The results of Russia’s parliamentary vote on December 7 suggest that the country has entered a new political era. For the first decade of post-communist politics in Russia, the central cleavage was between left and right, communist and anti-communist, or “reformers” and non-reformers. The central issue was the economy and policies to reform it. The vote tally suggests that a third parameter—nationalism—has overtaken these earlier divides and debates.
Of the major Russian political parties, three are rising and three are falling. United Russia, the Liberal Democratic Party of Russia (LDPR), and Motherland (Rodina) all won more votes in this election than in the last election in 1999. The Communist Party of the Russian Federation, Yabloko, and the Union of Right Forces all won fewer votes in 2003 than in 1999. The last two—Russia’s liberal, democratic, pro-Western parties—did so poorly that they will not even be represented in the new Duma.
Several factors unite these winners and losers and distinguish them from one another. First, the winners—United Russia, LDPR, and Motherland—are all parties created initially by the state, the LDPR over a decade ago, United Russia (called Unity before) in 1999, and Motherland during this electoral cycle. In contrast, societal actors founded the Communist Party, Yabloko, and the Union of Right Forces. Parties beholden to the state are gaining popular support. Parties independent from the state are losing strength.
Second, the three winners in the election are all loyal to the president. United Russia ran in this election as the party of President Vladimir Putin and is fully subservient to the Kremlin. Neo-nationalist Vladimir Zhirinovsky, the LDPR leader, and the leaders of Motherland are more colorful personalities than the gray suits leading United Russia, but these two parties will also serve the interests of the president on important issues. In contrast, the three losers are all opposition parties that have never fully succumbed to the presidentÂ’s will. After December 7, those in open opposition to the Kremlin have become much, much weaker.
Third, to varying degrees, all three winners are nationalist parties. Running on the coattails of President Putin, United Russia leaders and campaign materials called for a strong state and orderly country. United Russia’s major campaign slogan, plastered throughout the country, quoted Putin calling for a “strong and united country.” United Russia’s most frequently played television clip had the party’s leader, Boris Gryzlov, dreaming of a country based on “order” (poryadok) and “fairness” (spravodlivost). As a “former” KGB officer and current minister of the interior, Gryzlov’s own biography underscored these themes. Motherland leader Dmitry Rogozin even more stridently echoed nationalist themes in his campaign appearances, compelling some of his opponents in other parties to publicly use the word “fascist” to describe his ideology. Although this label was perhaps an overstatement, designed to rally liberal voters (a strategy that failed miserably), Rogozin has a long history of casting Russian problems both at home and abroad in ethnic terms. Without state support, his various electoral projects in the 1990s never amounted to much. This time around, however, with the Kremlin providing him and his party with major television coverage and financial resources, he could tap into voter demand for his nationalist message...
