Piotr Dutkiewicz, Director of the Center for Governance and Public Management at Carleton University, believes that corruption is not the only point behind the sacking of Yuri Luzhkov but the strong one.
I would start from the recollection of the last day of the Yaroslavl forum. I was sitting in the first row with Mr Luzhkov to my left. I was essentially the only one who spoke with him before the session started. So no one was greeting him, or, as is usual in such a situation, doing last minute business. Now usually such prominent figures are surrounded by tens of colleagues and clients at any moment, but not at that time. It was clear to me during the Yaroslavl forum already that he is a bit isolated and left on his own. So I felt that the political and economic power of one of the most powerful men in Russia is slowly coming to end. So I think that it’s about time.
He built Moscow as his small empire, and according to some Russian and international surveys, Moscow became one of the most corrupt cities in the world. Speedy fortunes were built on real estate and many separate contracts. From the Western perspective, obviously, family conflict of interest looked too obvious with his wife becoming the richest or one of the richest persons in Russia.
But I believe that this was most probably not the only reason for his departure. He was seen by many in the West as a very independent political survivor, independent in the sense that he built his own powerful financial bank. In this sense he was immune to the many pressures coming from different corners of the political circle in Russia.
So, that’s one, and second he didn’t confine his ambitions to the borders of Moscow. His political ambitions were definitely larger than being the mayor of Moscow. In this sense he became a competitor during a time when, I would say, the long term future of Russia is being shaped: the coming elections in 2012, the modernization plans by the president, last year’s crisis which forced Russia to change many of its economic policies, everything else, and the last fires which showed the shortcomings of the infrastructure in Russia.
All this added together means that the next few years in Russia will be very dynamic and the Russian political elite needs more allies than ever. In this case, the position of the mayor of Moscow is possibly one of the most powerful political positions in Russian and therefore, the tandem, President Medvedev and the prime minister Putin will be looking for someone who will become an active supporter of the different political and economic programs that they are launching. So therefore, it is not surprising that Mr Luzhkov is departing.
I would like to point out that the dismissal is connected to the fight against corruption, at least formally. But it is a complex situation. It’s not only about corruption; it’s about political influence, it’s about building new allies, its about building a strong base for future Russian-wide policies, so it’s a very complex position and Yuri Luzhkov’s dismissal cannot be seen only from the perspective of the fight against corruption.
But obviously this is probably the weakest point on which the mayor of Moscow can be attacked. As I said, if you look at both Russian and international surveys, Moscow is seen as a city in which a lot of good things were done, definitely. Moscow looks to those who go there twice or three times a year, Moscow each time looks different. It’s clean; there are many new buildings and so on and so forth, definitely yes. But at the same time, if you talk to just international investors, they will tell you stories of the different practices, to put it mildly, that are far beyond the transparency and clarity of normal business.
What is surprising is that there is no new mayor of Moscow nominated immediately. That is a surprising thing, because to have his deputy even temporarily running Moscow is not a solution. It creates more problems than it solves.
It is very hard to say what will be the consequences of the dismissal for the country’s political system because, Moscow, it’s not a city from the Western perspective. It’s a country in and of itself almost. It’s the size of many countries in the world. So this is a powerful position to be the mayor of Moscow. So therefore the stability, the overall political stability will depend on who will become the next mayor of Moscow. Definitely the unfinished business will destabilize, for a short period of time, the Moscow political scene and not only the Moscow political scene. But hopefully this will be a very short-lived period of instability in Moscow, and then it very much depends on who becomes the next mayor. And then, by that move we will judge what kind of new political alliances and new political support for the current tandem will be constructed. It’s simply too early to say. As I already said, to have a deputy mayor in charge of Moscow it’s enhancing the problem, it is not a solution to the problem. It’s making it worse.
You may view the story also at http://en.rian.ru/valdai_op/20100929/160766628.html