The prime minister defends his record

This article misses the point entirely. Democracy alone is not a panacea for improving society. Moreover, democracy cannot function without a broad consensus within a society at large, and particularly within its elite, about the underlying principles on which the country should be built. It also requires law and order. If these preconditions are missing democracy serves as an enabler for PLUTOCRACY or worse for the rule of bandits. Russia came to that state of affairs awfully close in the 90’s, under the leadership of Boris Yeltsyn. Hopefully, under Putin it will find its own, right way forward.

What makes all these Economist articles about Russia the subject of so much poignant debate is the the idea that Russia has this great "potential" that it is tragically failing to achieve. Instead Russia is simply a run-of-the mill resource-fuelled dictatorship like Venezuella, Saudi Arabia, Iran, and many others in the world. Accept this, and the "tragedy" goes away.

Oleg,
If you look around you (I assume you are in Russia), you will see that bandits (ex-KGB billionaires) are exactly the people who rule Russia.

Putin is a leader in all the meaning of the word.

Leaders are never perfect, and neither is he. He took a ravaged country, a sold out country, with lost identity and no hope for the future. What he did with it, is restore order, identity and national pride. Maybe the West doesn't like him. Not surprising since he put an end to the complete sell-out of its natural resources to the West. Some Russians also don't like him. Most likely those who made millions or perhaps billions from selling out their nation.

Regardless. He is a Russian leader, one that all Russians should be proud to have at the helm of a great nation.

No, I am not Russian.

"Supremacy of the State over the people" is the essence of surfdom. A day does not go by without gov't officials reminding us how they are above the law. Gov't issued Mercedes running red lights to tax agents shaking down businesses of every size. Modernization is a joke without real political reform in which rule of law becomes the centerpiece - not just a talking piece. Only then will Russia achieve its full potential.

What Putin probably does NOT understand is that beyond his circle of closest associates, he does NOT have much control over anything at all in the conutry.

His orders and those of the President are routinely ignored beyond the corridors of Kremlin. Russia is divided into many feifdoms/kingdoms with each having its own little czar.

Even if tomorrow Putin woke up and wanted to rein in all of the little despots in the provinces, he would not be able to do so. The power vertical today is absolutely ineffective, because it is riddled with corruption at all levels.

Does Russia need a leader who has no control over it?

Very good article.

Yes, brave Putin. He shoots whales to demonstrate his strong Czar qualities which so many Russian posters here admire, but the Russian press edits his meetings with ordinary Russians after the forest fires because they showed elderly Russian women berating Putin for lack of state response. God forbid the Russian people see their czar criticized publicly on TV.

Putin is terrified sooner of old ladies than whales! Witness the elderly pro-democracy Helsinki group political prisoner Lyudmila Alekseyeva from Soviet days being arrested again under Putin for attempting freedom of assembly.
http://www.newsweek.com/2010/08/03/russia-s-activists-lose-hope-in-presi...

Oh the whale hero! Poor Alekseyeva is even pictured as a Nazi in the camps of the radical Russian nationalist "Nashi" which group Putin visits. 83 year old Russian women scare the former K.G.B. agent Putin more than those photo-ready whales.

Russia. No liberty. You protest - you get the club. This is modern civilization?

“Supremacy of the state over the people”...is the essence of the political power and in absence of this, who would volunteer for this job in any part of the world.

@ Dydomyk

I say I am not Russian because I want to be clear that I am writing from a neutral point of view on his leadership skills, and don’t want people to think there is a “hidden agenda” behind my comments. I have said it before, and will say it again. On a strict leadership debate, I would choose Putin over Bush many times over. Bush took a relatively strong economy at the time, and systematically led it to a financial collapse. Not to mention leading his country into a war based on lies and deceit. Putin on the other hand, took over Yeltsin’s drunken national sell-out, and turned it once again into a country most its citizens could be proud of. I do think he has made errors along the way, but seriously, who is the “perfect” leader. That very term is an oxymoron.

Besides, tell me how the previous Russian governments were better. A lot of people criticize Putin and his “puppet regime” but tell me what’s better for Russia. I am curious what an expert such as yourself has to suggest other than being suspicious of my comments.

Now if you would excuse me, I have to meet with Putin and conspire for world domination.

Petlura...what political reforms, communism?...do not tell me that there is no plurality of choices in Russia...you have to accept the wishes of the majority, 51% is more then 49%. Just because you are in the 49% and perhaps taxman slapped you with a fine you want reforms.

Dont mind me, I thought I would jump in before the comments ignite.

As I tried to explain to my Japanese girlfriend, nothing gets the commentators going like an article on China or Russia.

I suppose I am just ambivalent to not only Putin at this point, but Russia as well. Its sad that he chases immortality at the hands of his country, but I am not one to really care anymore.

Calling Didomyk, Kuzmich and Joe the Reader...

"Bureaucracy is expanding to meet the needs of an expanding bureaucracy."

I'd give credit where due, but I don't know the source.

That quote was (I presume) written about the West, but it's true of just about everywhere. The government power structure becomes self-perpetuating, losing sight of the reason it had for existing in the first place.

Seven839 wrote: "do not tell me that there is no plurality of choices in Russia...you have to accept the wishes of the majority"

Oh yahhh ! You mean like the majority represented by the "Nashi" ?You should get up-to-date by exploring the facts behind a mystery of "Who is Mr. Putin", one of several mysteries relating to his family, his childhood years and, of course, his KGB service.

"КОРПОРАЦИЯ. РОССИЯ И КГБ ВО ВРЕМЕНА ПРЕЗИДЕНТА ПУТИНА" (Corporation, Russia and KGB during Putin's presidency")

http://www.corporation-kgb.org/?page=2

John71 wrote: " He is a Russian leader, one that all Russians should be proud to have at the helm of a great nation.
No, I am not Russian ".

Since you are not a Russian, how did you come to the conclusion you have just pronounced to the whole world ? Is it because your judgement is supposedly superior to anyone else ? Or is it that you have a personal stake in keeping Putin in office ? I heard that Putin @ Co. hires foreign advisors. Just makes me wonder.

Oh hi, how do you do?

Well, before Dido gets here and start flooding these forums with youtube videos and website links of questionable content, I figure I contribute now:

Putin is not perfect and so isn't any other leader around the world. Any sane person would agree that under Putin's rule, many things have improved in Russia. Only certain categories of people agree that Yeltsin years had been "prosperous" - 1. fools 2. Didomyk 3. those who made tons of money during those years of chaos. Yeltsin's reign was a disaster for Russians (not for West though), culminating in financial crysis in late 90s. Putin took over a broke state and he turned things around, making Russia stronger and richer (something West doesn't desire).

Why Russia need to get shot of these crooks and stand on its own feet.

http://www.putin-itogi.ru/putin-what-10-years-of-putin-have-brought/

LOL Putin. Is it just me or do Russian leaders perceive politics = foreign policy. But when it comes to the home affairs they're short off throwing hands up in the air in desperation. Sometimes It seems like Russia is inherently un-governable, thanks to vastness of it's territory and psychology of it's people.

Dido writes: "Since you are not a Russian, how did you come to the conclusion you have just pronounced to the whole world ?" ----- It's called common sense.

Susan, Russia may be difficult to govern due to its georgraphy, however, many have succeeded in governing, such as Peter the Great, Katherine, even Stalin I guess.