The time for petitions is over

The organizers of the action "Tired" did not guess with the format

The Saturday action of Open Russia, which took place on the eve of the start of the long May holidays in Russia, was a blank shot. It is clear that the participants in the Khodorkovsky project tried to build on the success of the March 26 protests and at the same time offer a new format - the mass transmission of letters to the president. But both goals were not achieved, and the action rather harmed the protest mobilization, as did the attempt by New Opposition activists to hold a rally on Tverskaya on April 2.

The more such relatively small speeches the opposition makes, the more likely it is that the protest as a whole will fall back to the “Strategy-31” format, when several hundred activists came out to protest, almost without attracting the attention of the general public. And the easier it will be for the authorities to present the protesters as, if not provocateurs, then at least outcasts who do not represent the interests of large social groups. There are a lot of tension points in the country now - from truckers to nervous expectations associated with Moscow renovation. But only Navalny and his supporters managed to create an "infrastructure" for the peaceful representation of these disparate problems. Will it be possible to build on this success on June 12? This largely depends on the actions of "other oppositions" - satellites who want attention and mass demonstrations, but do not know how to do them.

Writing letters to the president and gathering for this at the reception of his administration is a rather strange idea, evoking associations with the events of 1905. In essence, the Khodorkovsky movement proposed the old slogan "Russia without Putin" and the only political innovation this time was to pour this old wine into new wineskins. Inform Putin of the need for his resignation through petitions. Open Russia activists saw this as a trick: they say, the authorities cannot forbid carrying letters to themselves. But what about those who, for some reason, do not want to be in correspondence with the first person of the state?

For comparison, Navalny has chosen the weakest point of the current Kremlin system and methodically attacks it for several months, splitting the elites (up to a state that is incredible for modern Russia, when Medvedev has to report to parliament on someone else's agenda). Medvedev is unable to respond to Navalny's accusations, and it also proved impossible to turn him in - at least not quickly. Although the first cautious lists of possible successors to the prime minister are now circulating around the Kremlin. From accusations of corruption, it turned out to be impossible to hide behind Crimea or "geopolitical greatness", and the rating of the unpopular Medvedev continues to be converted into Navalny's recognition.

Actually, this is what political struggle looks like - in a situation where political institutions are in ruins, and a monopoly on the “correct point of view” has been introduced in the media. It is rather strange to formulate moral arguments in politics, but even based on pragmatic interests, individual opposition groups should now unite around Navalny's agenda and demand a trial over Medvedev's alleged assets.

At the same time, the authorities, especially in the regions, also seem to be doing everything possible to politicize citizens. While in Moscow, the petitioners peacefully dispersed from Staraya Square, in St. Petersburg, literally all the participants in the action, who simply appeared at the gathering place, were detained.

Possibly, in this specific way, Governor Poltavchenko is correcting himself for the mistake he made on March 26, when the crowd freely entered Palace Square, and the arrests began only at the moment when everyone dispersed. Giving advice to the authorities is a thankless task, and, fortunately, it is not part of our tasks. But it is clear that if such senseless detentions, and especially semi- and direct-criminal attacks on activists, continue, the risks for everyone will increase exponentially. If the state is going to continue to control the agenda in the pre-election year, it first needs to get the bandits to stop.

The opinion of the author may not coincide with the opinion of the editors