5 ms·

It wasn't predetermined, but there was a chain of events that helped. 1) 1993 constitution crisis. Role of the president had gained more power compared to the

It wasn't predetermined, but there was a chain of events that helped. 1) 1993 constitution crisis. Role of the president had gained more power compared to the State Duma (lower legislative house). 2) Privatization in Russia was a mess. On one hand, it created the oligarch class, which led to the obvious money → political power transition. On the other, huge slice of society had suffered economically, which explains the mid 2000s social contract of "People get less democracy in exchange for economical stability". 3) KGB archives hadn't been opened when there was an opportunity to do so. It was a huge mistake. 4) Re-election of Yeltsin in 1996 was against the natural way of events. Lots of resources were used in agitation, including, but not limited to professional political consultants from the USA. Putin's cronies were learning from the best ones. 5) As of 1999, Putin's appointment was a collective decision between two oligarch clans. It was a pure feudalistic/mafia-like process, without a hint of democratic principles. By the time of the next president elections, ruling oligarch clan controlled most of the media. That's a very oversimplified view. First Chechen war is not mentioned. Role of the Second Chechen war in Putin's presidency is important, yet not crucial.

lern_too_spel 2y ago
You're leaving out Putin's role and emphasizing minor details. For example, Putin always hated the US, and the fact that Yeltsin's campaign hired American pollsters had nothing to do with that, nor do Russians in general care who Yeltsin hired as consultants. Former FSB agent Litvinenko accused the FSB of being behind the apartment building bombings before Putin had him assassinated. These bombings were equivalent to 9/11 in the Russian consciousness at that time, and FSB agents were even found to have planted the defused bomb that immediately preceded the Second Chechen War, but after they were arrested, FSB director Patrushev claimed that incident (that was used to justify a war) was an anti-terror drill and had them released the next day. There were no more apartment bombings after that, and the Chechens claimed to have nothing to do with those bombings, which is exactly the opposite of what any other terrorist group would do. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1999_Russian_apartment_bombings https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1999_Russian_apartment_bombing... https://www.kyivpost.com/opinion/38614 https://www.kyivpost.com/opinion/38614
- throwaway74354 2y ago
  >You're leaving out Putin's role Putin was a figurehead of the oligarch clan from Saint-Petersburg, who happened to have KGB connections as well. Russia had moved from the Western-like democratic path already. They could've chosen another person with the same results. >Putin always hated the US It doesn't matter. Professional criminals don't operate out of hate. >the fact that Yeltsin's campaign hired American pollsters had nothing to do with that, nor do Russians in general care who Yeltsin hired as consultants He was re-elected with very low initial public support. Had Zyuganov become president in 1996, there could be an opportunity to build the democratic tradition of transition of power. OTOH, communists could've messed up in some other way, of course. I also omitted the financial crisis of 1998, but that's another explanation of why general public wasn't so principled regarding democratic values as opposed to promise of stability, 7-10 years later. Re: apartment bombings. Correct, that's the casus beli for the Second Chechen war and directly related to Putin's election platform.
  - lern_too_spel 2y ago
    > Putin was a figurehead of the oligarch clan from Saint-Petersburg, who happened to have KGB connections as well. Russia had moved from the Western-like democratic path already. They could've chosen another person with the same results. There were no oligarchs in St. Petersburg when Putin got into politics, and he wasn't a figurehead. Putin had ties to the St. Petersburg underworld, who were experienced with capitalism during communism. His affiliation with them helped him work his way up St. Petersburg politics as a deal fixer. > It doesn't matter. Professional criminals don't operate out of hate. Many of Putin's actions are absolutely driven by hatred of the West. > Had Zyuganov become president in 1996, there could be an opportunity to build the democratic tradition of transition of power. Only Zyuganov is to blame for losing. Pinning this on Americans is a huge stretch.
    - throwaway74354 2y ago
      >There were no oligarchs in St. Petersburg when Putin got into politics How do you call people like Gennady Timchenko? There's a nuanced difference between "Successful fossil fuel mogul" and "Member of a crime syndicate". >Pinning this on Americans is a huge stretch I didn't. It was a minor detail explaining that these were the second president elections ever happened in modern Russia and there was no local expertise in manipulating public opinion yet. And there was no legal checks and balances preventing abuse of power of the current president. "Administrative resource" had become a common noun after 1996.

lern_too_spel 2y ago

You're leaving out Putin's role and emphasizing minor details. For example, Putin always hated the US, and the fact that Yeltsin's campaign hired American pollsters had nothing to do with that, nor do Russians in general care who Yeltsin hired as consultants. Former FSB agent Litvinenko accused the FSB of being behind the apartment building bombings before Putin had him assassinated. These bombings were equivalent to 9/11 in the Russian consciousness at that time, and FSB agents were even found to have planted the defused bomb that immediately preceded the Second Chechen War, but after they were arrested, FSB director Patrushev claimed that incident (that was used to justify a war) was an anti-terror drill and had them released the next day. There were no more apartment bombings after that, and the Chechens claimed to have nothing to do with those bombings, which is exactly the opposite of what any other terrorist group would do. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1999_Russian_apartment_bombings https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1999_Russian_apartment_bombing... https://www.kyivpost.com/opinion/38614 https://www.kyivpost.com/opinion/38614

throwaway74354 2y ago
>You're leaving out Putin's role Putin was a figurehead of the oligarch clan from Saint-Petersburg, who happened to have KGB connections as well. Russia had moved from the Western-like democratic path already. They could've chosen another person with the same results. >Putin always hated the US It doesn't matter. Professional criminals don't operate out of hate. >the fact that Yeltsin's campaign hired American pollsters had nothing to do with that, nor do Russians in general care who Yeltsin hired as consultants He was re-elected with very low initial public support. Had Zyuganov become president in 1996, there could be an opportunity to build the democratic tradition of transition of power. OTOH, communists could've messed up in some other way, of course. I also omitted the financial crisis of 1998, but that's another explanation of why general public wasn't so principled regarding democratic values as opposed to promise of stability, 7-10 years later. Re: apartment bombings. Correct, that's the casus beli for the Second Chechen war and directly related to Putin's election platform.
- lern_too_spel 2y ago
  > Putin was a figurehead of the oligarch clan from Saint-Petersburg, who happened to have KGB connections as well. Russia had moved from the Western-like democratic path already. They could've chosen another person with the same results. There were no oligarchs in St. Petersburg when Putin got into politics, and he wasn't a figurehead. Putin had ties to the St. Petersburg underworld, who were experienced with capitalism during communism. His affiliation with them helped him work his way up St. Petersburg politics as a deal fixer. > It doesn't matter. Professional criminals don't operate out of hate. Many of Putin's actions are absolutely driven by hatred of the West. > Had Zyuganov become president in 1996, there could be an opportunity to build the democratic tradition of transition of power. Only Zyuganov is to blame for losing. Pinning this on Americans is a huge stretch.
  - throwaway74354 2y ago
    >There were no oligarchs in St. Petersburg when Putin got into politics How do you call people like Gennady Timchenko? There's a nuanced difference between "Successful fossil fuel mogul" and "Member of a crime syndicate". >Pinning this on Americans is a huge stretch I didn't. It was a minor detail explaining that these were the second president elections ever happened in modern Russia and there was no local expertise in manipulating public opinion yet. And there was no legal checks and balances preventing abuse of power of the current president. "Administrative resource" had become a common noun after 1996.