Translated material
Young President's School
Why was Sergei Ivanov made first deputy prime minister? Well, of course: to show that he is exactly the same candidate for successor as First Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev . Why didn't they keep him as Minister of Defense? Well, of course: so that the outrages in the unreformed Russian army do not affect his potential presidential rating. Why was a person who does not understand civilian economics assigned to oversee some civilian or “dual-use” industries? Well, of course: so that he can study in case he becomes prime minister under President Medvedev. Why was Sergei Naryshkin made Deputy Prime Minister for Foreign Economic Affairs and CIS countries? Well, of course: Mikhail Fradkov asked to take away part of the powers from German Gref, whom he disliked, but one must at least respect the prime minister in some way. Why was the former head of the Federal Tax Service, Anatoly Serdyukov, appointed Minister of Defense? The Kremlin does not answer this question in principle, and commentators are at a loss. In any case, not to strengthen civilian control over the army (how civilian is it, if in Mr. Serdyukov’s official biography the 16 years after graduating from university are virtually absent) and not to reform the army swamp.
Nobody in today’s Russia even asks why the positions of deputy prime ministers were first abolished, giving vice-premier powers to ministers, and now we already have two first deputy prime ministers and two simple “vice” ones. Why were ministers initially prohibited from having more than two deputies, and then allowed again? Why are some ministers working as if nothing had happened, causing, to put it mildly, bewilderment in the professional community or clearly not having clear responsibilities (for example, the head of the Ministry of Regional Development)?
But everything that concerns the government also concerns other bodies of Russian power. What, do we really have the Prosecutor General’s Office to monitor compliance with the law and investigate crimes? No, of course: its first task is to fight the enemies of the real owners of the country. Or perhaps the Constitutional Court defends the inviolability of the Constitution? When the authorities needed it, he, without blinking an eye, essentially canceled his previous verdict from the Yeltsin era and recognized the abolition of direct elections of governors as constitutional. And the governors themselves now work not at all in order to improve the lives of the people in the territories entrusted to them, but in order, first of all, to please the Kremlin.
It is not surprising that legal institutions of power do not govern Russia at all. And it is ruled by a complex system of shadow relations between officials and their influential friends. In such a situation, it is logical that our government is neither party-based (although United Russia, as a party with a constitutional majority in the State Duma, according to the laws of a normal political system, should form a cabinet individually) and not technical - a significant part of the ministers are clearly “specialists” is not. That is, in fact, it is not a government at all.
It is precisely because the system of legal government institutions has been reduced to nothing and even the president is actually “king, god and judge” that it is so painfully difficult to transfer this power. Power should be in legitimate government bodies with a clear legislative division of powers, but it is not there. But charisma and rating cannot be conveyed by any law or decree.
So we have to turn the government into a crash course in training potential presidents. At the same time, explaining to the public that we do not have “successors”, but presidential candidates, and not the Byzantine Empire, but a sovereign democracy.