Translated material
Pope imams
Political scientists disagree on the number of presidents the country needs
The initiative of Chechen President Ramzan Kadyrov, who proposed that the republican parliament rename his position , received an ambiguous assessment from the expert community. According to Mr. Kadyrov's idea, there should be only one president in the country - the head of the Russian Federation, and the leaders of the national republics should find more modest titles for themselves. For example, simply “the head of the republic” - like the leader of North Ossetia Taimuraz Mamsurov. Domestic political scientists, whom the Vremya Novostey correspondent asked to evaluate this plan, disagreed.According to the vice-president of the Center for Political Technologies Sergei Mikheev, “such an initiative can fit into the general outline of eliminating asymmetries in the structure of the Russian Federation.” “Since the 90s, we have developed an asymmetrical model, when some subjects actually and nominally have greater rights than others, and this primarily concerns national republics,” the analyst is convinced. — Then, quite logically, there could be an initiative to eliminate the very name “republic”: it is a quasi-state, a state within a state, with its own constitution. Bringing all regions to a single denominator would be logical.”
However, the expert stipulates, the whole question is how the leaders of the North Caucasus republics will now call themselves, whether they will really limit themselves to simply “head of the region.” “If they are ready to be called governors, then that’s one thing, but if imams, sheikhs and padishahs appear, this will only worsen the situation and lead to the emergence of even more exotic and separatist institutions within the country,” Mr. Mikheev believes.
On the contrary, the president of the St. Petersburg Politics Foundation, Mikhail Vinogradov, does not see any signs of separatism in the current names of positions and regions. Such an assessment seems to him “a false understanding of a single legal space and federalism.” “For regions, the names of legislative bodies and leadership positions today are not so much a struggle for opposition and sovereignty, but simply a reflection of the idea that they have the right to call themselves as they feel comfortable,” he believes.
Mr. Vinogradov believes that in the story of renaming presidents into heads of republics, the risks may turn out to be more tangible than the apparent advantages. “By getting as deeply as possible into the technical aspects of managing the activities of territories, the federal government provokes irritation, without particularly receiving any bonuses from this,” Mr. Vinogradov develops his thought. And this is at a time when there are many truly serious unresolved problems in relations between the center and the regions, in particular the issues of budgetary security, local self-government, and reducing corruption. Finally, the analyst recalls that the fight against “separatism” can lead unexpectedly far: “In Belarus they took this path to the point of absurdity, prohibiting even the heads of banks and joint-stock companies from being called presidents.”
But independent political scientist Dmitry Oreshkin does not see anything in what is happening other than an “administrative itch.” “The government is losing popularity, ratings are creeping down—something needs to be done,” he argues in a conversation with a Vremya Novostei correspondent. “We can’t really do anything, but at least let’s pretend virtually that our government is strong and powerful, there is only one president for the whole country.” This is from the same series as renaming the police into police. Power is geared towards virtual-symbolic actions. But in fact, even call it a pot, just don’t put it in the stove.”
Mr. Oreshkin is confident that it is important for ordinary citizens and voters that the head of the region copes effectively with his functions, “and whether he is called president, governor or procurator does not matter.” True, the analyst draws attention to the fact that if the head of Chechnya is called an imam, then this will be a claim not only on administrative, but also on spiritual governance of the territory. However, neither Ramzan Kadyrov nor other heads of the North Caucasus republics have yet laid claim to this name.
By the way, about titles: let’s not forget that in the Soviet Union the discreet title of General Secretary of the CPSU Central Committee did not prevent the person holding this post from concentrating all the levers of power in his hands.