does What in together 2012 being work the and they in differences, say run they not latter because the are discuss should just they Putin course, against of that run But and not poll. together would presidential he working that are said has they Medvedev that and emphasised issues; have Putin and Medvedev both hsburn flnso epniiiyas a esne ieso,wihhdimplications had which dimension, personnel a had also responsibility of lines of blurring This h pee frsosblt lose ohv eoels la ic 08 ral speaking, Broadly 2008. since clear less become have to seem also responsibility of spheres The standing the of terms in both politics, Russian of rules the changed has tandem the that clear is It ’ uf ne h adm h itnto em ital ohv iapae.Medvedev disappeared. have to virtually seems distinction the tandem, the Under turf. s – “ 9i aei on.Btmr motnl,Ptnhsbeen has Putin importantly, more But point. in case a is 09 tandem ” ntefwocsoste aedsusdteissue, the discussed have they occasions few the On . “ siloviki” ’ eesi to said were epneto response s Downloaded By: 10.3.98.104 At: 06:17 01 Oct 2021; For: 9780203804490, chapter3, 10.4324/9780203804490.ch3 u hsde o en sntdaoe htteecno edifferences. be cannot there that Putin above, together. the noted harness as in about working mean, definitive leaders not two anything does the with dynamics this say consistent the But perfectly about to is enough face had know able public loyalty not the be do have that of just except to attribution we would moment, the politics the president At that elite appear. suggesting was might of those it perhaps as Putin of administration, easy many as that while not case of is any administration head current In their presidential the promote? to as and the allegiance Medvedev fire give in hire, they to worked should power or who the patron administration, former possesses that their presumably of to who support charge and boss in loyalty not giving now by served is be who interests best Medvedev their would putative Putin: the those by any Moscow for within dilemma the onto a conflict be within would maps in conflict there example, manifested it some into be been how has would him but certainly this to bureaucracies, There that loyal apparatus. likely political be is Moscow might it central who Putin, as people and people these to Medvedev bring referred between have to some apparatus; began state the also in positions Medvedev Moscow, to coming h iwo i smr iea hnhspeeesr n eurn hm nhsrmrshsbeen has remarks his in theme recurring One calls predecessor. he his what than of liberal criticism more as him of view the the of member a former as a well as as and promotion people their these of to source outlook the (Putin services as policy security both particular Putin, a to loyalty both personal imputed have Moscow in and Many in Renz) Willerton). structure Bettina Putin by power 18 Chapter in the 2006; of Rivera particular and reaches Rivera 2003; upper White the and (Kryshtanovskaya throughout positions important occupy ti etil h aeta ubro Medvedev of number a that case the certainly is It Programme? Medvedev A h law the ihsadfedma the as freedom and rights eetyn obid ewsntaes opasn eorc,wt h oreo h continued the of be source the to with said democracy, they with country praising what one to was the society, Russia averse of of not free values was development and traditional He the just on build. more resting to focus, A trying its order. were as legal people the the society” of of interests civil best and the system our court the and of state strengthening our of cornerstone rgam of and essential, programme view, people’ by also the was his protected by development freedoms created In Economic be and imported. society. to be rights had civil society fundamental civil of with and future, Freedom development essential. the law the to solve with path help to the linked in remained he pitching democracy people which of characteristic self-help, real. personal a his was of problems, it by virtues but the overshadowed lauded nuance, been He a 2009). had was (Medvedev two theme the this between law, difference of The state. rule gazeta strong the (Novaya the about process upon spoken judicial emphasis had the too of Putin independence and protecting the While importance for and the and society society emphasised civil civil Medvedev of of 2008). development (Medvedev the of for institutions importance essential democratic the as Putin, strengthening seen to was central been this had state; that strong theme a a in acknowledged, but forward, way Constitution best the by guaranteed procedures and institutions nSpebr20 evdvhdise rgamtcsaeetentitled statement programmatic a issued had Medvedev 2009 September In ” ( rmanovostei Vremya “ modernisation ’ w alwc,tepeieta diitain(e hpe yPat by 7 Chapter (see administration presidential the bailiwick, own s ’ s “ “ “ 3Jnayad1 eray20) esoeo h edfrhuman for need the of spoke He 2008). February 18 and January 23 , neaceit lasachekist a always chekist, a once ea nihilism” legal urm au norsociety” our in value supreme ”– o hstedvlpeto ihtc nutywsnecessary. was industry high-tech of development the this for , “ “ esnlfedmadtemtrt ftedemocratic the of maturity the and freedom personal otmtfrlaw for contempt siloviki ( ’ ulcsaeet aebe ossetwith consistent been have statements public s rmanovostei Vremya rmtdit h rsdniladministration presidential the into promoted n the and ” ” upmyb lutaieo hs.Upon this). of illustrative be may quip eafre htdmcaywsthe was democracy that affirmed He . ” – n h edfrthe for need the and napeusro i uuecl o a for call future his of precursor a in – “ ui eso sntcer For clear. not is tension Putin udmna oeo a a]the [as] law of role fundamental a 08;h ogta sought he 2008); May 8 , “ civiliki w ciiy tcudnot could it activity; own s h evdvpresidency Medvedev The – evdvrelationship, Medvedev ” fteewstension was there If . 9 5Arl2009). April 15 39, “ owr Russia Forward “ urmc of supremacy 29 ” Downloaded By: 10.3.98.104 At: 06:17 01 Oct 2021; For: 9780203804490, chapter3, 10.4324/9780203804490.ch3 ossetyt ofrhrta i rdcso a oe esoeo h erras terror the of spoke He done. had predecessor his than further go to consistently country. the of development to the unwilling were in who involved entrepreneurs become and officialdom among corruption criticised also Medvedev Gill Graeme n oens h ry nldn h hfigo oe rmmltr ocvla fiil (see officials 30 civilian to military reform from to power made of Gorenburg). been Dmitry shifting have by attempts the 19 where including Chapter military this army, the effective how the in unclear pursued modernise is will been it and campaign problem, also the a has of size such Change the be. far given can Medvedev but how law, to seen of strengthening have substance be the also for some to need could remains gives this it it although But Certainly mid-2010, area. extend. the in was could human-rights apparatus too This the security So in charges. corruption. the professional against implications to official more fight given a the cases powers them in help some making in would including extension in which police, of and the both force, reform bodies better-paid police. to and both the measures at against by from directed and 2010 dismissals been Interior, in the has followed in of this resulted that Ministry mid-2008, the campaign has in in anti-corruption Initiated This officials words. an lower-level just and launched than middle- has further (mainly) Medvedev presidency, somewhat 17, go Putin to the Chapter seems from in change out substantial points Medvedev little Holmes of been mark has half-way the there at policy, although practical of terms In Putinism? of continuation A by justified be could accusations false is and there terror declared, by He caused purpose. millions national of higher some deaths Russia the of that claim history the the in tragedies greatest nldn hi xlsv ih opower to right as exclusive saw he their legal which including system, system, multi-party political the of the favour of in strengthening out “ came the also people for He and society. for civil state, activity, and the institutions economic than from rather state themselves the by solved of withdrawal some favoured He modernisation overcoming h roiyfrmdriainadtcnlgcldvlpetwsmeigpeople meeting was development technological and modernisation for priority The eyn ntesaefrsltos h oeo i esg sdfeetads ssm ftecontent. the of some is policy? so and in different manifested is been message his this of has tone But The solutions. for state the on relying and predecessor. law of his have rule Russia with the to system, contrast political seems a strong a suggest Medvedev not emphasises democracy; does he which state, message strong with a his favours force of Medvedev While consistency the the However, and Putin. them projected including another, or time the of of version sponsoring this his of was driver the aim as Valley. this envisaged Silicon was with which was Consistent Moscow, be. Russia outside Centre to of Innovation responsibility modernisation Skolkovo principal technological his in the plank saw project; key he to a what became sought which fundamental. Medvedev modernisation were message of nihilism public programme the legal the launched and which corruption speech this with was fight It the and government in transparency h otipratto o nuigtefnaetlrgt n reoso u people, our of freedoms and rights fundamental the ensuring for tool important most the evdvas icse h usino h tlns ersin nawywihseemed which way a in repressions Stalinist the of question the discussed also Medvedev n20 evdvcle o h onr oudroapormeof programme a undergo to country the for called Medvedev 2009 In h hmsMdee asdwr o e.Fre edr a asdalo hs susa one at issues these of all raised had leaders Former new. not were raised Medvedev themes The ’ uue n nacr ihti eepaie oua ntaieadcetvt ahrthan rather creativity and initiative popular emphasises he this with accord in and future, s “ u hoi akades eedneo a aeil xot,adcorruption and exports, materials raw on dependence backwardness, chronic our … “ oeeg democracy sovereign ae ndmcai ausadinstitutions and values democratic on based ” ii oit em ohv oiiepaei i iinof vision his in place positive a have to seems society Civil . ” h teghnn fdmcai ntttos greater institutions, democratic of strengthening The . ” ’ wwkelnr,3 coe 09 n rejected and 2009) October 30 (www.kremlin.ru, em hr aebe oeinvtos sLeslie As innovations. some been have there term, s “ oecs o repression for excuse no ’ omnsaotcruto n the and corruption about comments s ” Mdee 09) hsinvolved This 2009a). (Medvedev ” ’ . rbest be to problems s “ comprehensive ’ elneeds. real s “ n fthe of one ” . Downloaded By: 10.3.98.104 At: 06:17 01 Oct 2021; For: 9780203804490, chapter3, 10.4324/9780203804490.ch3 ogtr aigrgt o h lc e le nteUriinpr fSvsoo;a agreement an Sevastopol; of port Ukrainian the in fleet Sea Black the for fraught. rights somewhat basing been long-term had Moscow governments former from under importantly which More issue Moscow’ an prices, (from gas conducive of more negotiation a create to the seemed for election victory foreign-policy to major backers a as Western Moscow. seen putative in was his leadership This Medvedev convinced the membership. of have for adventurism support to perceived their seems the moderate Saakashvili However, the States. Mikhail within United from leader views the Georgian their had from for governments especially sympathy Both NATO, considerable NATO. been of had of ranks there Soviet members and former become case, this to the pressing Georgia had of been that and going momentum was area the Ukraine it blunted effectively Russian for the that it and Second, building region. of interests significant this been its in much defend actor was to major in forcefully a effects. be act there primacy to would continue primary it Russian to that that two all of had to clear signal reassertion war a sending public also the Union, the a outlook, is was was foreign-policy it it Russian it that the clear First, conflict, is of it the terms While In started Donaldson). provocation. Robert which by 36 side economy. Chapter Georgian the (see in Georgia state with the war for 2008 role short- limited a more but a anything advocated on involvement Medvedev state did indeed, increased government basis; for the crisis case and the term, make ownership to state opportunity of this expansion use difficulty wholesale not in no banks some was although perfect there However, a nationalised, the role. offered were that crisis to of financial expansion global relates continued the the crisis that for believed the opportunity many and to to economy, seems response the of strategy its sectors its strategic from overall the arising effect, combat positive factor a to important state had which One did with successful. it resources everything been significant not have While it crisis. gave sovereign the its of decade in of amounts away preceding effects put massive the had The government over the government. that fund Medvedev sales wealth gas the and to oil by go principally must generated money also credit some but Russia’ recovery, chapter, his in out points Tompson vertical Medvedev power the Bashkortostan of in Slider). Rakhimov centralism Darrell Murtaz by and of 13 Tatarstan Chapter trend in (see Shaimiyev the Mintimir bucked Moscow, regional in long-standing had Luzhkov three of autonomy removal the the whose with 2010 despite Greater in leaders but competitive. asserted genuinely be election), more to next system seemed political parliamentary also the the control of make from central to length effect effort The no take prison. been (to has in there extended spell rhetoric been further has a terms to sentenced presidential was and 2010, December in trial following a who, Khodorkovsky, Mikhail businessman incarcerated the against brought were charges rknoti te at ftecuty u hshsntbe nalresae h ei has media The scale. large a on been Putin not under has was this it but state country, the the in also of sporadically remained parts has other activity Protest in denied. out been demonstrate had broken to this permission formerly given where were Square Moscow change protesters Triumfalnaya long-serving when in A of Sobyanin, strategy. replacement Sergei the opposition by following Luzhkov or 2010 it Yury October policy mayor although in regime this up, to to broken regard due with or occur mainly allowed did was not this either whether been unclear still remains mostly have Moscow in Demonstrations otowsteeeto nUrieo h r-ocwVko auoihi 00 His 2010. in Yanukovich Viktor pro-Moscow the of Ukraine in election the was too So Medvedev during development important most the policy, foreign In after soon hit which crisis, financial global the was development principal the Economically, ntepbi pee hr a enn iheigo rsueo poiinforces. opposition on pressure of lightening no been has there sphere, public the In ’ oei h cnm.UdrPtnteehdbe nepnino tt wesi nkey in ownership state of expansion an been had there Putin Under economy. the in role s ’ lcin hshdasgiiat u eprr,efc nRussia’ on effect temporary, but significant, a had This election. s ’ esetv,areetwsrahdo netnino the of extension an on reached was agreement perspective, s ’ rsdnyad nahgl yblcmv,further move, symbolic highly a in and, presidency s eoeywsdei ag att h lbleconomic global the to part large in due was recovery s on fve)amshr o the for atmosphere view) of point s h evdvpresidency Medvedev The ’ rwh sWilliam As growth. s rsdnywsthe was presidency s – Yury 31 Downloaded By: 10.3.98.104 At: 06:17 01 Oct 2021; For: 9780203804490, chapter3, 10.4324/9780203804490.ch3 ern tpe .adDl .Hrpig(d)(2010), (eds) Herspring R. Dale and K. Stephen Wegren, aw,Rcad(2011), Richard Sakwa, —— (2008), Dmitry Medvedev, erv ioa (2009), Nikolai Petrov, Ol Kryshtanovskaya, different era. a new References a with presidency of albeit Medvedev beginning the the continue, than that rather means to interregnum also an likely This as positions. seen could looked positive swap be Medvedev would leaders tandem and some two 2012 the says, the in as president again minister, in configuration presidency the announcement prime the the what for the Given stand of achieved. become would tone substantial Putin nothing that the but 2011 in sphere, September policy tinge the liberal in more beginnings a with presidency, as way forces. a in of such treaty balance in START not prevailing new although the a side, of alter relation- each signature on equal substantially warheads the and to of with stable number gained the more be reduce a to to seemed for designed this desire mid-2010, of a Part into and West. Russia agenda, the of international with projection ship the a on views, issues and major interests the Russian all of with expression assertive apparently more years, a 25 presidency: success. further major a a was for This port Moscow. the for of costs occupancy offsetting Russian little for providing signed was Gill Graeme 32 (2006), Rivera W. David and Werning Sharon Rivera, —— —— Lna,M:Rwa Littlefield). & Rowman MD: (Lanham, Press). University Cambridge (Cambridge: Bourgeois? appears/2008/11/208749.shtml. tde n rniinPolitics Transition and Studies System kremlin.ru/transcripts/5979. nsm h evdvpeiec a entecniuto ftemi hmso h Putin the of themes main the of continuation the seen has presidency Medvedev the sum, In Putin the of period the from unchanged basically remained West the toward policy The (2009), (2010), (2009a), ” , usa oiisadLaw and Politics Russian http://www.gazeta.ru/comments/2009/09/10_a_3258568.shtml. vpered!”, “Rossiya einlGvrosUdrteDa oe fMdee n Putin and Medvedev of Power Dual the Under Governors “Regional ”, olneFederal “Poslanie otSve Affairs Post-Soviet ’ aadSehnWie(2003), White Stephen and ga h rsso usa eorc.TeDa tt,Fcinls n h evdvSuccession Medvedev the and Factionalism State, Dual The Democracy. Russian of Crisis The amSelo pigTa?Iaie n elCagsi h usa Political Russian the in Changes Real and Imagined Thaw? Spring or Spell “Warm drs oFdrlAssembly Federal to “Address 6() 276 (2): 26 ’ ouSbaiuRsiso Federatsii Rossiiskoi Sobraniyu nomu 2() 125 (2): 22 7() 40 (6): 47 – 305. – – 44. 46. “Putin oebr http://president.kremlin.ru/text/ November, 5 ”, h usa lt ne ui:Mltcai or Militocratic Putin: Under Elite Russian “The fe Putin After ’ Militocracy s ’ usa atIpret uueUncertain Future Imperfect, Past Russia. s ”, 2Nvme,http://president. November, 12 ”, otSve Affairs Post-Soviet ”, ora fCommunist of Journal 9() 289 (4): 19 – 306.