Democracy in Russia is curtailed. The menace of dictatorship reinstatement has risen again. How will the results of the parliamentary elections in Russia tell upon CIS countries? For today these questions are raised not only by international organizations on human rights advocacy, but by the majority of politicians both in the West and in the East either; Western politicians got used to giving assessments to the processes taking place in the post-Soviet space, in the East reformation of society is toughened.
The East orients now on the West, but Russia is a peculiar bridge between the Russian and the European continents. Baltic countries have been out of account already. The states of this region were always inclined towards Western mode of life. The state of things is quite different with Russia and Ukraine - two biggest powers that make others follow their democratic world. The processes taking place in these countries can't help having a sway over the situation in the Caucasus and Central Asia. Hereby one must not forget that in no single country of these two regions you will observe convincing reasonings, which would prove their allegiance to the principles of democracy up to now. In such a situation, the appropriate question is: who influenced whom? Did Russia sway over the countries of the Caucasus and Central Asia or vice versa?
The analysis of the results of the elections into the State Duma of the Russian Federation crowned with the convincing victory of the party of the power makes think that Russia begins to be retreating from the principles of democracy. At least, the political parties which haven't managed to overcome the five-percent-bar are inclined to think so. This is also the opinion of a number of international organizations, which were watching the course of the elections. OSCE, European Council spoke about them utterly in the negative. "The elections into the State Duma on December 7, 2003 didn't correspond to many commitments taken by countries-members of OSCE and European Council in regard to democratic elections, thus the intention of Russia to move to the direction of European criteria in respect of democratic elections has been brought under challenge", - the statement runs.
Any power will try to prolong its governance. It happens irrespective of the place of elections. Let it be the United States or Germany, France or the United Kingdom. Things go different when we judge to what extent this or that country, this or that nation are ready for democratic elections. While giving an appraisal human rights advocacy organizations seem not to have taken into account the situation inside Russia itself. Personally, I do not see any grounds for being apprehensive of Russia to curtail its reforms. The results of the elections into the State Duma were not difficult to prediction. The population simply voted for those who had got down to concrete deeds. It stands to reason that a certain role has been played by Putin, fragile in constitution, but staunch in disposition, with his team who declared a war to tycoons. As for the people, yearning for order and discipline it simply supported those who had managed, at last, to liquidate anarchy and chaos in the country. In so far as the levers of execution are concerned, they are used everywhere by everyone. I am afraid that the tycoons, Russian ones especially, long ago made friends with representatives of international organizations on human rights advocacy who are prompt to dance under their pipe.
Wrong interpretations of the process taking place in Russia lurk a great danger many people even don't suspect of. It is especially important for the population of Central Asian countries, Tajikistan inclusive, as the majority of its people look namely towards Russia. We wouldn't like the "Russian political fashion" which may even not exist to be imported to Central Asian countries. Just now it is quite non-desirable, as the leaderships of the countries of this region have believed into the irreversibility of democratic transformations. I judge by the situation shaped in two countries - Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan. Over the last two-three years noticeable changes start bringing results, here, at last. The people begin to feel more freely. However, as they say, "a bad example is contagious". And these are Russian tycoons who may give this example convincing others of the encroachment on citizen's rights. Because big finances are focused in their hands.
Outsiders may make inferences easier, of course, if they permanently follow the development of events. Why have SPS and "Apple" lost the elections, why has CPRF lost a part of its electorate? As for communists, their defeat is utterly understandable. Their disciples are decreasing in number as the distance between the present and the past which belonged to this is becoming longer and only a certain part of population endures nostalgia for it. The ranks of their admirers will be ebbing from year to year. But the things go quite different with SPS and "Apple". The names of Chubays and Nemtsov long ago evoke revulsion, though one should acknowledge that the first is a good economist, but a bad politician. As for Yavlinsky, being in politics for a decade and a half, he has not ever managed to do anything for the Russian people. Simply people begin to disappoint in those whom they believed. New politicians are in need for these parties. People simply believe neither in Chubays, nor in Nemtsov, nor in Yavlinsky.
And what about Zhirinovsky? He is a populist. Still this is the man whose oratory art can be hardly imagined to be brought under challenge. He is able to convince people. Let him contradict himself sometimes, but he speaks about painful things. He proves that he does know about the people's pain. His loyal attitude to president Putin hasn't worked for him greatly. LDPR must be grateful to its leader. Over half of votes the party enjoyed had been given to Zhirinovsky. And I am more tan sure that the share of young politician Vladimir Ragozin in the success of "Motherland" bloc was no less than Vladimir Volfovich had.
I consider that the results of elections into the Russian State Duma are in evaluation of the course conducted by president Vladimir Putin being aimed at the restoration of legality and order in Russia where certain circles try to present them as a curtailment of democratic processes and a return to the establishment of authoritarian power. Democratic processes are irreversible and no single force is able to curtail them. We ought to be sure of it.