|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Main page > Products > Politics in Russia: power, lobby, conflicts - The weekly bulletin > Politics in Russia: power, lobby, conflicts. Issue No (73) 761 Politics in Russia: power, lobby, conflicts. Issue No (73) 761May 11 - 17, 2009 Main tendencies of political weekAn informational campaign aimed at drawing the preliminary results of the ruling tandem’s first anniversary as well as identifying Dmitry Medvedev’s course finished last week. The campaign started in early March (the first anniversary of Dmitry Medvedev’s election) and culminated in the first half of May. Discussions on this topic were transforming noticeably; in particular, by May almost all experts had arrived at a conclusion that the tandem system had proved its viability and it could exist until the next presidential elections at least. Vladimir Putin indirectly pointed to this in his interview with the Japanese mass media. Moreover, the text of the Strategy of National Security also testifies to this; quite a compromising document was approved by Dmitry Medvedev. Simultaneously, there were some activities on the party field. The president met with communist leaders, but the rhetoric at their meeting was rather complimentary on both sides. However, attempts to portray the results of the meeting as the head of state’s approval of all or almost all initiatives of the leftists are groundless. In particular, CPRF’s main proposal, which they had been promoting for a long time, i.e. the necessity to rely on communists under the conditions of the crisis like it was in 1998, was ignored. However, unlike the 1998 developments, there are no objective preconditions for that currently. Meanwhile, confrontation between leaders of the Pravoe Delo party sharpened, which was caused by the party’s ‘birth trauma’. Relations between its co-chairs, Boris Titov and Leonid Gozman, became heated. They often have absolutely different opinions on a number of issues. Such a situation is very dangerous for the party structure. If the party loses support of state authorities, this will lead to its inevitable collapse. At the same time, if SPS representatives leave the party, the electoral potential of this political force will substantially decrease, which also makes its prospects rather doubtful. Major events May 11, 2009 - May 17, 2009
Volume: 13 pages If you are interested to obtain please contact » Elena Kim Other issues: |
Special report:Nord Stream 2 and Ukraine: Costs Should DecideShale Revolution: Myths and RealitiesLiquefied Natural Gas Outlook: Expectations and RealityAnalytical series “The Political compass”:Political power in Russia after presidential electionState Corporations in the Russian EconomyPolitical Results of 2007: Russia on the Eve of Power ShufflePolitical Landscape Ahead of the Parliamentary Election 2007«Centers of influence» in the Russian politicsLeading Russian corporations and the executive power: interaction methodsForecast of political developments after the presidential election in 2008 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
About us | Products | Comments | Services | Books | Conferences | Our clients | Price list | Site map | Contacts Consulting services, political risks assessment on the Fuel & Energy Industry, concern of pilitical and economic Elite within the Oil-and-Gas sector.National Energy Security Fund © 2007 |