Putin his foot in it

No need for an exit pollAn opinion poll released on election night itself, based on responses from voters emerging from polling stations. They are generally the most accurate opinion polls., a swingometerA graphics device, often used in UK election programs, showing the swing in support from one party to another. , a night of punditsExperts. In India, the word refers to Hindus with an extensive knowledge of Sanskrit, philosophy, religion and the law. declaring it's still "all to play for": the Russian presidential election this year was hardly in doubt. Perhaps the only slight surprise was Vladimir Putin's apparent modesty: he claimed just 87% of the vote.¹

It makes for sobering reading in the West. At the start of the war in Ukraine, breathless observers were predicting that it was only a matter of time before Putin got his comeuppance, via a military coupWhen an individual or group takes control of government by illegal means, including by violence., a popular uprising or Alexei NavalnyA well-known opposition leader in Russia and critic of Vladimir Putin, who died in prison in 2024 at the age of 47. .

Now, two years, one aborted coup and a death in an Arctic prison later, Putin is still there, in control, fixing big election victories.

For some, this has more troubling implications. They say it shows dictatorships, not democracies, might own the future.

Despite all the naysaying and the prophesying, the world's powerful autocraciesCountries run by one person or small group with complete power. , like Russia and China, are only strengthening their grip.

Meanwhile, democracy still seems to be flailing. The world's biggest democracy, India, is sliding into authoritarianismA form of government in which individual freedoms are severely limited by government power. Examples include Nazi Germany, Khmer Rogue Cambodia and contemporary China..³ The USA's potential president as of November, Donald Trump, has praised both Adolf Hitler and Kim Jong Un.

This, they argue, is because a dictator can take the long view. Putin has been in power for 24 years now. That lets him act strategically. A democratic leader is only ever looking ahead four or five years.

But others say this is rarely true. Dictators, they say, must constantly be paranoidBelieving, often with no solid basis, that you are being harassed, betrayed or persecuted by others. , because they can only be replaced with violence. They cannot trust anyone, and they end up isolating themselves.

Meanwhile, advisers know that if they cross their paranoid leader they could be exiled, imprisoned or even killed.

That means they have no incentive to speak truth to power, and power is unable to hear them anyway.

In contrast, democracies are very good at identifying and solving people's grievances. Because everyone has the right to vote and express their opinions freely, if a large part of the population is angry then the government has to respond.

An autocrat might not even know how furious people are until that rage bursts out as an insurrectionA violent uprising against a government. that topples them.

The deeper truth, still others say, might be that the kind of government in Russia is not really the problem. Since the end of the Cold WarA period of diplomatic conflict between blocs led by the USA and the USSR that lasted from 1947 until 1991, when the USSR collapsed., Western liberals have been waiting for the person who will "fix" Russia and turn it into the vibrant democracy it was always supposed to be.

All its aberrantDifferent from what is normal or standard. behaviour has been put down to Putin himself, dragging a reluctant or brainwashed Russian public into war after war.

The one idea we do not want to confront, they argue, is that the problem is not Putin himself. Russia has been invading and colonising its neighbours for centuries. Putin is just its latest figurehead.

If Russia is to change it will take more than the end of Putin. It will need Russians to reflect on their past, give up their historic imperialismThe practice of growing a country's power through colonisation or force. and work towards a new and better relationship with the countries it used to rule.

Has Putin fallen into a trap?

Yes: History suggests that autocratic rule is not sustainable in the long term. Dictators get more and more removed from reality until their own decisions catch up with them.

No: Observers have been predicting Putin's demise for years, and yet he is still there. And while many dictatorships have been cut short in recent years, democracies are not looking too healthy either.

Or... Putin is a symptom of Russia's problems, not their cause. Anyone else would be pursuing the same policies. The key is to change Russia's political culture, not just its leader.